Table of Contents

 

 

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

xANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

xANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20172020

 

or

 

oTRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

¨TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

 

Commission file number: 000-51397

 

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 


Federally chartered corporation

13-6400946

(State or other jurisdiction of

(I.R.S. Employer

incorporation or organization)

Identification No.)

101 Park Avenue, New York, New York

10178

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Zip Code)

 

(212) 681-6000

(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:None

Title of each classTrading Symbol(s)Name of each exchange on which registered
NoneN/AN/A

 

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

Class B Stock, putable, par value $100

(Title of class)

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes o¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes o¨ No x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x No o¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes x No o

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.x¨

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company”, and “smaller reporting“emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

Large accelerated filer ¨o

Accelerated filer                  ¨o

Non-accelerated filer   x

Smaller reporting company ¨o

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Emerging growth company ¨o

 

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. o¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report.x

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes o¨  No x

 

Registrant’s stock is not publicly traded and is only issued to members of the registrant. Such stock is issued and redeemed at par value, $100 per share, subject to certain regulatory and statutory limits. At June 30, 2017,2020, the aggregate par value of the common stock held by members of the registrant was approximately $6,756,499,900.$6,334,135,100. At February 28, 2018, 65,697,6402021, 53,093,420 shares of common stock were outstanding.

 

 

 



Table of Contents

FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK OF NEW YORK

20172020 Annual Report on Form 10-K

Table of Contents

 

PART I

Item 1.

Business

3

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

1117

Item 1B.

Unresolved Staff Comments

1725

Item 2.

Properties

1725

Item 3.

Legal Proceedings

1725

Item 4.

Mine Safety Disclosures

1725

PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

1826

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data

1927

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

2130

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

8399

Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

86104

Item 9.

Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

160181

Item 9A.

Controls and Procedures

160181

Item 9B.

Other Information

160181

PART III

Item 10.

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

162182

Item 11.

Executive Compensation

175197

Item 12.

Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters

205226

Item 13.

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence

206227

Item 14.

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

208230

PART IV

��

Item 15.

Exhibits, and Financial Statement Schedules

209231

Signatures

Item 16.

Form 10-K Summary

210232

Signatures233


PartPART  I

 

Item 1.Business.

Item 1.Business.

 

General

 

The Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“we,” “us,” “our,” “the Bank” or the “FHLBNY”) is a federally chartered corporation exempt from federal, state and local taxes except local real property taxes. It is one of eleven district Federal Home Loan Banks (“FHLBanks”)(FHLBanks).  The FHLBanks are U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (“GSEs”)(GSEs), organized under the authority of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932, as amended (“FHLBank Act”)(FHLBank Act).  Each FHLBank is a cooperative owned by member institutions located within a defined geographic district.  The members purchase capital stock in the FHLBank and generally receive dividends on their capital stock investment.  Our defined geographic district is New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  We provide a readily available, low-cost source of funds for our member institutions.

 

The FHLBNY is managed to deliver balanced value to members, rather than to maximize profitability or advance volume through low pricing.  Our members must purchase FHLBNY stock according to regulatory requirements as a condition of membership.  For more information, see financial statements, Note 13.14.  Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.  The business of the cooperative is to provide liquidity for our members (primarily in the form of loans referred to as “advances”) and to provide a return on members’ investment in FHLBNY stock in the form of a dividend. Since members are both stockholders and customers, our management operates the Bank such that there is a trade-off between providing value to them via low pricing for advances with a relatively lower dividend versus higher advances pricing with a relatively higher dividend.

 

All federally insured depository institutions, federally insured credit unions and insurance companies engaged in residential housing finance can apply for membership in the FHLBank in their district.  Community development financial institutions (“CDFIs”)(CDFIs) that have been certified by the CDFI Fund of the U.S. Treasury Department, including community development loan funds, community development venture capital funds, and state-chartered credit unions without federal insurance, are also eligible to become members of a FHLBank.  Only a fewFive CDFIs were members of the FHLBNY at December 31, 2017.2020.

 

A member of another FHLBank or a financial institution that is not a member of any FHLBank may also hold FHLBNY stock as a result of having acquired one of our members.  Because we operate as a cooperative, we conduct business with related parties in the normal course of business and consider all members and non-member stockholders as related parties in addition to the other FHLBanks.  For more information, see financial statements, Note 19.20.  Related Party Transactions and also Item 13.  Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence in this Form 10-K.

 

Our primary business is making collateralized loans or advances to members and is also the principal factor that impacts our financial condition.  We also serve the public through our mortgage programs, which enable our members to liquefy certain mortgage loans by selling them to the Bank.  We also provide members with such correspondent services as safekeeping, wire transfers, depository, and settlement services.  Non-members that have acquired members have access to these services up to the time that their advances outstanding prepay or mature.

 

We obtain our funds from several sources.  A primary source is the issuance of FHLBank debt instruments, called Consolidated obligations, to the public.  The issuance and servicing of Consolidated obligations are performed by the Office of Finance, the fiscal agent for the issuance and servicing of Consolidated obligations on behalf of the 11 FHLBanks.  These debt instruments represent the joint and several obligations of all the FHLBanks.  Because the FHLBanks’ Consolidated obligations are rated Aaa/P-1 with a stable outlook by Moody’s Investors Service (Moody’s) and AA+/A-1+ with a stable outlook by Standard & Poor’s Rating Services (“S&P”(S&P or “StandardStandard & Poor’s”)Poor’s) and because of the FHLBanks’ GSE status, the FHLBanks are generally able to raise funds at rates that are typically at a small to moderate spread above U.S. Treasury security yields.  Additional sources of funding are member deposits, other borrowings, and the issuance of capital stock.  Deposits may be accepted from member financial institutions and federal instrumentalities.


We combine private capital and public sponsorship as a GSE to provide our member financial institutions with a reliable flow of credit and other services for housing and community development, and our cooperative ownership structure allows us to pass along the benefit of these low funding rates to our members.  By supplying additional liquidity to our members, we enhance the availability of residential mortgages and community investment credit.  Members also benefit from our affordable housing and economic development programs, which provide grants and below-market-rate loans that support members’ involvement in creating affordable housing and revitalizing communities.

 

We do not have any wholly or partially owned subsidiaries, nor do we have an equity position in any partnerships, corporations, or off-balance sheet special purpose entities.  We haveown a grantor trust related to fund certain non-qualified employee benefitsretirement programs, more fully described in financial statements Note 15.16. Employee Retirement Plans.Plans and Note 6. Equity Investments.

 

A Joint Capital Enhancement Agreement (“Capital Agreement”)(Capital Agreement) among the 11 FHLBanks requires each FHLBank to enhance its capital position, and each FHLBanksFHLBank will contribute 20% of its Net income each quarter to its own restricted retained earnings account at the FHLBank until the balance of that account equals at least one percent of that FHLBank’s average balance of outstanding Consolidated obligations for the previous quarter.  These restricted retained earnings will not be available to pay dividends.

The FHLBNY is supervised by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”(FHFA or the “Finance Agency”)Finance Agency), the independent Federal regulator of the FHLBanks, the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (Freddie Mac) and the Federal National Mortgage Association (Fannie Mae).  The FHFA’s stated mission with respect to the FHLBanks is to provide effective supervision, regulation, and housing mission oversight of the FHLBanks to promote their safety and soundness, support housing finance and affordable housing, and support a stable and liquid mortgage market.

 

Each FHLBank carries out its statutory mission only through activities that are authorized under and consistent with the Safety and Soundness Act and the FHLBank Act; and the activities of each FHLBank and the manner in which they are operated is consistent with the public interest.  The Finance Agency also ensures that the FHLBNY carries out its housing and community development mission, remains adequately capitalized and able to raise funds in the capital markets. However, while the Finance Agency establishes regulations governing the operations of the FHLBanks, the Bank functions as a separate entity with its own management, employees and board of directors.

 

Our website is www.fhlbny.com.  We have adopted, and posted on our website, a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics applicable to all employees and directors.

 

Market Area

 

Our market area is the same as the membership district — New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  Institutions that are members of the FHLBNY must have their charter or principal places of business within this market area but may also operate elsewhere.  We had 330 members at December 31, 20172020 and 328 members at December 31, 2016.2019.

 

Due to the deeply penetrated market, there are few opportunities to gain new bank and credit union members. However, we continue to engage the few member prospects who are eligible to join. In addition, foreign banks with charters based in our membership district are another potential pool of prospects.  This is not a new trend as we currently have members who have parent companies outside the USA.United States.

 

An appropriate candidate for membership is an institution that is likely to transact advance business with us within a reasonable period of time, so that the capital stock of the potential member will likely be required to purchase under membership provisions will not dilute the dividend on the existing members’ capital stock.  Characteristics that identify attractive candidates include institutions with assets “of size”, an established practice of wholesale funding, a high loan-to-deposit ratio, strong asset growth, sufficient eligible collateral, and management that might have had experience with the FHLBanks during previous employment.


We actively market membership through a series of targeted, on-going sales and marketing initiatives.  We compete for business by offering competitively priced products, services and programs that provide financial flexibility to the membership. The dominant reason institutions join the FHLBNY is access to a reliable source of liquidity.  While liquidity is provided in a variety of ways, advances are one of the most attractive sources of liquidity because they permit members to pledge relatively illiquid assets, such as 1-4 family, multifamily, home equity, and commercial real estate mortgages held in portfolio, to create liquidity.  Advances are attractively priced because of our access to capital markets as a GSE and our strategy of providing balanced value to members.

 

The following table summarizes our members by type of institution:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Development

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial

 

Thrift

 

Credit

 

Insurance

 

Financial

 

 

 

 

 

Banks

 

Institutions

 

Unions

 

Companies (a)

 

Institution

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

134

 

81

 

93

 

19

 

3

 

330

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

137

 

84

 

90

 

14

 

3

 

328

 


(a)Includes three captive insurance companies in 2016, which were considered in 2016 as non-members.  In 2017, captive insurance companies were not included as they are no longer eligible members under regulations.

               Community    
               Development    
   Commercial  Thrift  Credit  Insurance  Financial    
   Banks  Institutions  Unions  Companies  Institution  Total 
December 31, 2020   111   68   104   42   5   330 
                          
December 31, 2019   121   71   100   31   5   328 

 

Business Segments

 

We manage our operations as a single business segment.  Management and our Board of Directors review enterprise-wide financial information in order to make operating decisions and assess performance.

 

Our cooperative structure permits us to expand and contract with demand for advances and changes in membership.  When advances are paid down, because the member no longer needs the funds or because the member has been acquired by a non-member and the former member decides to prepay advances, the stock associated with the advances is immediately redeemed. When advances are paid before maturity, we collect fees that make us financially indifferent to the prepayment. Our operating expenses are low. Dividend capacity, which is a function of net income and the amount of stock outstanding, is largely unaffected by the prepayment since future stock and future income are reduced more or less proportionately.  We believe that we will be able to meet our financial obligations and continue to deliver balanced value to members, even if advance demand drops significantlycontracts or if membership declines.

Products and Services

 

Introduction Advances to members are the primary focus of our operations and are also the principal factor that impacts our financial condition.  Revenues from advances to members are the largest and the most significant element in our operating results.  Providing advances to members, supporting the products, and associated collateral and credit operations, and funding and swapping the funds are the focus of our operations.

 

We offer our members several correspondent banking services as well as safekeeping services.  The fee income that is generated from these services is not significant.  We also issue standby letters of credit on behalf of members for a fee.  The total income derived from all such sources, and other incidental income and expenses were not material in the periods in this report.

 

We provide our members with an alternative to originating and selling long-term, fixed-rate mortgages in the secondary market.  We accomplish this by purchasing eligible conforming fixed-rate mortgages originated or purchased by our members.  Purchases are at negotiated market rates.  For more information, see Acquired Member Assets Programs below and in the financial statements, Note 9.10.  Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.  However, weWe do not expect the program to become a significant factor in our operations.  The interest revenues derived from this program were $94.3$92.0 million in 2017, $86.82020, $101.2 million in 20162019 and $81.1$97.5 million in 2015.  The2018.  Relative to interest income from advances, revenues werefrom mortgage loans have not been a significant source of interest income.

 

5

Advances

 

We offer a wide range of credit products to help members meet local credit needs, manage interest rate and liquidity risk, and serve their communities. Our primary business is making secured loans, called advances, to members. These advances are available as short- and long-term loans with adjustable, variable, and fixed-rate features (including option-embedded and amortizing advances).

 

Advances to members, including former members, constituted 77.1%67.2% and 76.1%62.1% of our total assets of $158.9$137.0 billion and $143.6$162.1 billion at December 31, 20172020 and 2016.2019.  In terms of revenues, interest income derived from advances were $1.6$1.2 billion, $0.9$2.5 billion, and $0.6$2.5 billion, representing 69.7%60.3%, 67.6%66.8%, and 62.9%70.3% of total interest income in 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015.2018. Most of our critical functions are directed at supporting the borrowing needs of our members and monitoring the members’ associated collateral positions. For more information about advances, including our underwriting standards, see financial statements, Note 8.9. Advances; also see Tables 3.1 to 3.93.8 and the accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

 

Members use advances as a source of funding to supplement their deposit gathering activities. Advances borrowed by members have been substantial ingenerally increased over the last 10 yearsdecade because many members have not been able to increase their deposits in their local markets as quickly as they have increased their assets. To close this funding gap, members have preferred to obtain reasonably priced advances rather than increasing their deposits by offering higher rates or foregoing asset growth. Because of the wide range of advance types, terms, and structures available to them, members have also used advances to enhance their asset/liability management. As a cooperative, we price advances at minimal net spreads above the cost of our funding in order to deliver more value to members.

 

Letters of Credit

 

We may issue standby financial letters of credit on behalf of members to facilitate members’ residential and community lending, provide members with liquidity, or assist members with asset/liability management. Where permitted by law, members may utilize FHLBNY letters of credit to collateralize deposits made by units of state and local governments. Our underwriting and collateral requirements for securing letters of credit are the same as our requirements for securing advances.

 

Derivatives

 

To assist members in managing their interest rate and basis risks in both rising and falling interest-rate environments, we will act as an intermediary between the member and derivatives counterparty. We do not act as a dealer and view this as an additional service to our members.  Participating members must comply with our documentation requirements and meet our underwriting and collateral requirements. Volume of such requests has been insignificant.

 

Acquired Member Assets Programs

 

Utilizing a risk-sharing structure, the FHLBanks are permitted to acquire certain assets from or through their members. These initiatives are referred to as Acquired Member Assets (“AMA”)(AMA) programs. At the FHLBNY, the Acquired Member Assets initiative is the Mortgage Partnership Finance (“MPF®”(MPF®) Program, which provides members with an alternative to originating and selling long-term, fixed-rate mortgages in the secondary market. In the MPF Program, we purchase conforming fixed-rate mortgages originated or purchased by our members. Members are then paid a fee for assuming a portion of the credit risk of the mortgages that we acquired. Members assume credit risk by providing a credit enhancement to us or providing and paying for a supplemental mortgage insurance policy insuring us for some portion of the credit risk involved. This providesPrior to June 1, 2017, the mortgage loans acquired were credit enhanced to a double-A equivalent level of creditworthiness oncreditworthiness. For loans acquired after June 1, 2017, the mortgages.credit enhancement is computed to a “Single A” credit risk. The amount of this credit enhancement is fully collateralized by the member. We assume the remainder of the credit risk along with the interest rate risk of holding the mortgages in the MPF loan portfolio.

After several years of research and development, we introduced a new AMA investment program called Mortgage Asset Program sm (MAP) in the fourth quarter of 2020. MAP purchases will be investment grade, conforming one-to-four family or government insured long-term, fix-rate home mortgages. MAP, like MPF, is structured to provide secondary mortgage market liquidity to the selling member, the participating financial institution (PFI). 


MAP will be fully rolled out in late March 2021 and we will stop purchasing MPF loans. Legacy MPF loans will remain on the FHLBNY’s balance sheet and will continue to be supported by the FHLBNY and the FHLBank of Chicago as MPF Provider.

Income from both MPF and MAP are derived primarily from the difference, or spread, between the yield on the purchased mortgage loans and the borrowing cost of Consolidated Obligations.

Under MAP, the PFI’s credit enhancement is created by the FHLBNY through the establishment of an individual or, in certain cases as pooled, member performance account (MPA).  The FHLBNY sets aside funds in the MPA account; funds are unsecured for the PFI and serves as the selling member’s credit enhancement for future credit losses experienced on that MAP loan pool.  This first loss credit enhancement provided by the member, or a group of members through pool aggregation, brings the FHLBNY purchased loans to at least investment grade at the time of sale.  We offer pool aggregation under MAP to reduce the credit enhancement cost to small and mid-sized PFIs when they sell mortgages into combined pools.  These credit enhancements apply after a homeowner’s equity, and if applicable, private mortgage insurance has first been exhausted. For FHA and other government insured home mortgages that we purchase under MAP, we do not establish an additional MPA credit enhancement because the credit risk is insured by the United States government.

We do not service the mortgage loans we purchase under MPF and MAP.  PFIs may elect to retain servicing rights for the loans sold to us, or they may elect to sell servicing rights to an FHLBNY approved servicer.  We do not pay a PFI any fees other than the servicing fee when the PFI retains the servicing rights. We closely monitor the servicers because we are exposed to credit and operational risk if they fail to properly perform.

Those PFIs that retain servicing rights receive a monthly servicing fee and may be required to undergo a review by a third-party quality control contractor that advises the PFIs of any deficiencies in servicing procedures or processes and then notifies us so that we can monitor the PFIs’ performance.  The PFIs that retain servicing rights can sell those rights at a later date with our approval.  If we deem servicing to be inadequate, we can require that the servicing of those loans be transferred to a servicer that is acceptable to us.

The servicers are responsible for all aspects of servicing, including, among other responsibilities, the administration of any foreclosure and claims processes from the date we purchase the loan until the loan has been fully satisfied.  As the servicer progresses through the process from foreclosure to liquidation, the servicer remits the P&I collected from the borrower. On a small percentage of loans that are remittance type “schedule/schedule”, the servicer will advance P&I “on account” if P&I is not collected from the borrower. At foreclosure, any unpaid P&I and advances received are then settled.

It is the servicer’s responsibility to initiate claims for losses on the loans.  If a loss is expected, no claims are settled until the claim has been reviewed and approved by the FHLBNY.  Under MAP, the MPA first absorbs the credit loss after a homeowner’s equity, and if applicable, private mortgage insurance has first been exhausted. If the MPA has been depleted, based on our contractual arrangement, the FHLBNY takes the ultimate credit loss, and the servicer is reimbursed for an approved claim amount.

The Bank Act requires the Finance Agency to establish low-income housing goals for mortgage purchases.  Under its current housing goals regulation, the Finance Agency establishes low-income housing goals for the FHLBNY for conventional mortgages purchased through the AMA programs.  If we do not meet any affordable housing goals established by the Finance Agency, we may be required to submit a housing plan to the Finance Agency.

The Acquired Member Assets Regulation does not specifically address the disposition of Acquired Member Assets. The main intent of that regulation is the purchase of assets for investment rather than for trading purposes. The FHLBNY’s present intent for MPF and MAP is to hold these investment in portfolio. However, the FHLBanks have the legal authority to sell Mortgage Partnership Finance loans and MAP pursuant to the granting of incidental powers in Section 12 of the FHLBank Act. Section 12(a) of the FHLBank Act specifically provides that each FHLBank shall have all such incidental powers, not inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter, as are customary and usual in corporations generally. General corporate law principles permit the sale of investments.

 

For additional discussion on our mortgage loans and their related credit risk, see financial statements, Note 9.10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.  Also see Tables 5.1 to 5.65.3 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

 

7

Correspondent Banking Services

 

We offer our members an array of correspondent banking services, including depository services, wire transfers, settlement services, and safekeeping services.  Depository services include processing of customer transactions in “Overnight Investment Accounts,” the interest-bearing demand deposit account each customer has with us. All customer-related transactions (e.g. deposits, Federal Reserve Bank settlements, advances, securities transactions, and wires) are posted to these accounts each business day.  Wire transfers include processing of incoming and outgoing domestic wire transfers, including third-party transfers.  Settlement services include automated clearinghouse and other transactions received through our accounts at the Federal Reserve Bank as correspondent for members and passed through to our customers’ Overnight Investment Accounts with us. Through a third party, we offer customers a range of securities custodial services, such as settlement of book entry (electronically held) and physical securities. We encourage members to access these products through 1Linksm, an Internet-based delivery system we developed as a proprietary service. Members access the 1Link system to obtain account activity information or process wire transfers, book transfers, security safekeeping and advance transactions.

 

Affordable Housing Program and Other Mission Related Programs

 

Federal Housing Finance Agency regulation 12 CFR Part 1292.5 (“Community(Community Investment Cash Advance Programs”)Programs) states in general that each FHLBank shall establish an Affordable Housing Program (AHP) in accordance with Part 1291, and a Community Investment Program. As more fully discussed under the section “Assessments” in this Form 10-K, theThe 11 FHLBanks together must annually allocate for the Affordable Housing ProgramAHP the greater of $100 million or 10%10 percent of regulatory defined net income.  For more information, see Background in the MD&A, and financial statements, Note 12.  Affordable Housing Program.

earnings. The FHLBank may also offer a Rural Development Advance program, an Urban Development Advance program, and other Community Investment Cash Advance programs.

 

·Affordable Housing Program (AHP). We meet this requirement by allocating 10 percent of regulatory defined net income to our AHP to support the creation and preservation of housing for lower income families and individuals through the Affordable Housing Program (AHP). The program is offered primarily in two forms: a competitive program and a homeownership program. In the competitive program, AHP funds are awarded through a competitive process to members who submit applications on behalf of project sponsors who are planning to purchase, rehabilitate, or construct affordable homes or apartments. In the homeownership program, we require households to have income at or below 80% of the area median income, and we may set aside annually, in aggregate, up to the greater of $4.5 million or 35% of the Bank’s annual required AHP contributions. The Homebuyer Dream Program® (HDP) was established in 2019 to replace the First Home Clubsm (FHC), which is expected to sunset in 2021. The homeownership programs are to assist first time homebuyers with closing costs and/or down payment assistance. The HDP provides grant assistance up to $14,500 to eligible households through an annual round on a first come, first served basis. New homebuyers are eligible under the program to receive up to $500 to defray the cost of counseling provided by a nonprofit housing agency.

See financial statements, Note 13. Affordable Housing Program (“AHP”).  We meet this requirement by allocating 10% of regulatory defined net income to our Affordable Housing Program each year.  The Affordable Housing Program helps our members meet their Community Reinvestment Act responsibilities.  The program gives members access to cash grants and subsidized, low-cost funding to create affordable rental and home ownership opportunities, including first-time homebuyer programs.  Within each year’s AHP allocation, we have established a set-aside program for first-time homebuyers called the First Home Clubsm.  The FHLBNY may set aside annually, in aggregate, up to the greater of $4.5 million or 35% of the Bank’s annual required AHP contributions.  Household income qualificationsassessments allocated from earnings for the First Home Club are the same as for the competitive AHP.  Qualifying households can receive matched funds at a 4:1 ratio, up to $7,500 to help with closing costs and/or down payment assistance; households are also required to attend counseling provided by a nonprofit housing agency, and we may provide up to $500 to defray the cost.periods in this report.

·Other Mission — Related Activities. The Bank offers three distinct Community Lending Programs (CLP) that support our member’s community-oriented mortgage lending, which was established under the Community Investment Cash Advance Programs. The Bank provides reduced interest rate advances to members for lending activity that meet the CLP requirements, under the following individual programs: Community Investment Program (CIP), Rural Development Advance (RDA), and Urban Development Advance (UDA). The CLP provides additional support to members in their affordable housing and economic development lending activities within low- and moderate-income neighborhoods as well as other activities that benefit low- and moderate-income households. The Bank also provides letters of credit in support of projects that meet the CLP program requirements and are offered at reduced fees.  Providing CLP Advances and Letters of Credit at advantaged pricing that is discounted from our market interest rates and fees represents an additional allocation of our income in support of the Bank’s affordable housing and community economic development mission. In addition, overhead costs and administrative expenses associated with the implementation of our Affordable Housing and CLP are absorbed as general operating expenses and are not charged back to the AHP allocation set aside. The foregone interest and fee income, as well as the administrative and operating costs, are above and beyond the annual income contribution to the AHP grants and advances offered under these programs.

8

Investments

 

Other Mission—Related Activities. The Bank offers three distinct Community Lending Programs (“CLP”) that support our member’s community-oriented mortgage lending, which was established under the Community Investment Cash Advance Programs.  The Bank provides reduced interest rate advances to members for lending activity that meet the CLP requirements, under the following individual programs: Community Investment Program (“CIP”), Rural Development Advance (“RDA”), and Urban Development Advance (“UDA”).  The CLP provides additional support to members in their affordable housing and economic development lending activities within low- and moderate-income neighborhoods as well as other activities that benefit low- and moderate-income households.  The Bank also provides letters of credit in support of projects that meet the CLP program requirements and are offered at reduced fees.  Providing CLP Advances and Letters of Credit at advantaged pricing that is discounted from our market interest rates and fees represents an additional allocation of our income in support of the Bank’s affordable housing and community economic development mission. In addition, overhead costs and administrative expenses associated with the implementation of our Affordable Housing and CLP are absorbed as general operating expenses and are not charged back to the AHP allocation set-aside. The foregone interest and fee income, as well as the administrative and operating costs, are above and beyond the annual income contribution to the AHP Loans offered under these programs.

Investments

We maintain portfolios of investments to provide additional earnings and for liquidity purposes.  Investment income also bolsters our capacity to fund Affordable Housing Program projects, and to cover operating expenditures. To help ensure the availability of funds to meet member credit needs, we maintain a portfoliointerest-bearing deposits and portfolios of short-term investments issued by highly-rated, high credit quality financial institutions.  The investments may include overnight Federal funds, term Federal funds, securities purchased under agreements to resell, and wewe are a major lender in this market, particularly in the overnight market. We further enhance our interest income by holding long-term investments classified as either held-to-maturity or as available-for-sale.  These portfolios primarily consist of mortgage-backed securities issued by government-sponsored mortgage enterprises.  Our long-term investments also include a small

portfolio of privately issued mortgage-backed and residential asset-backed securities that were primarily acquired prior to 2006, bonds issued by housing finance agencies, and Grantor Trust owned by the FHLBNY owned Grantor Trusts.that invests in mutual funds. We have a liquidity trading portfolio invested primarily in highly-liquid U.S. Treasury securities to enhance our short-term liquidity positions. The trading portfolio is not for speculative purposes.

 

For more information, see financial statements, Note 4. Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell, Note 5. Trading Securities, Note 6. Equity Investments, Note 7. Available-for-Sale Securities, and Note 7.8. Held-To-Maturity Securities.  Also see Tables 4.1 through 4.114.9 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

 

Debt Financing  Consolidated Obligations

 

Our primary source of funds is the sale of debt securities, known as Consolidated obligations, in the U.S. and global capital markets.  Consolidated obligations are the joint and several obligations of the FHLBanks, backed only by the financial resources of the 11 FHLBanks.  Consolidated obligations are not obligations of the United States, and the United States does not guarantee them.  The issuance and servicing of Consolidated obligations debt are performed by the Office of Finance, a joint office of the FHLBanks established by the Finance Agency.  The Office of Finance (or the “OF”) has authority to issue joint and several debt on behalf of the FHLBanks.  At December 31, 20172020 and 2016,2019, the par amounts of Consolidated obligations outstanding, bonds and discount notes for all 11 FHLBanks was $0.7 trillion and $1.0 trillion, including $148.5$126.6 billion and $133.7$152.2 billion issued for the FHLBNY and outstanding at those dates.

For more information, see financial statements, Note 11.12.  Consolidated Obligations.  Also see Tables 6.1 to 6.106.11 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

 

Finance Agency regulations state that the FHLBanks must maintain, free from any lien or pledge, qualifying assets at least equal to the face amount of Consolidated obligations outstanding.  Qualifying assets are defined as cash; secured advances; assets with an assessment or rating at least equivalent to the current assessment or rating of the Consolidated obligations; obligations of or fully guaranteed by the United States, obligations, participations, or other instruments of or issued by Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”)(Fannie Mae) or the Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”)(Ginnie Mae); mortgages, obligations, or other securities which are or ever have been sold by the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”)(Freddie Mac) under the FHLBank Act; and such securities as fiduciary and trust funds may invest in under the laws of the state in which the FHLBank is located. Any assets subject to a lien or pledge for the benefit of holders of any issue of Consolidated obligations are treated as if they were free from lien or pledge for purposes of compliance with these regulations.

 

Consolidated obligations are distributed through dealers selected by the Office of Finance using various methods including competitive auction and negotiations with individual or syndicates of underwriters. Some debt issuance is in response to specific inquiries from underwriters.  Many Consolidated obligations are issued with the FHLBank concurrently entering into derivatives agreements, such as interest rate swaps. To facilitate issuance, the Office of Finance may coordinate communication between underwriters, individual FHLBanks, and financial institutions executing derivative agreements with the FHLBanks.

Issuance volume is not concentrated with any particular underwriter.

 

The Office of Finance is mandated by the Finance Agency to ensure that Consolidated obligations are issued efficiently and at the lowest all-in cost of funds over time. If the Office of Finance determines that its action is consistent with its Finance Agency’s mandated policies, it may reject our issuance request, and the requests of other FHLBanks, to raise funds through the issuance of Consolidated obligations on particular terms and conditions.  We have never been denied access under this policy for all periods reported.  The Office of Finance serves as a source of information for the FHLBanks on capital market developments and manages the FHLBanks’ relationship with the rating agencies with respect to the Consolidated obligations.

 


Consolidated Obligation Liabilities

 

Each FHLBank independently determines its participation in each issuance of Consolidated obligations based on (among other factors) its own funding and operating requirements, maturities, interest rates, and other terms available for Consolidated obligations in the market place.  The FHLBanks have emphasized diversification of funding sources and channels as the need for funding from the capital markets has grown.

 

Consolidated Obligations Bonds. Consolidated bonds are issued primarily to raise intermediate- and long-term funds for the FHLBanks. They can be issued and distributed through negotiated or competitive bidding transactions with approved underwriters or bidding group members.  Consolidated bonds (COs or CO bonds) generally carry fixed- or variable-rate payment terms and have maturities ranging from one month to 30 years.

 

·
·The Global Debt Program — The FHLBanks issue global bullet Consolidated bonds. The FHLBanks and the Office of Finance maintain a debt issuance process for scheduled issuance of global bullet Consolidated bonds. As part of this process, management from each FHLBank will determine and communicate a firm commitment to the Office of Finance for an amount of scheduled global bullet debt to be issued on its behalf. If the FHLBanks’ orders do not meet the minimum debt issue size, each FHLBank receives an allocation of proceeds equal to either the larger of the FHLBank’s commitment or the ratio of the individual FHLBank’s regulatory capital to total regulatory capital of all of the FHLBanks.  If the FHLBanks’ commitments exceed the minimum debt issue size, then the proceeds are allocated based on relative regulatory capital of the FHLBanks, with the allocation limited to either the lesser of the allocation amount or the actual commitment amount.  The FHLBanks can, however, pass on any scheduled calendar slot and decline to issue any global bullet Consolidated bonds upon agreement of at least eight of the FHLBanks.

·TAP Issue Program — The FHLBanks use the TAP Issue Program to issue fixed-rate, noncallablenon-callable (bullet) bonds. This program uses specific maturities that may be reopened daily through competitive auctions.  The goal of the TAP Issue Program is to aggregate frequent smaller fixed-rate funding needs into a larger bond issue that may have greater market liquidity.

Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes.  Discount notes may be offered into the market though the “discount note window”, or through regularly scheduled competitive auctions. These CO discount notes have a maturity range of one day to one year, are generally issued at or below par, and mature at par.

 

Consolidated Obligation
·Discount Notes. On anotes issued through the discount note window are priced daily basis,and distributed through FHLBank authorized dealers. FHLBanks may request that specific amounts of Consolidated discount notes (CO discount notes or discount notes) with specific maturity dates be offered by the Office of Finance for sale through certainauthorized securities dealers.  The Office of Finance commits to issue ConsolidatedCO discount notes on behalf of the requesting FHLBanks after dealers submit orders for the specific ConsolidatedCO discount notes offered for sale.  The FHLBanks receive funding based on the time of their request, the rate requested for issuance, the trade date, the settlement date, and the maturity date. However, a FHLBank may receive less than requested (or may not receive any funding) because of investor demand and competing FHLBank requests for the particular funding that the FHLBank is requesting.  These Consolidated discount notes have a maturity range of one day to one year, are generally issued at or below par, and mature at par.

 

·Twice weekly, one or more of the FHLBanks may also request that specific amounts of ConsolidatedCO discount notes with fixed maturities of four, nine,4, 8, 13, and 26 weeks be offered by the Office of Finance through competitivesingle-price (Dutch) auctions conducted with securities dealers in the Consolidated discount note selling group. Issuance is contingent on FHLBank demand for funding with these terms. Auction sizes and maturity categories are announced to dealers during the auction process on Reuters and other major wire services. The Consolidated discount notes offered for sale through competitive auctionDutch auctions are not subject to a limit on the maximum costs the FHLBanks are willing to pay. TheBids will be accepted from the lowest bid rate until the auction size is met, and all winning bids will be awarded at the highest bid rate accepted, so that the FHLBanks receive funding based on their requests at a weighted-averagethe highest bid rate of the winning bids from the dealers.accepted. If the bids submitted are less than the total of the FHLBanks’ requests, athe FHLBank receives funding based on that FHLBank’s regulatory capital relative to the regulatory capital of other FHLBanks offering ConsolidatedCO discount notes.


Deposits

The FHLBank Act allows us to accept deposits from its members, other FHLBanks and government instrumentalities.  For us, member deposits are also a source of funding, but we do not rely on member deposits to meet our funding requirements.  For members, deposits are a low risk earning asset that may satisfy their regulatory liquidity requirements.  We offer several types of deposit programs to our members, including demand and term deposits.

Capital

From its enactment in 1932, the FHLBank Act provided for a subscription-based capital structure for the FHLBanks. The amount of capital stock that each FHLBank issued was determined by a statutory formula establishing how much FHLBank capital stock each member was required to purchase. With the enactment of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, Congress replaced the statutory subscription-based member capital stock purchase formula with requirements for total capital, leverage capital, and risk-based capital for the FHLBanks and required the FHLBanks to develop new capital plans to replace the previous statutory structure.

The FHLBNY’s capital plan bases the stock purchase requirement on the level of activity a member has with the Bank, subject to a minimum membership requirement that is intended to reflect the value to the member of having access to the Bank as a funding source. With the approval of the Board of Directors, we may adjust these requirements from time to time within the ranges established in the capital plan. Any changes to our capital plan must be approved by our Board of Directors and the Finance Agency.

Bank capital stock cannot be publicly traded, and under the capital plan, may be issued, transferred, redeemed, and repurchased only at its par value of $100 per share, subject to certain regulatory and statutory limits. Under the capital plan, a member’s capital stock will be redeemed by the Bank upon five years notice from the member, subject to certain conditions. In addition, we have the discretion to repurchase excess capital stock from members. Our current practice is to acquire excess activity-based capital stock daily.

For more information, see Table 7.1 Stockholders’ Capital in this MD&A, and Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings in the notes to the audited financial statements.

Retained Earnings and Dividends

The Bank’s Retained Earnings and Dividends policy (the “Policy”) is a Board approved policy, the objectives of which are to preserve the value of our members’ investment with us, and to provide members with a reasonable dividend. The Policy also states that we want to provide returns on the investment in the Bank’s stock that are sufficient to attract and retain members, and that do not discourage member borrowing. The Bank’s minimum level of retained earnings provides management with a high degree of confidence that estimable losses under simulated stressful conditions and scenarios will not impair paid-in capital, thereby preserving the par value of the stock. Additionally, Unrestricted Retained Earnings should be available to supplement dividends when earnings are low, or losses occur. Our ability to pay dividends and any other distributions may be affected by standards under the Policy.

The Policy establishes (1) a minimum level of Retained Earnings equal to the Bank’s “Retained Earnings Sufficiency”, which is the FHLBNY’s measure of estimating the Bank’s risk exposures; it is estimated under simulated stressful conditions and scenarios, within a defined confidence interval, on market, credit and operational risks, as well as GAAP accounting exposures related to the fair values of certain financial instruments; (2) the priority of contributions to retained earnings relative to other distributions of income; (3) the target level of Retained Earnings, based on the Retained Earnings Sufficiency level, and (4) a timeline to achieve the targets and to ensure maintenance of appropriate levels of Retained Earnings.

The Bank may pay dividends from Unrestricted Retained Earnings and current net income. Per Finance Agency regulations, our Board of Directors may declare and pay dividends in either cash or capital stock; our practice has been to pay dividends in cash. Our dividends and our dividend policy are subject to Federal Housing Finance Agency regulations and policies. Any dividend payments declared by our Board are a function of these policies, and our financial condition and performance.


To achieve the Bank’s strategic plans and business objectives within the Bank’s risk appetite, the Board-approved Retained Earnings target was $1,812 million for 2020 (including $743 million of Restricted retained earnings (RRE) allocated to Risk Bearing Capacity) and $1,760 million for 2019. For more information about Restricted retained earnings, see Table 7.1 Stockholder’s Capital in this MD&A.

Unrestricted Retained Earnings was $1,135.3 million and $1,115.2 million at December 31, 2020 and 2019. Restricted Retained Earnings was $774.3 million and $685.8 million at the two dates. The balance in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI), a component of stockholder’s equity, were losses of $19.7 million and $47.8 million at December 31, 2020 and 2019. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, our actual retained earning balances exceeded the required Bank’s Retained Earnings Sufficiency level and was in compliance with the Retained Earnings and Dividend Policy.

The following table summarizes the impact of dividends on our retained earnings for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018 (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Retained earnings, beginning of year $1,801,034  $1,694,082  $1,546,282 
Adjustments to opening balance (a)  14,431   -   4,924 
Net Income for the year  442,385   472,588   560,478 
   2,257,850   2,166,670   2,111,684 
Dividends paid in the year (b)  (348,234)  (365,636)  (417,602)
             
Retained earnings, end of year $1,909,616  $1,801,034  $1,694,082 

 

Deposits(a)

The FHLBank Act allows us

Represents the effects of a cumulative catch up charge to accept deposits from its members, other FHLBanksopening balances with the adoption of ASU 2016-13 effective January 1, 2020, and government instrumentalities.  For us, member deposits are also a sourcerecovery in 2020 of funding, but we do not rely on member depositsprior capital distribution to meet our funding requirements.  For members, deposits are a low-risk earning asset that may satisfy their regulatory liquidity requirements.  We offer several types of deposit programs to our members, including demand and term deposits.

Retained Earnings and Dividends

The Bank’s Retained Earnings and Dividends policy (the “Policy”) is a Board approved policy, the objectives of which are to preserve the value of our members’ investment with us, and to provide members with a reasonable dividend.  The Policy also states that we want to provide returns on the investment in the Bank’s stock that are sufficient to attract and retain members, and that do not discourage member borrowing.  The Bank’s minimum level of retained earning provides management with a high degree of confidence that estimable losses under simulated stressful conditions and scenarios will not impair paid-in capital, thereby preserving the par value of the stock.  Additionally, Unrestricted Retained Earnings should be available to supplement dividends when earnings are low or losses occur.  Our ability to pay dividends and any other distributions may be affected by standards under the Policy.

The Policy establishes (1) a minimum level of Retained Earnings equal to the Bank’s “Retained Earnings Sufficiency” distinguished as the quantification of the Bank’s risk exposures.  The Retained Earnings Sufficiency is estimated under simulated stressful conditions and scenarios, within a defined confidence interval, on market, credit and operational risks, as well as GAAP accounting exposures related to the fair values of certain financial instruments; (2) the priority of contributions to retained earnings relative to other distributions of income; (3) the target level of Retained Earnings, based on the Retained Earnings Sufficiency level, and (4) a timeline to achieve the targets and to ensure maintenance of appropriate levels of Retained Earnings.

The Bank may pay dividends from Unrestricted Retained Earnings and current net income.  Per Finance Agency regulations, our Board of Directors may declare and pay dividends in either cash or capital stock; our practice has been to pay dividends in cash.  Our dividends and our dividend policy are subject to Federal Housing Finance Agency regulations and policies.

To achieve the Bank’s strategic plans and business objectives within the Bank’s risk appetite, Management had determined the Retained Earnings target to be $1,290 million for 2017 (including $250.0 million of Restricted retained earnings (“RRE”) allocated to Risk Bearing Capacity) and $885.0 million for 2016.FICO. For more information, about Restricted retained earnings, see Table 7.1 Stockholder’sStatements of Capital in this MD&A.

Unrestricted Retained Earnings was $1,067.1 million and $1,028.7 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016.  Restricted Retained Earnings was $479.2 million and $383.3 million at the two dates.  The balance in Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (AOCI), a component of stockholder’s equity, was a loss of $55.2 million and $95.7 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016.  At December 31, 2017 and 2016, our actual retained earning balances were greater than the Bank’s Retained Earnings Sufficiency level.

The following table summarizes the impact of dividends on our retained earnings for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Retained earnings, beginning of year

 

$

1,411,965

 

$

1,270,139

 

$

1,082,771

 

Net Income for the year

 

479,469

 

401,152

 

414,811

 

 

 

1,891,434

 

1,671,291

 

1,497,582

 

Dividends paid in the year (a)

 

(345,152

)

(259,326

)

(227,443

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Retained earnings, end of year

 

$

1,546,282

 

$

1,411,965

 

$

1,270,139

 


Financial Statements.

(a)(b)Dividends are paid quarterly in arrears in the second month after quarter end.quarter-end. Dividends are not accrued at quarter end.quarter-end.

Competition

Demand for advances is affected by many factors including, but not exclusive to the availability and cost to members of alternate sources of liquidity, including retail deposits and wholesale funding options such as brokered deposits, repurchase agreements, Federal Funds lines of credit, Federal Reserve Bank liquidity facilities, wholesale CD programs, and deposits through listing service.  Historically, members have grown their assets at a faster pace than retail deposits and capital resulting in the creation of a funding gap.  We compete with both secured and unsecured suppliers of wholesale funding to fill these potential funding gaps.  Such other suppliers of funding may include Wall Street dealers, commercial banks, regional broker-dealers, and firms capitalizing on wholesale funding platforms.  Of these wholesale funding sources, the brokered CD market is our main threat as members continue to increase their usage and counterparties extend available maturities.

An emerging competitor is Deposits through Listing Services, which are financial institutions that charge a subscription fee to help banks gather deposits.  We have seen a gradual uptick in the use of these wholesale deposits using this vehicle. The Federal Reserve funding programs are no longer a liquidity facility of “last resort” and has emerged as competition for our short-term advances. Repo and Federal Funds usage has been stable, though demand for certain members has both increased and decreased as a result of the various changes in the regulatory liquidity requirements and we expect this trend to extend as advances and brokered CDs continue to pressure market share.  Our larger members may also have access to the national and global credit markets.  The availability of alternative funding sources can vary as a result of market conditions, member creditworthiness, availability of collateral and suppliers’ appetite for the business, as well as other factors. However, we believe the competitive landscape will continue and will be reflected in the balances and market share.

In the debt markets, we compete for funds in the national and global debt markets.  Competitors include corporations, sovereigns, the U.S. Treasury, supranational entities, and Government Sponsored Enterprises including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the Federal Farm Credit Banks (FFCB). Increases in the supply of competing debt products could, in the absence of increases in demand, result in higher debt costs or lesser amounts of debt issued at the same cost than would otherwise be the case.  In addition, the availability and cost of funds can be adversely affected by regulatory initiatives that could reduce


demand for Federal Home Loan Bank System debt.  Although the available supply of funds has historically kept pace with the liquidity needs of our members, there can be no assurance this will continue to be the case.

In certain market conditions, there is considerable competition among high credit quality issuers in the markets for callable debt.  The issuance of callable debt and the simultaneous execution of callable derivatives that mirror the debt have been, when available, a valuable source of competitively priced funding for the FHLBNY.  However, since Money Market Fund Reform, the dominant System issuance has been in simple floating-rate debt as money market funds migrated assets from Prime to Government Funds; thereby creating demand for eligible assets such as FHLB debt. Floaters have been one of the main determinants of our relative cost of funds. There can be no assurance that the current breadth and depth of these markets will be sustained as it is heavily influenced by investor sentiment concerning rates and yields, LIBOR cessation and availability of alternative investments, particularly in the Repo sector.

Since November 2018, the FHLB System has been a major participant in the issuance of floaters using the proposed LIBOR replacement index, the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR). SOFR-floaters are potentially a major source of funding for the System as issuance grows and a broader derivative market develops in anticipation of a cessation of LIBOR. See LIBOR replacement discussions in Item 1A. Risk Factors.

We compete for the purchase of mortgage loans held-for-sale.  For single-family products, competition is primarily with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, principally on the basis of price, products, structures, and services offered.

Competition for certain aspects of the FHLBank business model among the 11 FHLBanks is limited, although a bank holding company with multiple banking charters may operate in more than one FHLBank’s district.  If the member has a centralized treasury function, it is possible that there could be competition for advances.  A limited number of our member institutions are subsidiaries of financial holding companies with multiple charters and FHLBank memberships.  The amount of advances borrowed by these entities and the amount of capital stock held, could be material to the business.  Certain large member financial institutions operating in our district may borrow unsecured Federal funds or source deposits from other FHLBanks.  We are permitted by regulation to purchase short-term investments from our members, though we choose to not permit members to borrow unsecured funds from us.

Oversight, Audits, and Examinations

Our business is subject to extensive regulation and supervision. The laws and regulations to which we are subject cover all key aspects of our business, and directly and indirectly affect our product and service offerings, pricing, competitive position and strategic plan, relationship with members and third parties, capital structure, cash needs and uses, and information security. As a result, such laws and regulations have a significant effect on key drivers of our results of operations, including, for example, our capital and liquidity, product and service offerings, risk management, and costs of compliance. An overview of our regulatory environment is discussed below.

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (Finance Agency or FHFA), an independent agency in the executive branch of the U.S. government, supervises and regulates the FHLBanks.  The Housing Act created the FHFA with regulatory authority over FHLBank matters such as: board of director composition, executive compensation, risk-based capital standards and prompt corrective action enforcement provisions, membership eligibility, and low-income housing goals.  The FHFA’s mission, with respect to the FHLBanks, is to ensure that the FHLBanks operate in a safe and sound manner so that the FHLBanks serve as a reliable source of liquidity and funding for housing finance and community investment.

We carry out our statutory mission only through activities that comply with the rules, regulations, guidelines, and orders issued under the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act, the Housing Act and the FHLBank Act.

Our shares of Class B stock are registered with the SEC under the Exchange Act, and we are subject to the information, disclosure, insider trading restrictions and other requirements under the Exchange Act.  We are not subject to the provisions of the Securities Act.

The Government Corporation Control Act provides that, before a government corporation may issue and offer obligations to the public, the Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe the form, denomination, maturity, interest rate and conditions of the obligations; the way and time issued; and the selling price.  The U.S. Department of the Treasury receives the Finance Agency’s annual report to Congress, monthly reports reflecting securities transactions of the FHLBanks, and other reports reflecting the operations of the FHLBanks. The FHLBNY has an internal audit department, and our Board of Directors has an


Audit Committee.  An independent registered public accounting firm audits our annual financial statements.  The independent registered public accounting firm conducts these audits following auditing standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB).  The FHLBanks, the Finance Agency, and Congress all receive the audit reports.  We must also submit annual management reports to Congress, the President, the Office of Management and Budget, and the Comptroller General.  These reports include: Statements of financial condition, operations, and cash flows; a Statement of internal accounting and administrative control systems; and the Report of the independent registered public accounting firm on the financial statements and internal controls over financial reporting.

The Comptroller General has authority under the FHLBank Act to audit or examine the Finance Agency and the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, and to decide the extent to which they fairly and effectively fulfill the purpose of the FHLBank Act.  Furthermore, the Government Corporation Control Act provides that the Comptroller General may review any audit of our financial statements conducted by a registered independent public accounting firm.  If the Comptroller General conducts such a review, then he or she must report the results and provide his or her recommendations to Congress, the Office of Management and Budget and the Bank.  The Comptroller General may also conduct his or her own audit of any of our financial statements.

For a discussion regarding the risks related to our regulatory environment, see the description of “Risk Factors — Regulatory Risks” in Part I, Section 1A of this Form 10-K, and for a discussion of recent regulatory developments that may impact the Bank, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis — Legislative and Regulatory Developments” in Part II, Item 7 of this Form 10-K.

Tax Status

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, are exempt from ordinary federal, state, and local taxation except for real property taxes.

Assessments

Affordable Housing Program (AHP) Assessments. — Section 10(j) of the FHLBank Act requires each FHLBank to establish an Affordable Housing Program.  Each FHLBank provides subsidies in the form of direct grants and below-market interest rate advances to members who use the funds to assist in the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.  Annually, the FHLBanks must allocate for the AHP the greater of $100 million or 10% of regulatory net income.  Regulatory net income is defined as GAAP net income before interest expense related to mandatorily redeemable capital stock and the assessment for Affordable Housing Program.  The exclusion of interest expense related to mandatorily redeemable capital stock is a regulatory interpretation of the Finance Agency.  We accrue the AHP expense monthly.

We charge the amount allocated for the Affordable Housing Program to income and recognize the amounts allocated as a liability.  We relieve the AHP liability as members use subsidies.  In periods where our regulatory income before Affordable Housing Program is zero or less, the amount of AHP liability is equal to zero.  If the result of the aggregate 10% calculation described above is less than $100 million for all 11 FHLBanks, then the Act requires the shortfall to be allocated among the FHLBanks based on the ratio of each FHLBank’s income before Affordable Housing Program to the sum of the income before Affordable Housing Program of the 11 FHLBanks.  There were no shortfalls in 2020, 2019 and 2018.

Human Capital Resources

The Bank’s human capital is a significant contributor to the success of the Bank’s strategic business objectives. In managing the Bank’s human capital, the Bank focuses on its workforce profile and the various programs and philosophies described below.

Workforce Profile

The Bank’s workforce is primarily comprised of corporate employees, with the Bank’s principal operations in two locations. As of December 31, 2020, the Bank had 354 full-time and no part-time employees. As of December 31, 2020, approximately 41% of the Bank’s workforce were women, 59% men, 44% non-minority and 56% minority. Given the size of assets under management, the Bank’s workforce is lean, and historically has included a number of longer-tenured employees. The Bank strives to both develop talent from within the organization and supplement with external hires. The Bank believes that


developing talent internally results in institutional strength and continuity and promotes loyalty and commitment in the Bank’s employee base, which furthers its success, while adding new employees contributes to new ideas, continuous improvement, and the Bank’s goals of a diverse and inclusive workforce. As of December 31, 2020, the average tenure of the Bank’s employees was 9.17 years. There are no collective bargaining agreements with the Bank’s employees.

Total Rewards

The Bank seeks to attract, develop, engage and retain talented employees to achieve its strategic business initiatives, enhance business performance and increase shareholder value. The Bank effects this objective through a combination of inclusion and development programs, benefits and employee wellness programs and recognizing and rewarding performance. Specifically, the Bank’s programs include:

 

Competition

·Cash compensation (i.e., base salary, and, for exempt employees, "variable" or "at risk" short-term incentive compensation)

 

Demand for advances is affected by (among other things) the availability
·Health Benefits – Healthcare insurance, Life and cost to members of alternate sources of liquidity, including retail depositsAccidental Death & Dismemberment insurance, Short-Term and wholesale funding options such as brokered deposits, repurchase agreementsLong-Term Disability benefits

·Retirement Benefits – 401(k) retirement savings plans with employer match, and Federal funds.  Historically, members have grown their assets at a faster pace than retail deposits and capital creating a funding gap.  We compete with both secured and unsecured suppliers of wholesale funding to fill these potential funding gaps.  Such other suppliers of funding may include Wall Street dealers, commercial banks, regional broker-dealers and firms capitalizing on wholesale funding platforms.  Certain members may have access to alternative wholesale funding sources such as lines of credit, wholesale CD programs, brokered CDs, deposits thru listing service, and sales of securities under agreements to repurchase.  Of these wholesale funding sources, the brokered CD market is our main threat as members continue to increase their usage.  An emerging competitor is Deposits Thru Listing Services, which are financial institutions that charge a subscription fee to help banks gather deposits.  We have seen a gradual uptick in the use of these wholesale deposits. Repo and Federal funds have subsided compared to pre-crisis volume and we expect this trend to extend as advances and brokered CDs continue to take market share.  Large members may also have access to the national and global credit markets.  The availability of alternative funding sources can vary as a result of market conditions, member creditworthiness, availability of collateral and suppliers’ appetite for the business, as well as other factors.

pension benefits

 

We compete for funds in the national and global unsecured debt markets.  Competitors include corporate, sovereign, U.S. Treasury, supranational entities and Government Sponsored Enterprises including Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and the Federal Farm Credit Banks (“FFCB”).  Increases in the supply of competing debt products could, in the absence of increases in demand, result in higher debt costs or lesser amounts of debt issued at the same cost than would otherwise be the case.  In addition, the availability and cost of funds can be adversely affected by regulatory initiatives that could reduce demand for Federal Home Loan Bank system debt.  Although the available supply of funds has historically kept pace with the liquidity needs of our members, there can be no assurance this will continue to be the case indefinitely.

There is considerable competition among high credit quality issuers in the markets for callable debt.  The issuance of callable debt and the simultaneous execution of callable derivatives that mirror the debt have been, when available, a valuable source of competitively priced funding for the FHLBNY.  Therefore, the liquidity of markets for callable debt is one of the determinants of our relative cost of funds.  There can be no assurance that the current breadth and depth of these markets will be sustained as it is heavily influenced by investor sentiment concerning rising rates and yields and availability of alternative investments.

We compete for the purchase of mortgage loans held-for-sale.  For single-family products, competition is primarily with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, principally on the basis of price, products, structures, and services offered.

Competition among the 11 member banks of the FHLBanks is limited.  A bank holding company with multiple banking charters may operate in more than one FHLBank’s district.  If the member has a centralized treasury function, it is possible that there could be competition for advances.  A limited number of our member institutions are subsidiaries of financial holding companies with multiple charters and FHLBank memberships.  We do not believe, however, that the amount of advances borrowed by these entities, or the amount of capital stock held, is material in the context of its competitive environment.  Certain large member financial institutions operating in our district may borrow unsecured Federal funds from other FHLBanks.  We are permitted by regulation to purchase short-term investments from our members, but we are not permitted to allow members to borrow unsecured funds from us.

Oversight, Audits, and Examinations

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Finance Agency” or “FHFA”), an independent agency in the executive branch of the U.S. government, supervises and regulates the FHLBanks.  The Housing Act created the FHFA with regulatory authority over FHLBank matters such as: board of director composition, executive compensation, risk-based capital standards and prompt corrective action enforcement provisions, membership eligibility, and low-income housing goals.  The FHFA’s mission, with respect to the FHLBanks, is to ensure that the FHLBanks operate in a safe and sound manner so that the FHLBanks serve as a reliable source of liquidity and funding for housing finance and community investment.

We carry out our statutory mission only through activities that comply with the rules, regulations, guidelines, and orders issued under the Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act, the Housing Act and the FHLBank Act.

Our shares of Class B stock are registered with the SEC under the Exchange Act, and we are subject to the information, disclosure, insider trading restrictions and other requirements under the Exchange Act.  We are not subject to the provisions of the Securities Act as amended.

The Government Corporation Control Act provides that, before a government corporation may issue and offer obligations to the public, the Secretary of the Treasury shall prescribe the form, denomination, maturity, interest rate and conditions of the obligations; the way and time issued; and the selling price.  The U.S. Department of the Treasury receives the Finance Agency’s annual report to Congress, monthly reports reflecting securities transactions of the FHLBanks, and other reports reflecting the operations of the FHLBanks.

The FHLBNY has an internal audit department, and our Board of Directors has an Audit Committee.  An independent registered public accounting firm audits our annual financial statements.  The independent registered public accounting firm conducts these audits following auditing standards established by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  The FHLBanks, the Finance Agency, and Congress all receive the audit reports.  We must also submit annual management reports to Congress, the President, the Office of
·Wellness program – Fitness Reimbursement, Health Management and Budget,Employee Assistance Programs

·Time away from work – including time off for vacation, personal, holiday, and the Comptroller General.  These reports include: Statements of financial condition, operations, and cash flows; a Statement of internal accounting and administrative control systems; and the Report of the independent registered public accounting firm on the financial statements and internal controls over financial reporting.

volunteer opportunities

 

The Comptroller General has authority under
·Culture – Culture and Activity Committees events, Diversity and Inclusion initiatives

·Work/Life balance – parental leave, bereavement and jury duty

·Development programs and training – Tuition Reimbursement Program, Corporate Toastmasters Club, Online Training Platform, Internal Educational and Development program, and Management Development Program

·Management succession planning – the FHLBank Act to audit or examine the Finance AgencyBank’s board and the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, and to decide the extent to which they fairly and effectively fulfill the purpose of the FHLBank Act.  Furthermore, the Government Corporation Control Act provides that the Comptroller General may review any audit of our financial statements conducted by a registered independent public accounting firm.  If the Comptroller General conducts such a review, then he or she must report the results and provide his or her recommendations to Congress, the Office of Management and Budget and the Bank.  The Comptroller General may also conduct his or her own audit of any of our financial statements.

Personnel

As of December 31, 2017, we had 308 full-time and no part-time employees.  As of December 31, 2016, we had 280 full-time and no part-time employees.  The employees are not represented by a collective bargaining unit, and we consider our relationship with employees to be good.

Tax Status

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, are exempt from ordinary federal, state, and local taxation except for real property taxes.

Assessments

Affordable Housing Program (“AHP”) Assessments. — Section 10(j) of the FHLBank Act requires each FHLBank to establish an Affordable Housing Program.  Each FHLBank provides subsidiesleadership actively engage in the form of direct grants and below-market interest rate advances to members who use the funds to assist in the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.  Annually, the FHLBanks must allocate for the AHP the greater of $100 million or 10% of regulatory net income.  Regulatory net income is defined as GAAP net income before interest expense related to mandatorily redeemable capital stock and the assessment for Affordable Housing Program.  The exclusion of interest expense related to mandatorily redeemable capital stock is a regulatory interpretation of the Finance Agency.  We accrue the AHP expense monthly.

management succession planning

 

We charge the amount allocated for the Affordable Housing Program to income and recognize the amounts allocated as a liability.  We relieve the AHP liability as members use subsidies.  In periods where our regulatory income before Affordable Housing Program is zero or less, the amount of AHP liability is equal to zero.  If the result of the aggregate 10% calculation described above is less than $100 million for all 11 FHLBanks, then the Act requires the shortfall to be allocated among the FHLBanks based on the ratio of each FHLBank’s income before Affordable Housing Program to the sum of the income before Affordable Housing Program of the 11 FHLBanks.  There were no shortfalls in 2017, 2016 and 2015.

The Bank’s Performance Management framework includes a mid-year checkpoint, as well as an annual performance review.  Overall annual ratings are calibrated and merit and incentive payments are differentiated for the Bank’s highest performers.

The Bank is committed to the health, safety and wellness of its employees. In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Bank has implemented significant operating environment changes, safety protocols and procedures that it determined were in the best interest of the Bank’s employees and members, and which comply with government regulations. This includes having the Bank’s employees work remotely, while implementing additional safety measures for volunteer employees on-site.

Diversity and Inclusion Program

Diversity and Inclusion (“D&I”) is a strategic business priority for the Bank.  The Bank’s Head of Corporate Services/Director of Diversity & Inclusion is a Member of the Management Committee, reporting to the President and Chief Executive Officer and serves as a liaison to the Board of Directors.  The Bank recognizes that diversity increases capacity for innovation and creativity. Additionally, inclusion allows the Bank to leverage the unique perspectives of all employees and strengthens the Bank’s retention efforts.  The Bank operationalizes its commitment through the development and execution of a three-year diversity and inclusion strategic plan that includes quantifiable metrics to measure its success and it reports regularly on its performance to management and the Board of Directors.  The Bank also offers a range of opportunities for its employees to connect and grow personally and professionally through the Office of Diversity and Inclusion Workplace Inclusion Team.  The Bank considers learning an important component of its D&I strategic plan and regularly offers educational opportunities to its employees and evaluates inclusive behaviors as part of the Bank’s annual performance management process.

15

Available Information

The Federal Home Loan Bank of New York maintains a website located at www.fhlbny.com where we make available our annual report on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), and other information regarding us and our products free of charge. We are required to file with the SEC an annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, and current reports on Form 8-K. The SEC maintains a website that contains these reports and other information regarding our electronic filings located at www.sec.gov. Information on these websites, or that can be accessed through these websites, does not constitute a part of this annual report.


Item 1A.

ITEM 1A.Risk Factors.RISK FACTORS.

The following discussion sets forth the material risk factors that could affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  Readers should not consider any descriptions of such factors to be a complete set of all potential risks that could affect the FHLBNY.

Regulatory Risks

The FHLBanks are governed by federal laws and regulations, which could change or be applied in a manner detrimental to FHLBNY’s operations.  The FHLBanks are government-sponsored enterprises (“GSEs”), organized under the authority of the FHLBank Act, and, as such, are governed by federal laws and regulations of the Finance Agency, an independent agency in the executive branch of the federal government.  From time to time, Congress has amended the FHLBank Act in ways that significantly affected the FHLBanks and the manner in which the FHLBanks carry out their housing finance mission and business operations.  New or modified legislation enacted by Congress or regulations adopted by the Finance Agency could have a negative effect on our ability to conduct business or our cost of doing business. Due to recent changes in the U.S. government administration and recent executive actions, there are additional uncertainties in the legislative and regulatory environment.

Changes in regulatory or statutory requirements, or in their application, could result in, among other things, changes in: our cost of funds; retained earnings requirements; liquidity requirements, debt issuance; dividend payments; capital redemption and repurchases; permissible business activities; the size, scope, or nature of our lending, investment, or mortgage purchase programs; or our compliance costs.  Changes that restrict dividend payments, the growth of our current business, or the creation of new products or services could negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition.  Further, the regulatory environment affecting members could be changed in a manner that would negatively affect their ability to acquire or own our capital stock or take advantage of our products and services.

As a result of these factors, the FHLBank System may have to pay a higher rate of interest on Consolidated obligations.  The resulting increase in the cost of issuing Consolidated obligations could cause our advances to be less profitable and reduce our net interest margins (the difference between the interest rate received on advances and the interest rate paid on Consolidated obligations).  If we change the pricing of our advances, they may no longer be attractive to members and outstanding advances may decrease.  In any case, the increased cost of issuing Consolidated obligations could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Negative information about us, the FHLBanks or housing GSEs, in general, could adversely impact our cost and availability of financing. Negative information impacting us or any other FHLBank, such as material losses or increased risk of losses, could also adversely impact our cost of funds. More broadly, negative information about housing GSEs, in general, could adversely impact us. The housing GSEs — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHLBanks — issue highly rated agency debt to fund their operations. From time to time, negative announcements by any of the housing GSEs concerning accounting problems, risk-management issues, and regulatory enforcement actions have created pressure on debt pricing for all GSEs, as investors have perceived such instruments as bearing increased risk. Similar announcements by the FHLBanks may contribute to this pressure on debt pricing.  One possible source of information that impacts us could come from plans for housing GSE reform.  Such plans, including those introduced by the U.S. Treasury and HUD proposed certain recommendations for the reform of the housing GSEs.  Although the focus of those recommendations is on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the proposal includes certain recommendations for the FHLBanks.  The proposed reforms could affect the FHLBanks’ current business activities with their members, particularly large financial institutions.  These recommendations include reducing and altering the composition of FHLBanks investment portfolios, limiting the level of advances outstanding to individual members and restricting membership to allow each financial institution, inclusive of its affiliates, to be an active member in only a single FHLBank.  Other recommendations or other plans could result in market uncertainty regarding the status of U.S. federal government support of housing GSEs, in general, including the FHLBanks, and our cost of financing could be adversely impacted as a result.

Any such negative information or other factors could result in the FHLBanks having to pay a higher rate of interest on COs to make them attractive to investors. If we maintain our existing pricing on our advances products and other services notwithstanding increases in CO interest rates, the spreads we earn would fall and our results of operations would be adversely impacted.  If, in response to this decrease in spreads, we change the pricing of our advances, the advances may be less attractive to members and the amount of new advances and our outstanding advance balances may decrease.  In either case, the increased cost of issuing COs could adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Loan modification programs could adversely impact the value of the FHLBNY’s mortgage-backed securities or our investment values in the MPF loans.  Federal and state government authorities, as well as private entities such as financial institutions and the servicers of residential mortgage loans, have proposed, commenced, or promoted implementation of programs designed to provide homeowners with assistance in avoiding residential mortgage loan foreclosures.  Loan modification programs, as well as future legislative, regulatory or other actions, including amendments to the bankruptcy laws, that result in the modification of outstanding mortgage loans may adversely affect the value of and the returns on our mortgage-backed securities or MPF loans under our Acquired Member Assets Programs.

Business Risks

A loss or change of business activities with large members could adversely affect the FHLBNY’s results of operations and financial condition.  We have a high concentration of advances with three member institutions, and a loss or change of business activities with any of these institutions could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.  Concentration risk for the FHLBNY is defined as the exposure to loss arising from a disproportionately large number of financial transactions with a limited number of individual customers, with a particular focus on members that have outstanding advances that account for more than 10% of advances by par value to the total par value of all advances outstanding as of a given date.  For more information about concentration, see Note 20.  Segment Information and Concentration to Financial Statements.

Future changes in the regulatory environment for larger members that fall into the category of a Global Systemically Important Bank, may impact our business.  As an example, in November 2014, the Financial Stability Board (“FSB”) issued consultative document that defined a global standard for minimum amounts of Total Loss Absorbency Capacity (“TLAC”) to be held by Global Systemically Important Banks (G-SIBs), with the objective of ensuring that G-SIBs have the loss absorbing and recapitalization capacity so that critical functions continue without requiring taxpayer support or threatening financial stability.  G-SIBs will have until 2019 to meet certain leverage and other thresholds, and for certain G-SIBs that may require changes in balance sheet management, including issuances of additional senior and Tier 2 debt.  Depending on how soon the balance sheet adjustments are made, they could have an impact on our business even in the near term.

Withdrawal of one or more large members from our membership could result in a reduction of our total assets, capital, and net income.  If one or more of our large members were to prepay their advances or repay the advances as they came due and no other advances were made to replace them, it could also result in a reduction of our total assets, capital, and net income.  In prior years, we experienced significant prepayments of advances by large members.  In 2016, we also experienced prepayments due to the acquisition of a member by another member.

While our analysis of the impact of the prepayments do not indicate a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations, however,

The following discussion sets forth the material risk factors that could affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  Readers should not consider any descriptions of such factors to be a complete set of all potential risks that could affect the FHLBNY.

Market and Economic Risks

Changes to and replacement of the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) benchmark interest rate could adversely affect FHLBNY’s business, financial condition, and results of operations. In July 2017, the United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which regulates LIBOR, announced that after 2021 it will no longer persuade or compel banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR. The announcement indicated that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot and will not be guaranteed after 2021. It is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR, whether LIBOR will cease to be published or supported before or after 2021, or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. There is no assurance that LIBOR will continue to be accepted or used by the markets generally or by any issuers, investors, or counterparties at any time, even if LIBOR continues to be available.

In September 2019, the FHFA issued a supervisory letter (the Supervisory Letter) to the FHLBank and the Office of Finance relating to their planning for the LIBOR phase-out. Under the Supervisory Letter, with limited exceptions, FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, should, by December 31, 2019, stop purchasing investments that reference LIBOR and mature after December 31, 2021, and should, by June 30, 2020, no longer enter into any other new financial assets, liabilities, and derivatives that reference LIBOR and mature after December 31, 2021. As we align our business strategies to the Supervisory Letter, we may experience less flexibility in our access to funding, higher funding costs, or lower overall demand or increased costs for our advances, which may, in turn, negatively affect the future composition of our balance sheet, capital stock levels, core mission asset ratios, and net income. In addition, as we are generally not permitted to continue to use instruments that reference LIBOR for hedging and risk-mitigating purposes, we will have to alter our hedging and interest-rate risk management strategies, which may have a negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

On October 23, 2020, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA) published a Supplement to the 2006 ISDA Definitions (the Supplement) and the ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol (the Protocol). Both the Supplement and the Protocol took effect on January 25, 2021. On that date, all legacy bilateral derivative transactions subject to Protocol-covered agreements (including ISDA agreements) that incorporate certain covered ISDA definitional booklets and reference a covered Interbank Offered Rate (IBOR), including U.S. Dollar LIBOR, were effectively amended to apply the new ISDA-recommended IBOR fallbacks in the event of the relevant IBOR’s cessation. Both the Bank and our counterparty must have adhered to the Protocol in order to effectively amend legacy derivatives contracts, otherwise the parties must bilaterally amend legacy covered agreements (including ISDA agreements) to address LIBOR fallbacks. The Protocol will remain open for adherence after the effective date. As of January 25, 2021, all new derivative contracts are subject to the relevant IBOR fallbacks set forth in the Supplement.

On October 21, 2020, the Finance Agency issued a Supervisory Letter to the FHLBanks that required each FHLBank to adhere to the Protocol by December 31, 2020, and to the extent necessary, to amend any bilateral agreements regarding the adoption of the Protocol by December 15, 2020. We adhered to the Protocol on October 22, 2020, and all of our counterparties have adhered to the Protocol. We also amended all outstanding bilateral over-the-counter derivative agreements referencing U.S. Dollar LIBOR with our members to adopt the Protocol.

In December 2020, ICE Benchmark Administration (IBA) published its consultation on its intention to cease the publication of: (i) one-week and two-month U.S. Dollar LIBOR settings immediately following the LIBOR publication on December 31, 2021; and (ii) the remaining U.S. Dollar LIBOR settings (i.e., overnight and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month) immediately following the LIBOR publication on June 30, 2023. The IBA consultation period ended on January 25, 2021.

On March 5, 2021, the FCA announced that certain LIBOR will either cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative immediately after December 31, 2021 (on, in the case of some more frequently used U.S. Dollar LIBOR settings, immediately after June 30, 2023). Although the FCA does not expect LIBOR to become unrepresentative before the applicable cessation date and intends to consult on requiring the administrator of LIBOR to continue publishing LIBOR of certain currencies and tenors on a non-representative, synthetic basis for a period after the applicable cessation date, there is no assurance that LIBOR, of any particular currency or tenor, will continue to be published or be representative through any


particular date. On the same day, the IBA also published a summary of the feedback it received on its December 2020 consultation regarding its intention to cease publication of the LIBOR tenors.

In the United States, the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York convened the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) to identify a set of alternative reference interest rates for possible use as market benchmarks. This committee has proposed the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) as its recommended alternative to U.S. Dollar LIBOR, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York began publishing SOFR rates in the second quarter of 2018. SOFR is based on a broad segment of the overnight Treasury repurchase market and is intended to be a measure of the cost of borrowing cash overnight collateralized by Treasury securities. Since 2018, market activity in SOFR-linked financial instruments has continued to develop. The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, have offered SOFR-linked consolidated obligations on an ongoing basis and have started offering SOFR-linked advances. In March 2021, the ARRC confirmed that in its opinion the March 5, 2021 announcements by IBA and the FCA on future cessation and loss of representativeness of the LIBOR benchmarks constituted a “Benchmark Transition Event” with respect to all U.S. Dollar LIBOR settings.

As many of our assets, liabilities, and derivatives are indexed to LIBOR, the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY and the Office of Finance have developed a LIBOR transition plan, which addresses considerations such as LIBOR exposure, fallback language, operational preparedness, and balance sheet management. However, the market transition away from LIBOR and towards SOFR or another alternate reference rate is expected to be complicated, including the development of term and credit adjustments to accommodate differences between LIBOR and SOFR or any other alternate reference rate. During the market transition away from LIBOR, LIBOR may experience increased volatility or become less representative. In addition, the overnight Treasury repurchase market underlying SOFR has experienced and may experience disruptions from time to time, which has resulted and may result in unexpected fluctuations in SOFR. Introduction of an alternate reference rate also may create challenges in hedging and asset liability management and introduce additional basis risk and increased volatility for the FHLBNY and other market participants. While market activity in SOFR-linked financial instruments has continued to develop, there can be no guarantee that SOFR will become widely accepted and used across market segments and financial products in a timely manner and any other alternative reference rate may or may not be developed. Any disruption in the market transition away from LIBOR and towards SOFR or another alternate reference rate could result in increased financial, operational, legal, reputational, or compliance risks for the FHLBNY. We are not able to predict the effect of a possible transition to SOFR or another alternate reference rate will have on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Changes in interest rates could significantly affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  The level of interest rates and the impact on our balance sheet spreads are important factors affecting the Bank’s interest rate risk management, profitability, and returns. We earn income from capital, and the level of market interest rates as impacted by the Federal Reserve and the capital markets directly affects these earnings.

We earn income from the spread between interest earned on our outstanding advances, investments and shareholders’ capital, and interest paid on our Consolidated obligations and other interest-bearing liabilities. Although we use various methods and procedures to monitor and manage our exposure to changes in interest rates, we may experience instances when either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa. In either case, interest rate movements contrary to our position could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations. Moreover, the effect of changes in interest rates can be exacerbated by prepayment and extension risk, a risk that mortgage related assets will be refinanced by the mortgagor in low interest rate environments or will remain outstanding longer than expected at below market yields when interest rates increase. 

The possibility of negative interest rates on U.S. Treasury or other market instruments could adversely affect our results of operations by, for example, reducing asset yields or spreads, creating operating and operating system issues, or having other adverse impacts on our business.

The FHLBNY’s funding depends on its ability to access the capital markets.  Our primary source of funds is the sale of Consolidated obligations in the capital markets.  Our ability to obtain funds through the sale of Consolidated obligations depends in part on prevailing conditions in the capital markets, which are, for the most part, beyond our control. Accordingly, we may not be able to obtain funding on acceptable terms, if at all.  If we cannot access funding when needed on acceptable terms, our ability to support and continue operations could be adversely affected, which could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.  If additional reforms are legislated over money market funds, they may have an adverse impact on the FHLBank discount note pricing, given that the funds are significant sponsors of short-term


FHLBank debt.  Ongoing changes to the regulatory environment that affect bank counterparties and debt underwriters could adversely affect our ability to access the debt markets or the cost of that funding.

Economic downturns, macro-economic events, and changes in federal monetary policy, including those related to widespread health emergencies or similar events, could have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s business and its results of operations.  Our businesses and results of operations are sensitive to general business and economic conditions.  These conditions include short- and long-term interest rates, inflation, money supply, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, and the strength of the United States economy and the local economies in which we conduct our business.  If any of these conditions deteriorate, our businesses and results of operations could be adversely affected.  For example, a prolonged economic downturn could result in members needing fewer advances.  In addition, our business and results of operations are significantly affected by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies, including the Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States.  The Federal Reserve Board’s policies directly and indirectly influence the yield on interest-earning assets and the cost of interest-bearing liabilities, and can have far reaching impacts on the U.S. economy as a whole.

We note here that the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) recently approved emergency reductions to the target range for the Federal Funds rate and implemented other initiatives in response to the COVID-19 coronavirus outbreak and the potential negative impact on the U.S. economy. Further or similar action in response to this or any widespread health emergency or similar event, or impacts on the economy as a result of such event, could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Regulatory Risks

Determinations regarding compensation may impede the FHLBNY’s ability to hire and retain qualified senior management.  Each Federal Home Loan Bank’s Board of Directors has the statutory authority to select, employ and fix the compensation of its officers and employees in order to help ensure the hiring and retention of qualified staff.  However, as the regulator of the Federal Home Loan Banks, the Finance Agency has the authority to determine whether compensation paid to any executive officer is in its view not reasonable and comparable with compensation for employment in other similar businesses involving similar duties and responsibilities.  Depending on how such authority is exercised, the FHLBNY’s ability to hire and retain qualified executive officers could be adversely affected. 

The FHLBanks are governed by federal laws and regulations, which could change or be applied in a manner detrimental to FHLBNY’s operations.  The FHLBanks are government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs), organized under the authority of the FHLBank Act, and, as such, are governed by federal laws and regulations of the Finance Agency, an independent agency in the executive branch of the federal government.  From time to time, Congress has amended the FHLBank Act in ways that significantly affected the FHLBanks and the manner in which the FHLBanks carry out their housing finance mission and business operations.  New or modified legislation enacted by Congress or regulations adopted by the Finance Agency could have a negative effect on our ability to conduct business or our cost of doing business. Due to recent changes in the U.S. government administration and recent executive actions, there are additional uncertainties in the legislative and regulatory environment.

Changes in regulatory or statutory requirements, or in their application, could result in, among other things, changes in: our cost of funds; retained earnings requirements; liquidity requirements, debt issuance; dividend payments; capital redemption and repurchases; permissible business activities; the size, scope, or nature of our lending, investment, or mortgage purchase programs; our ability to appropriately compensate, recruit and retain our employees; or our compliance costs.  Changes that restrict dividend payments, the growth of our current business, or the creation of new products or services could negatively affect our results of operations and financial condition.  Further, the regulatory environment affecting members could be changed in a manner that would negatively affect their ability to acquire or own our capital stock or take advantage of our products and services.

As a result of these factors, the FHLBank System may have to pay a higher rate of interest on Consolidated obligations.  The resulting increase in the cost of issuing Consolidated obligations could cause our advances to be less profitable and reduce our net interest margins (the difference between the interest rate received on advances and the interest rate paid on Consolidated obligations).  If we change the pricing of our advances, they may no longer be attractive to members and outstanding advances may decrease.  In any case, the increased cost of issuing Consolidated obligations could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.


Negative information about us, the FHLBanks or housing GSEs, in general, could adversely impact our cost and availability of financing. Negative information impacting us or any other FHLBank, such as material losses or increased risk of losses, could also adversely impact our cost of funds. More broadly, negative information about housing GSEs, in general, could adversely impact us. The housing GSEs — Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and the FHLBanks — issue highly rated agency debt to fund their operations. From time to time, negative announcements by any of the housing GSEs concerning accounting problems, risk-management issues, and regulatory enforcement actions have created pressure on debt pricing for all GSEs, as investors have perceived such instruments as bearing increased risk. Similar announcements by the FHLBanks may contribute to this pressure on debt pricing.  One possible source of information that impacts us could come from plans for housing GSE reform.  Such plans, including those introduced by the U.S. Treasury and HUD proposed certain recommendations for the reform of the housing GSEs.  Although the focus of those recommendations is on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the proposal includes certain recommendations for the FHLBanks.  The proposed reforms could affect the FHLBNY’s current business activities with its members, particularly large financial institutions.  These recommendations include reducing and altering the composition of FHLBanks investment portfolios, limiting the level of advances outstanding to individual members and restricting membership to allow each financial institution, inclusive of its affiliates, to be an active member in only a single FHLBank.  Other recommendations or other plans could result in market uncertainty regarding the status of U.S. federal government support of housing GSEs, in general, including the FHLBanks, and our cost of financing could be adversely impacted as a result.

Any such negative information or other factors could result in the FHLBanks having to pay a higher rate of interest on COs to make them attractive to investors. If we maintain our existing pricing on our advances products and other services notwithstanding increases in CO interest rates, the spreads we earn would fall and our results of operations would be adversely impacted.  If, in response to this decrease in spreads, we change the pricing of our advances, the advances may be less attractive to members and the amount of new advances and our outstanding advance balances may decrease.  In either case, the increased cost of issuing COs could adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Business Risks

A loss or change of business activities with large members could adversely affect the FHLBNY’s results of operations and financial condition.  We have a high concentration of advances with three member institutions, and a loss or change of business activities with any of these institutions could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition. Concentration risk for the FHLBNY is defined as the exposure to loss arising from a disproportionately large number of financial transactions with a limited number of individual customers, with a particular focus on members that have outstanding advances that account for more than 10% of advances by par value to the total par value of all advances outstanding as of a given date. For more information about concentration, see Note 21. Segment Information and Concentration to Financial Statements.

Withdrawal of one or more large members from our membership could result in a reduction of our total assets, capital, and net income.  If one or more of our large members were to prepay their advances or repay the advances as they came due and no other advances were made to replace them, it could also result in a reduction of our total assets, capital, and net income.  In prior years, we experienced significant prepayments of advances by large members, and prepayments due to the acquisition of a member by another bank.

Our analysis of the impact of the prepayments do not indicate a material adverse impact on our business and results of operation. However, these are the types of events that we consider to be potential negative factors that may arise from a high concentration of advances.  The timing and magnitude of the effect of a reduction in the amount of advances would depend on a number of factors, including:

 

·the amount and the period over which the advances were prepaid or repaid;

·the amount and timing of any corresponding decreases in activity-based capital;

·the profitability of the advances;

·the size and profitability of our short- and long-term investments; and

·the extent to which Consolidated obligations (funding) matured as the advances were prepaid or repaid.


 

At December 31, 2017, advances borrowed by insurance companies accounted for 17.1% of total advances (18.7% at December 31, 2016).  Lending to insurance companies poses a number of unique risks not present in lending to federally insured depository institutions.  For example, there is no single federal regulator for insurance companies.  They are supervised by state regulators and subject to state insurance codes and regulations.  There is uncertainty about whether a state insurance commissioner would try to void FHLBNY’s claims on collateral in the event of an insurance company failure.  Even if ultimately unsuccessful, such a legal challenge could result in a delay in the liquidation of collateral and a loss of market value.  Also see Note 8.  Advances to Financial Statements for more information.

The FHLBNY has geographic concentrations that may adversely impact its business operations and/or financial condition.  By nature of our regulatory charter and our business operations, we are exposed to credit risk as the result of limited geographic diversity.  Our advance lending is limited by charter to operations to the four areas — New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. We employ conservative credit rating and collateral policies to limit exposure, but a decline in regional economic conditions could create an exposure to us in excess of collateral held.

We have concentrations of mortgage loans in some geographic areas based on our investments in MPF loans and private-label MBS and on the receipt of collateral pledged for advances.  To the extent that any of these geographic areas experiences significant declines in the local housing markets, declining economic conditions, or a natural disaster, we could experience increased losses on our investments in the MPF loans or the related MBS or be exposed to a greater risk that the pledged collateral securing related advances would be inadequate in the event of default on such an advance.

The FHLBNY relies upon derivative instruments to reduce its interest-rate risk, and changes in our credit ratings may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms.  Our financial strategies are highly dependent on our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms to reduce our interest-rate risk.  Rating agencies may from time to time change a rating or issue negative reports, which may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments with acceptable parties on satisfactory terms in the quantities necessary to manage our interest-rate risk on Consolidated obligations or other financial instruments.  This could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in regulatory requirements related to derivative instruments may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms.  The ongoing implementation of derivatives regulation under the Dodd-Frank Act could adversely impact the FHLBNY’s ability to execute derivatives to hedge interest rate risk, and would increase our compliance costs and negatively impact our results of operations.  Derivatives regulations under the Dodd-Frank Act have impacted and will continue to substantially impact the derivatives

At December 31, 2020, advances borrowed by insurance companies accounted for 35.6% of total advances (24.9% at December 31, 2019).  Lending to insurance companies poses a number of unique risks not present in lending to federally insured depository institutions.  For example, there is no single federal regulator for insurance companies. They are supervised by state regulators and subject to state insurance codes and regulations.  There is uncertainty about whether a state insurance commissioner would try to void FHLBNY’s claims on collateral in the event of an insurance company failure.  Even if ultimately unsuccessful, such a legal challenge could result in a delay in the liquidation of collateral and a loss of market value.  For more information, see Financial Statements Note 9. Advances.

The FHLBNY has geographic concentrations that may adversely impact its business operations and/or financial condition.  By nature of our regulatory charter and our business operations, we are exposed to credit risk as the result of limited geographic diversity.  Our advance lending is limited by charter to operations to the four areas — New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. We employ conservative credit rating and collateral policies to limit exposure, but a decline in regional economic conditions could create an exposure to us in excess of collateral held.

We have concentrations of mortgage loans in some geographic areas based on our investments in MPF loans, MAP loans, and private-label MBS and on the receipt of collateral pledged for advances.  To the extent that any of these geographic areas experiences significant declines in the local housing markets, declining economic conditions, or a natural disaster, we could experience increased losses on our investments in the MPF loans, MAP loans, or MBS, or be exposed to a greater risk that the pledged collateral securing related advances would be inadequate in the event of default on such an advance.

The FHLBNY relies upon derivative instruments to reduce its interest-rate risk, and changes in our credit ratings may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms.  Our financial strategies are highly dependent on our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms to reduce our interest-rate risk.  Rating agencies may from time to time change a rating or issue negative reports, which may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments with acceptable parties on satisfactory terms in the quantities necessary to manage our interest-rate risk on Consolidated obligations or other financial instruments. This could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in regulatory requirements related to derivative instruments may adversely affect our ability to enter into derivative instruments on acceptable terms.  The ongoing implementation of derivatives and clearinghouse regulations could adversely impact the FHLBNY’s ability to execute derivatives to hedge interest rate risk, and increase our compliance costs and negatively impact our results of operations.  Such regulations have impacted, and will continue to substantially impact, the derivatives markets by, among other things: (i) requiring extensive regulatory and public reporting of derivatives transactions; (ii) requiring a wide range of over-the-counter derivatives to be cleared through recognized clearing facilities and traded on exchanges or exchange-like facilities; (iii) requiring the collection and segregation of collateral for most uncleared derivatives; and (iv) significantly broadening limits on the size of positions that may be maintained in specified derivatives.  These market structure reforms could make many derivatives products more costly to execute, may significantly reduce the liquidity of certain derivatives markets and could diminish customer demand for covered derivatives.  Those changes could negatively impact the FHLBNY’s ability to execute derivatives in a cost efficient manner, which could have an adverse impact on its results of operations.  

The FHLBNY faces competition for advances, loan purchases, and access to funding, which could adversely affect its businesses and the FHLBNY’s efforts to make advance pricing attractive to its members as well as it may adversely affect earnings.  Our primary business is making advances to our members, and we compete with other suppliers of wholesale funding, both secured and unsecured, including investment banks, commercial banks and, in certain circumstances, other FHLBanks.  Our members have access to alternative funding sources, which may offer more favorable terms than the ones we offer on our advances, including more flexible credit or collateral standards.  We may make changes in policies, programs, and agreements affecting members from time to time, including, affecting the availability of and conditions for access to advances and other credit products, the MPF Program, MAP, the AHP, and other programs, products, and services, which could cause members to obtain financing from alternative sources.  In addition, many of our competitors are not subject to the same regulations, which may enable those competitors to offer products and terms that we are not able to offer.

The availability of alternative funding sources that are more attractive to our members may significantly decrease the demand for our advances.  Lowering the price of the advances to compete with these alternative funding sources may decrease the profitability of advances.  A decrease in the demand for our advances or a decrease in our profitability on advances could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, changes to regulations governing our members’ businesses that reduce liquidity or capital requirements could serve to reduce demand for advances from the FHLBNY.

21

Certain FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, also compete (primarily with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) for the purchase of mortgage loans from members.  Some FHLBanks may also compete with other FHLBanks with which their members have a relationship through affiliates.  We offer the MPF Program and MAP to our members.  Competition among FHLBanks for MPF and MAP business may be affected by the requirement that a member and its affiliates can sell loans into the MPF Program through only one FHLBank relationship at a time.  Increased competition can result in a reduction in the amount of mortgage loans we are able to purchase and adversely impact income from this part of its business.

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, also compete with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other GSEs, as well as corporate, sovereign, and supranational entities, for funds raised through the issuance of debt in the national and global debt markets.  Increases in the supply of competing debt products may, in the absence of increases in demand, result in higher debt costs or lower amounts of debt issued at the same cost than otherwise would be the case.  Increased competition could adversely affect our ability to have access to funding, reduce the amount of funding available to us, or increase the cost of funding available to us.  Any of these effects could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Credit Risks

Changes in the credit ratings on FHLBank System Consolidated obligations may adversely affect the cost of Consolidated obligations, which could adversely affect FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  FHLBank System Consolidated obligations have been assigned Aaa/P-1 and AA+/A-1+ ratings by Moody’s and S&P.  The outlook for the FHLBank debt by both S&P and Moody’s is stable.  Rating agencies may from time to time change a rating or issue negative reports, which may adversely affect the cost of funds of one or more FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, and the ability to issue Consolidated obligations on acceptable terms.  A higher cost of funds or the impairment of the ability to issue Consolidated obligations on acceptable terms could also adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.  Rating agency downgrades of the debt of the United States could also cause a downgrade in the rating of the FHLBanks.

The FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by FHLBNY’s exposure to credit risk.  We have exposure to credit risk in that the market value of an obligation may decline as a result of deterioration in the creditworthiness of the obligor or the credit quality of a security instrument.  In addition, we assume secured and unsecured credit risk exposure associated with the risk that a borrower or counterparty or a derivative clearing organization could default and we could suffer a loss if we could not fully recover amounts owed to us on a timely basis.  A credit loss, if material, will have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to credit-risk exposures related to the loans that back our investments. Increased delinquency rates and credit losses beyond those currently expected could adversely impact the yield on or value of those investments. We have invested in securities issued by Housing Finance Agencies (HFA) as held-to-maturity investments. The cash flows on these securities are based on the performance of the underlying loans, although these securities generally do include additional credit enhancements.  At the time of purchase, the HFA securities were rated double-A (or its equivalent rating), some have since been downgraded. The portfolio of HFA securities (carrying value was $1.1 billion at December 31, 2020 and 2019) reported gross unrealized losses of $21.6 million at December 31, 2020 and $23.2 million at December 31, 2019. Although we have determined that none of the securities is other-than-temporarily impaired, we could realize credit losses from these securities should the underlying loans underperform our projections.

A rise in delinquency rates on our investments in MPF and MAP loans or related adverse trends could adversely impact our results of operation and financial condition. As discussed in Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition, our methodology for determining our allowance for loan losses is determined based on our investments in MPF and MAP loans and considers factors relevant to those investments. Important factors in determining this allowance are the collateral values supporting our investments in conventional mortgage loans. The credit loss allowance may prove insufficient if macroeconomic factors worsen, housing prices fall and collateral values decline. While we have recorded reserves for credit exposures, such reserves are subject to judgments and estimates that could be incorrect or differ from actual future events. Under the new CECL accounting standard, which became effective January 1, 2020, the allowance for credit losses would reflect expected losses, rather than incurred losses, which could lead to more volatility in the allowance and the provision for credit losses as forecasts of economic conditions change.


Insufficient collateral protection could adversely affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  We require that all outstanding advances be fully collateralized. In addition, for mortgage loans that we purchased under the MPF Program and MAP, we require that members fully collateralize the outstanding credit enhancement obligations not covered through the purchase of supplemental mortgage insurance. We evaluate the types of collateral pledged by our members and assign borrowing capacities to the collateral based on the risks associated with that type of collateral.  If we have insufficient collateral before or after an event of payment default by the member, or we are unable to liquidate the collateral for the value assigned to it in the event of a payment default by a member, we could experience a credit loss on advances, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The FHLBNY may become liable for all or a portion of the Consolidated obligations of the FHLBanks, which could negatively impact the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  We are jointly and severally liable along with the other FHLBanks for the Consolidated obligations issued through the Office of Finance.  Dividends on, redemption of, or repurchase of shares of our capital stock are not permitted unless the principal and interest due on all Consolidated obligations have been paid in full.  If another Federal Home Loan Bank were to default on its obligation to pay principal or interest on any Consolidated obligations, the Finance Agency may allocate the outstanding liability among one or more of the remaining FHLBanks on a pro rata basis or on any other basis the Finance Agency may determine.  As a result, our ability to pay dividends on, to redeem, or to repurchase shares of capital stock could be affected by the financial condition of one or more of the other FHLBanks. However, no FHLBank has ever defaulted on its debt and no FHLBank has ever been asked to assume the debt payments of another FHLBank since the FHLB System was established in 1932.

Liquidity Risks

The FHLBNY may not be able to meet its obligations as they come due or meet the credit and liquidity needs of its members in a timely and cost-effective manner.  We seek to be in a position to meet our members’ credit and liquidity needs and pay our obligations without maintaining excessive holdings of low-yielding liquid investments or being forced to incur unnecessarily high borrowing costs.  In addition, we maintain a contingent liquidity plan designed to enable us to meet our obligations and the liquidity needs of members in the event of operational disruptions or short-term disruptions in the capital markets. Liquidity Regulations addressing liquidity requirements are in place for the Federal Home Loan Banks, and compliance with these regulations are closely monitored by our management and Board of Directors. However, our ability to manage our liquidity position or our contingent liquidity plan may not enable us to meet our obligations and the credit and liquidity needs of our members, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Operational Risks

Deteriorating market conditions increase the risk that the FHLBNY’s models may produce unreliable results.  We use market-based information as inputs to our financial models, which are used in making operational decisions and to derive estimates for use in our financial reporting processes. The downturn in the housing and mortgage markets created additional risk regarding the reliability of the models, particularly since the models are regularly adjusted in response to rapid changes in the actions of consumers and mortgagees to changes in economic conditions.  This may increase the risk that our models could produce unreliable results or estimates that vary widely or prove to be inaccurate.

A natural disaster or similar events in the Bank’s region, or with widespread impacts, such as the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, could adversely affect the Bank’s profitability and financial condition.  The frequency and severity of natural disasters has increased in recent years, possibly due to the effects of climate change. A severe natural disaster could damage the Bank’s physical infrastructure and have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s business.  Furthermore, portions of the Bank’s region are subject to risks from hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or other natural disasters.  These natural disasters could damage or dislocate the facilities of the Bank’s members, may damage or destroy collateral that members have pledged to secure advances, may adversely affect the viability of the Bank’s mortgage purchase programs or the livelihood of borrowers of the Bank’s members, or otherwise could cause significant economic dislocation in the affected areas of the Bank’s region.

Additionally, the impact of widespread health emergencies, such as the recent outbreak of the COVID-19 coronavirus, which has now spread to many countries around the world, including the United States, could adversely impact the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations. If a widespread health emergency leads to a situation that impacts the FHLBNY’s employees or vendors, the FHLBNY’s members, the borrowers of the FHLBNY’s members, and/or economic growth generally, the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected.


The Bank notes here in particular that, as of the date of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the full effects of the COVID-19 coronavirus are evolving and unknowable. The rapid and diffuse spread of COVID-19 has had severe negative impacts on, among other things, financial markets, liquidity, economic conditions and trade and could continue to do so or could worsen for an unknown period of time, which could in turn have a material adverse impact on our results of operations or financial condition. The timeliness and effectiveness of actions taken or not taken to contain and mitigate the effects of COVID-19 both in the U.S. and internationally by governments, central banks, healthcare providers, health system participants, other businesses and individuals could greatly affect outcomes. There are many current and potential issues, and we cannot predict them all or the extent to which they will affect the Bank and its business. Since March 16, 2020, most of our employees have been working remotely, and the long-term ramifications of this, including negative effects on our operations and our employees, may not yet be fully understood.

General Risk Factors

Failures of critical vendors and other third parties, including but not limited to, the Federal Reserve Banks, could disrupt the Banks’ ability to conduct and manage its businesses.  We rely on vendors and other third parties to perform certain critical services.  A failure in, or an interruption to, one of more of those services could adversely affect the business operations of the Bank.  The use of vendors and other third parties also exposes the Bank to the risk of loss of confidential information or other harm.  To the extent that vendors do not conduct their activities under appropriate standards, the Bank could also be exposed to reputational risk.

The departure of key personnel could adversely impact the Bank’s operations.  We rely on key personnel for many of our functions. Our success in retaining such personnel is important to our ability to conduct our operations and measure and maintain risk and financial controls. The ability to retain key personnel could be challenged as the U.S. employment market improves.  We maintain a succession planning program in which we attempt to identify and develop employees who can potentially replace key personnel in the event of their departure, whether due to resignation or normal retirement.

The FHLBNY relies heavily on information systems and other technology.  We rely heavily on information systems and other technology to conduct and manage our business.  We have implemented a business continuity plan that includes the maintenance of alternate sites for data processing and office functions.  All critical systems are tested annually for recovery readiness and all business units update and test their respective disaster recovery plans annually. If we were to experience a failure or interruption in any of these systems or other technology and our disaster recovery capabilities were also impacted, it would affect our ability to conduct and manage our business effectively, including advance and hedging activities.  This may adversely affect member relations, risk management, and negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Continually evolving cybersecurity or other technological risks could result in the disclosure of confidential client or customer information, damage to the FHLBNY’s reputation, additional costs to the FHLBNY, regulatory penalties and financial losses.  A significant portion of FHLBNY’s operations relies heavily on the secure processing, storage and transmission of financial and other information.  The FHLBNY’s computer systems, software and networks are subject to similar vulnerabilities as other companies highly reliant on technology for operational processing. These risks include unauthorized access, loss or destruction of data, unavailability of service, computer viruses or other malicious code, cyber-attacks and other events.  These threats may derive from human error, fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, or may result from accidental technological failure.  If one or more of these events occurs, it could result in the disclosure of confidential information, damage to FHLBNY’s reputation with its customers, additional costs to the FHLBNY (such as repairing systems or adding new personnel or protection technologies), regulatory penalties and financial losses to the FHLBNY. Such events could also cause interruptions or malfunctions in the operations of the FHLBNY data systems (such as the lack of availability of FHLBNY’s online advance transaction system with members).


markets by, among other things: (i) requiring extensive regulatory and public reporting of derivatives transactions; (ii) requiring a wide range of over-the-counter derivatives to be cleared through recognized clearing facilities and traded on exchanges or exchange-like facilities; (iii) requiring the collection and segregation of collateral for most uncleared derivatives; and (iv) significantly broadening limits on the size of positions that may be maintained in specified derivatives.  These market structure reforms will make many derivatives products more costly to execute, may significantly reduce the liquidity of certain derivatives markets and could diminish customer demand for covered derivatives.  Those changes could negatively impact the FHLBNY’s ability to execute derivatives in a cost efficient manner, which could have an adverse impact on its results of operations.  Numerous aspects of the new derivatives regime require costly and extensive compliance systems to be put in place and maintained.

The FHLBNY faces competition for advances, loan purchases, and access to funding, which could adversely affect its businesses and the FHLBNY’s efforts to make advance pricing attractive to its members as well as it may adversely affect earnings.  Our primary business is making advances to our members, and we compete with other suppliers of wholesale funding, both secured and unsecured, including investment banks, commercial banks and, in certain circumstances, other FHLBanks.  Our members have access to alternative funding sources, which may offer more favorable terms than the ones we offer on our advances, including more flexible credit or collateral standards.  We may make changes in policies, programs, and agreements affecting members from time to time, including, affecting the availability of and conditions for access to advances and other credit products, the MPF Program, the AHP, and other programs, products, and services, which could cause members to obtain financing from alternative sources.  In addition, many of our competitors are not subject to the same regulations, which may enable those competitors to offer products and terms that we are not able to offer.

The availability of alternative funding sources that are more attractive to our members may significantly decrease the demand for our advances.  Lowering the price of the advances to compete with these alternative funding sources may decrease the profitability of advances.  A decrease in the demand for our advances or a decrease in our profitability on advances could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Certain FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, also compete (primarily with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac) for the purchase of mortgage loans from members.  Some FHLBanks may also compete with other FHLBanks with which their members have a relationship through affiliates.  We offer the MPF Program to our members.  Competition among FHLBanks for MPF program business may be affected by the requirement that a member and its affiliates can sell loans into the MPF Program through only one FHLBank relationship at a time.  Increased competition can result in a reduction in the amount of mortgage loans we are able to purchase and adversely impact income from this part of its business.

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, also compete with the U.S. Department of the Treasury, Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and other GSEs, as well as corporate, sovereign, and supranational entities, for funds raised through the issuance of debt in the national and global debt markets.  Increases in the supply of competing debt products may, in the absence of increases in demand, result in higher debt costs or lower amounts of debt issued at the same cost than otherwise would be the case.  Increased competition could adversely affect our ability to have access to funding, reduce the amount of funding available to us, or increase the cost of funding available to us.  Any of these effects could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Market and Economic Risks

The FHLBNY’s funding depends on its ability to access the capital markets.  Our primary source of funds is the sale of Consolidated obligations in the capital markets.  Our ability to obtain funds through the sale of Consolidated obligations depends in part on prevailing conditions in the capital markets, which are, for the most part, beyond our control.  Accordingly, we may not be able to obtain funding on acceptable terms, if at all.  If we cannot access funding when needed on acceptable terms, our ability to support and continue operations could be adversely affected, which could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.  If additional reforms are legislated over money market funds, they may have an adverse impact on the FHLBank discount note pricing, given that the funds are significant sponsors of short-term FHLBank debt.  Ongoing changes to the regulatory environment that affect bank counterparties and debt underwriters could adversely affect our ability to access the debt markets or the cost of that funding.

Changes in interest rates could significantly affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  We earn income primarily from the spread between interest earned on our outstanding advances, investments and shareholders’ capital, and interest paid on our Consolidated obligations and other interest-bearing liabilities.  Although we use various methods and procedures to monitor and manage our exposure to changes in interest rates, we may experience instances when either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa.  In either case, interest rate movements contrary to our position could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.  Moreover, the effect of changes in interest rates can be exacerbated by prepayment and extension risk, a risk that mortgage related assets will be refinanced by the mortgagor in low interest rate environments or will remain outstanding longer than expected at below market yields when interest rates increase.  The possibility of negative interest rates on U.S. Treasury or other market instruments could adversely affect our results of operations by, for example, reducing asset yields or spreads, creating operating and operating system issues, or having other adverse impacts on our business.

Economic downturns and changes in federal monetary policy could have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s business and its results of operations.  Our businesses and results of operations are sensitive to general business and economic conditions.  These conditions include short- and long-term interest rates, inflation, money supply, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, and the strength of the United States economy and the local economies in which we conduct our business.  If any of these conditions deteriorate, our businesses and results of operations could be adversely affected.  For example, a prolonged economic downturn could result in members

needing fewer advances.  In addition, our business and results of operations are significantly affected by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies, including the Federal Reserve Board, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States.  The Federal Reserve Board’s policies directly and indirectly influence the yield on interest-earning assets and the cost of interest-bearing liabilities.

Changes to and Replacement of the LIBOR Benchmark Rate Could Adversely Affect Our Profitability and Cost of Funds.  Actions by the ICE Benchmark Administration (the current administrator of LIBOR), regulators or law enforcement agencies may result in changes to the manner in which LIBOR is determined or the establishment of alternative reference rates.  For example, on July 27, 2017, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. Furthermore, in the United States, efforts to identify a set of alternative U.S. dollar reference interest rates include proposals by the Alternative Reference Rates Committee sponsored by the Federal Reserve Board and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. At this time, it is not possible to predict the effect of any such changes, any establishment of alternative reference rates or any other reforms to LIBOR that may be enacted in the United Kingdom, in the U.S., or elsewhere. Uncertainty as to the nature of such potential changes, alternative reference rates or other reforms may adversely affect the trading market for LIBOR-based securities, which may include some of our Consolidated Obligations, may affect member appetite for LIBOR-based advances, and may affect the availability, pricing and terms of LIBOR-based interest rate swaps we use to hedge our interest rate risk. Reform of, or the replacement or disappearance of, LIBOR and proposed regulation of LIBOR and other “benchmarks” may adversely affect the value of and return on our Consolidated Obligations and LIBOR-based advances, and the availability, pricing and terms of LIBOR-based interest rate swaps we use to hedge our interest rate risk.  Alternative reference rates or modifications to LIBOR may not align for our assets, liabilities, and hedging instruments, which could reduce the effectiveness of certain of our interest rate hedges, and could cause increased volatility in our earnings.  Any one or more of these factors could have an adverse effect on our revenue and profitability. Additionally, as the Bank transitions its existing LIBOR contracts, the risk of contract claims concerning the replacement index may increase.

Credit Risks

Changes in the credit ratings on FHLBank System Consolidated obligations may adversely affect the cost of Consolidated obligations, which could adversely affect FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  FHLBank System Consolidated obligations have been assigned Aaa/P-1 and AA+/A-1+ ratings by Moody’s and S&P.  The outlook for the FHLBank debt by both S&P and Moody’s is stable.  Rating agencies may from time to time change a rating or issue negative reports, which may adversely affect the cost of funds of one or more FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, and the ability to issue Consolidated obligations on acceptable terms.  A higher cost of funds or the impairment of the ability to issue Consolidated obligations on acceptable terms could also adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.  Rating agency downgrades of the debt of the United States could also cause a downgrade in the rating of the FHLBanks.

The FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected by FHLBNY’s exposure to credit risk.  We have exposure to credit risk in that the market value of an obligation may decline as a result of deterioration in the creditworthiness of the obligor or the credit quality of a security instrument.  In addition, we assume secured and unsecured credit risk exposure associated with the risk that a borrower or counterparty or a derivative clearing organization could default and we could suffer a loss if we could not fully recover amounts owed to us on a timely basis.  A credit loss, if material, will have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to credit-risk exposures related to the loans that back our investments. Increased delinquency rates and credit losses beyond those currently expected could adversely impact the yield on or value of those investments.  The carrying value of our portfolio of private-label MBS was $181.4 million at December 31, 2017.  Since 2006, we have made no acquisitions of private-label MBS.  Our investments in private-label MBS are primarily backed by prime, subprime mortgage loans, and many of these securities are projected to sustain credit losses under current assumptions, and have been downgraded by various Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“NRSROs”).  See Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations for a description of our portfolio of investments in these securities.

Credit losses have not been significant in all periods in this report, but if we were to experience high rates of delinquency and an increase in loss severity trends on the loans underlying the private-label MBS, and face challenging macroeconomic factors, such as continuing high unemployment levels and higher than expected troubled residential mortgage loans, we may have to recognize additional credit losses.

We have also invested in securities issued by Housing Finance Agencies (“HFA”), which are held-to-maturity, with a carrying value of $1.1 billion as of December 31, 2017.  Generally, the cash flows on these securities are based on the performance of the underlying loans, although these securities generally do include additional credit enhancements.  At the time of purchase, the HFA securities were rated double-A (or its equivalent rating), some have since been downgraded.  Further, the fair values of some of our HFA securities reported gross unrealized losses of $33.0 million at December 31, 2017 and $37.0 million at December 31, 2016.  Although we have determined that none of these securities is other-than-temporarily impaired, should the underlying loans underperform our projections, we could realize credit losses from these securities.

A rise in delinquency rates on our investments in MPF loans or related adverse trends could adversely impact our results of operation and financial condition.  As discussed in Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Financial Condition, our methodology for determining our allowance for loan losses is determined based on our investments in MPF loans and considers factors relevant to those investments.  Important factors in determining this allowance are the collateral values supporting our

investments in conventional mortgage loans.  The allowance of $1.0 million at December 31, 2017 may prove insufficient if macroeconomic factors worsen, housing prices fall and collateral values decline.  To the extent those risks are realized, we may determine to increase our allowance for loan losses, which would adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.

Insufficient collateral protection could adversely affect the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  We require that all outstanding advances be fully collateralized.  In addition, for mortgage loans that we purchased under the MPF Program, we require that members fully collateralize the outstanding credit enhancement obligations not covered through the purchase of supplemental mortgage insurance. We evaluate the types of collateral pledged by our members and assign borrowing capacities to the collateral based on the risks associated with that type of collateral.  If we have insufficient collateral before or after an event of payment default by the member, or we are unable to liquidate the collateral for the value assigned to it in the event of a payment default by a member, we could experience a credit loss on advances, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

The FHLBNY may become liable for all or a portion of the Consolidated obligations of the FHLBanks, which could negatively impact the FHLBNY’s financial condition and results of operations.  We are jointly and severally liable along with the other FHLBanks for the Consolidated obligations issued through the Office of Finance.  Dividends on, redemption of, or repurchase of shares of our capital stock are not permitted unless the principal and interest due on all Consolidated obligations have been paid in full.  If another Federal Home Loan Bank were to default on its obligation to pay principal or interest on any Consolidated obligations, the Finance Agency may allocate the outstanding liability among one or more of the remaining FHLBanks on a pro rata basis or on any other basis the Finance Agency may determine.  As a result, our ability to pay dividends on, to redeem, or to repurchase shares of capital stock could be affected by the financial condition of one or more of the other FHLBanks.  However, no FHLBank has ever defaulted on its debt and no FHLBank has ever been asked to assume the debt payments of another FHLBank since the FHLB System was established in 1932.

Liquidity Risks

The FHLBNY may not be able to meet its obligations as they come due or meet the credit and liquidity needs of its members in a timely and cost-effective manner.  We seek to be in a position to meet our members’ credit and liquidity needs and pay our obligations without maintaining excessive holdings of low-yielding liquid investments or being forced to incur unnecessarily high borrowing costs.  In addition, we maintain a contingent liquidity plan designed to enable us to meet our obligations and the liquidity needs of members in the event of operational disruptions or short-term disruptions in the capital markets.  Our ability to manage our liquidity position or our contingent liquidity plan may not enable us to meet our obligations and the credit and liquidity needs of our members, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Operational Risks

The FHLBNY relies heavily on information systems and other technology.  We rely heavily on information systems and other technology to conduct and manage our business.  We have implemented a business continuity plan that includes the maintenance of alternate sites for data processing and office functions.  All critical systems are tested annually for recovery readiness and all business units update and test their respective disaster recovery plans annually. If we were to experience a failure or interruption in any of these systems or other technology and our disaster recovery capabilities were also impacted, it would affect our ability to conduct and manage our business effectively, including advance and hedging activities.  This may adversely affect member relations, risk management, and negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Continually evolving cybersecurity or other technological risks could result in the disclosure of confidential client or customer information, damage to the FHLBNY’s reputation, additional costs to the FHLBNY, regulatory penalties and financial losses.  A significant portion of FHLBNY’s operations relies heavily on the secure processing, storage and transmission of financial and other information.  The FHLBNY’s computer systems, software and networks are subject to similar vulnerabilities as other companies highly reliant on technology for operational processing. These risks include unauthorized access, loss or destruction of data, unavailability of service, computer viruses or other malicious code, cyber-attacks and other events.  These threats may derive from human error, fraud or malice on the part of employees or third parties, or may result from accidental technological failure.  If one or more of these events occurs, it could result in the disclosure of confidential information, damage to FHLBNY’s reputation with its customers, additional costs to the FHLBNY (such as repairing systems or adding new personnel or protection technologies), regulatory penalties and financial losses, to the FHLBNY.  Such events could also cause interruptions or malfunctions in the operations of the FHLBNY data systems (such as the lack of availability of FHLBNY’s online advance transaction system with members).

Deteriorating market conditions increase the risk that the FHLBNY’s models may produce unreliable results.  We use market-based information as inputs to our financial models, which are used in making operational decisions and to derive estimates for use in our financial reporting processes. The downturn in the housing and mortgage markets created additional risk regarding the reliability of the models, particularly since the models are regularly adjusted in response to rapid changes in the actions of consumers and mortgagees to changes in economic conditions.  This may increase the risk that our models could produce unreliable results or estimates that vary widely or prove to be inaccurate.

The departure of key personnel could adversely impact the Bank’s operations.  We rely on key personnel for many of our functions. Our success in retaining such personnel is important to our ability to conduct our operations and measure and maintain risk and financial controls. The ability to retain key personnel could be challenged as the U.S. employment market improves.  We maintain a succession planning program in which we attempt to identify and develop employees who can potentially replace key personnel in the event of their departure, whether due to resignation or normal retirement.

A natural disaster in the Bank’s region could adversely affect the Bank’s profitability and financial condition. A severe natural disaster could damage the Bank’s physical infrastructure and have an adverse effect on the FHLBNY’s business.  Furthermore, portions of the Bank’s region are subject to risks from hurricanes, tornadoes, floods or other natural disasters.  These natural disasters could damage or dislocate the facilities of the Bank’s members, may damage or destroy collateral that members have pledged to secure advances, may adversely affect the viability of the Bank’s mortgage purchase programs or the livelihood of borrowers of the Bank’s members, or otherwise could cause significant economic dislocation in the affected areas of the Bank’s region.  As an example, in 2012, Hurricane Sandy struck sections of the New York and New Jersey coast line, and our market area was significantly impacted by the storm which resulted in widespread flooding, wind damage, and power outages.

Failures of critical vendors and other third parties could disrupt the Banks’ ability to conduct and manage its businesses.  We rely on vendors and other third parties to perform certain critical services.  A failure in, or an interruption to, one of more of those services could adversely affect the business operations of the Bank.  The use of vendors and other third parties also exposes the Bank to the risk of loss of confidential information or other harm.  To the extent that vendors do not conduct their activities under appropriate standards, the Bank could also be exposed to reputational risk.

Item 1B

Unresolved Staff Comments.

 

Not applicable.

 

Item 2.Properties.

At December 31, 2020, we occupied approximately 73,294 square feet of leased office space at 101 Park Avenue, New York, New York as the Bank’s headquarters, 52,041 square feet of leased office space in Jersey City, New Jersey, principally as an operations center, and 2,521 square feet of leased office space in Washington, D.C.

 

At December 31, 2017, we occupied approximately 66,000 square feet of leased office space at 101 Park Avenue, New York, New York.  We also maintain 30,000 square feet of leased office space at 30 Montgomery Street, Jersey City, New Jersey, principally as an operations center.

Item 3.Legal Proceedings.

 

From time to time, the FHLBNY is involved in disputes or regulatory inquiries that arise in the ordinary course of business. At the present time, there are no pending claims against the FHLBNY that, if established, are reasonably likely to have a material effect on the FHLBNY’s financial condition, results of operations or cash flows or that are otherwise reasonably likely to be material to the FHLBNY.

 

Item 4.Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not applicable.


PART II

 

Not applicable.

PART II

Item 5.

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

 

All of the capital stock of the FHLBNY, which is issued only at a par value of $100 per share, is owned by our members.  Stock may also be held by former members as a result of having been acquired by a non-member institution.  We conduct our business in advances and mortgages exclusively with stockholder members and housing associates (1).  There is no established marketplace for FHLBNY stock as FHLBNY stock is not publicly traded.  It may be redeemed at par value upon request, subject to regulatory limits.  These shares of stock in the FHLBNY are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  At December 31, 2020, we had 330 members who held 53,668,298 shares of capital stock between them.  At December 31, 2020, former members held 29,915 shares.  At December 31, 2019, we had 328 members who held 57,786,659 shares of capital stock between them.  At December 31, 2019, former members held 51,295 shares.  Capital stock held by former members is classified as a liability, and deemed to be mandatorily redeemable under the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.

Our recent quarterly cash dividends are outlined in the table below.  No dividends were paid in the form of stock.  Dividend payments and earnings retention are subject to be determined by our Board of Directors, at its discretion, and within the regulatory framework promulgated by the Finance Agency.  Our Retained Earnings and Dividends Policy outlined in the section titled Retained Earnings and Dividends under Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K provides additional information.

Dividends from a calendar quarter’s earnings are paid (a) subsequent to the end of that calendar quarter as summarized below. Dividend payments reported below are on Class B Stock, which includes payments to non-members on capital stock reported as mandatorily redeemable capital stock in the Statements of Condition (dollars in thousands):

  2020  2019  2018 
Month Paid Amount  Dividend Rate  Amount  Dividend Rate  Amount  Dividend Rate 
November $79,272   5.10% $84,900   6.35% $107,373   6.90%
August  95,491   5.60   92,189   6.35   103,573   6.75 
May  85,950   5.90   87,607   6.35   105,329   6.50 
February  87,799   6.35   101,347   6.90   102,484   6.50 
  $348,512(b)     $366,043(b)     $418,759(b)    

(a)The table above reports dividend on a paid basis and includes payments to former members as a result of having been acquired by a non-member institution.  We conduct our business in advanceswell as members.  Dividends paid to former members were $0.3 million, $0.4 million and mortgages exclusively with stockholder$1.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018.
(b)Includes dividends paid to non-members; payments to non-members are classified as interest expense for accounting purposes. Dividends are accrued for former members and housing associates (1).  There is no established marketplace for FHLBNY stockrecorded as FHLBNY stock is not publicly traded.  It may be redeemed at par value upon request, subject to regulatory limits.  The par value of all FHLBNY stock is $100 per share.  These shares of stock in the FHLBNY are registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.  At December 31, 2017, we had 330 members who held 67,500,045 shares ofinterest expense on mandatorily redeemable capital stock between them.  At December 31, 2017, former members held 199,447 shares.  At December 31, 2016, we had 325 members, who held 63,077,657 shares of capital stock between them.  At December 31, 2016, former members held 314,347 shares.  Capital stock held by former members and is classified as a liability,charge to Net income.  Dividends on capital stock held by members are not accrued.  Dividends are paid in arrears typically in the second month after the quarter end in which the dividend is earned and deemedis a direct charge to be mandatorily redeemable under the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.retained earnings.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

We are exempt from disclosures of unregistered sales of common equity securities or securities issued through the Office of Finance that otherwise would have been required under Item 701 of the SEC’s Regulation S-K.  By the same no-action letter, we are also exempt from disclosure of securities repurchases by the issuer that otherwise would have been required under Item 703 of Regulation S-K.

 

Our recent quarterly cash dividends are outlined in the table below.  No dividends were paid in the form of stock.  Dividend payments and earnings retention are subject to be determined by our Board of Directors, at its discretion, and within the regulatory framework promulgated by the Finance Agency.  Our Retained Earnings and Dividends Policy outlined in the section titled Retained Earnings and Dividends under Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K provides additional information.


(1)Housing associates are defined as non-stockholder entities that (i) are approved mortgagees under Title II of the National Housing Act, (ii) are chartered under law and have succession, (iii) are subject to inspection and supervision by a governmental agency, (iv) lend their own funds as their principal activity in the mortgage field, and (v) have a financial condition such that advances may be safely made to that entity.  At December 31, 2017,2020, we had 9 housing associates as members.customers.  Advances made to housing associates totaled $5.4$5.0 million, and the mortgage loans acquired from housing associates were immaterial in any periods in this report.


Dividends from a calendar quarter’s earnings are paid (a) subsequent to the end of that calendar quarter as summarized below. Dividend payments reported below are on Class B Stock, which includes payments to non-members on capital stock reported as mandatorily redeemable capital stock in the Statements of Condition. (dollars in thousands):

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Month Paid

 

Amount

 

Dividend Rate

 

Amount

 

Dividend Rate

 

Amount

 

Dividend Rate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

November

 

$

97,005

 

6.00

%

$

71,991

 

5.00

%

$

54,507

 

4.10

%

August

 

85,449

 

5.50

 

65,437

 

4.75

 

53,294

 

4.10

 

May

 

76,646

 

5.00

 

61,535

 

4.50

 

55,963

 

4.10

 

February

 

87,638

 

5.65

 

61,572

 

4.65

 

64,499

 

4.60

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

346,738

(b)

 

 

$

260,535

(b)

 

 

$

228,263

(b)

 

 


(a)The table above reports dividend on a paid basis and includes payments to former members as well as members.  Dividends paid to former members were $1.6 million, $1.2 million and $0.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.

(b)Includes dividends paid to non-members; payments to non-members are classified as interest expense for accounting purposes.

Dividends are accrued for former members, and recorded as interest expense on mandatorily redeemable capital stock held by former members, and is a charge to Net income.  Dividends on capital stock held by members are not accrued.  Dividends are paid in arrears typically in the second month after the quarter end in which the dividend is earned, and is a direct charge to Retained earnings.

Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

We are exempt from disclosures of unregistered sales of common equity securities or securities issued through the Office of Finance that otherwise would have been required under Item 701 of the SEC’s Regulation S-K.  By the same no-action letter, we are also exempt from disclosure of securities repurchases by the issuer that otherwise would have been required under Item 703 of Regulation S-K.

Item 6.

Selected Financial Data.

Statements of Condition Years ended December 31, 
(dollars in millions) 2020  2019  2018  2017  2016 
Investments (a) $39,748  $56,892  $35,741  $33,069  $30,939 
Advances  92,067   100,695   105,179   122,448   109,257 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses (b)  2,900   3,173   2,927   2,897   2,747 
Total assets  136,996   162,062   144,381   158,918   143,606 
Deposits and borrowings  1,753   1,194   1,063   1,196   1,241 
Consolidated obligations, net                    
Bonds  69,716   78,764   84,154   99,288   84,785 
Discount notes  57,659   73,959   50,640   49,614   49,358 
Total consolidated obligations  127,375   152,723   134,794   148,902   134,143 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  3   5   6   20   31 
AHP liability  149   154   162   132   125 
Capital                    
Capital stock  5,367   5,779   6,066   6,750   6,308 
Retained earnings                    
Unrestricted  1,135   1,116   1,103   1,067   1,029 
Restricted  774   685   591   479   383 
Total retained earnings  1,909   1,801   1,694   1,546   1,412 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (20)  (48)  (13)  (55)  (96)
Total capital  7,256   7,532   7,747   8,241   7,624 
Equity to asset ratio (c)  5.30%  4.65%  5.37%  5.19%  5.31%

Statements of Condition Years ended December 31, 
Averages (See note below; dollars in millions) 2020  2019  2018  2017  2016 
Investments (a) $45,150  $45,725  $43,370  $36,835  $29,337 
Advances  109,117   95,838   107,971   109,188   96,201 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses  3,123   3,008   2,899   2,838   2,631 
Total assets  158,811   145,506   154,795   149,581   129,260 
Interest-bearing deposits and other borrowings  1,442   1,131   1,032   1,768   1,431 
Consolidated obligations, net                    
Bonds  73,097   77,671   93,529   93,352   73,174 
Discount notes  74,759   58,318   51,657   45,895   46,508 
Total consolidated obligations  147,856   135,989   145,186   139,247   119,682 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  4   6   14   22   24 
AHP liability  155   159   147   123   114 
Capital                    
Capital stock  6,129   5,545   6,166   6,259   5,712 
Retained earnings                    
Unrestricted  1,119   1,091   1,076   1,019   977 
Restricted  728   636   532   423   337 
Total retained earnings  1,847   1,727   1,608   1,442   1,314 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (67)  (36)  16   (86)  (181)
Total capital  7,909   7,236   7,790   7,615   6,845 

 

Statements of Condition

 

Years ended December 31,

 

(dollars in millions)

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2014

 

2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Investments (a) 

 

$

33,069

 

$

30,939

 

$

26,167

 

$

25,201

 

$

20,084

 

Advances

 

122,448

 

109,257

 

93,874

 

98,797

 

90,765

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses (b) 

 

2,897

 

2,747

 

2,524

 

2,129

 

1,928

 

Total assets

 

158,918

 

143,606

 

123,239

 

132,825

 

128,333

 

Deposits and borrowings

 

1,196

 

1,241

 

1,350

 

1,999

 

1,929

 

Consolidated obligations, net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

99,288

 

84,785

 

67,716

 

73,536

 

73,275

 

Discount notes

 

49,614

 

49,358

 

46,850

 

50,044

 

45,871

 

Total consolidated obligations

 

148,902

 

134,143

 

114,566

 

123,580

 

119,146

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

20

 

31

 

19

 

19

 

24

 

AHP liability

 

132

 

125

 

113

 

114

 

123

 

Capital

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital stock

 

6,750

 

6,308

 

5,585

 

5,580

 

5,571

 

Retained earnings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unrestricted

 

1,067

 

1,029

 

967

 

863

 

842

 

Restricted

 

479

 

383

 

303

 

220

 

157

 

Total retained earnings

 

1,546

 

1,412

 

1,270

 

1,083

 

999

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

(55

)

(96

)

(136

)

(137

)

(84

)

Total capital

 

8,241

 

7,624

 

6,719

 

6,526

 

6,486

 

Equity to asset ratio (c)

 

5.19

%

5.31

%

5.45

%

4.91

%

5.05

%

Statements of Condition

 

Years ended December 31,

 

Averages (See note below; dollars in millions)

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2014

 

2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Investments (a) 

 

$

36,835

 

$

29,337

 

$

26,944

 

$

28,233

 

$

27,710

 

Advances

 

109,188

 

96,201

 

91,401

 

93,550

 

80,245

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses

 

2,838

 

2,631

 

2,362

 

1,989

 

1,912

 

Total assets

 

149,581

 

129,260

 

122,155

 

125,632

 

112,780

 

Interest-bearing deposits and other borrowings

 

1,768

 

1,431

 

1,213

 

1,705

 

1,683

 

Consolidated obligations, net

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

93,352

 

73,174

 

69,177

 

76,580

 

65,502

 

Discount notes

 

45,895

 

46,508

 

43,628

 

38,713

 

36,872

 

Total consolidated obligations

 

139,247

 

119,682

 

112,805

 

115,293

 

102,374

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

22

 

24

 

19

 

22

 

24

 

AHP liability

 

123

 

114

 

107

 

117

 

124

 

Capital

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital stock

 

6,259

 

5,712

 

5,299

 

5,530

 

5,054

 

Retained earnings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unrestricted

 

1,019

 

977

 

875

 

840

 

808

 

Restricted

 

423

 

337

 

252

 

186

 

124

 

Total retained earnings

 

1,442

 

1,314

 

1,127

 

1,026

 

932

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

(86

)

(181

)

(149

)

(108

)

(149

)

Total capital

 

7,615

 

6,845

 

6,277

 

6,448

 

5,837

 

NoteAverage balance calculation.  For most components of the average balances, a daily weighted average balance is calculated for the period. When daily weighted average balance information is not available, a simple monthly average balance is calculated.

Operating Results and Other Data


Operating Results and Other Data 
(dollars in millions)      
(except earnings and dividends per Years ended December 31, 
share, and headcount) 2020  2019  2018  2017  2016 
Net income $442  $473  $560  $479  $401 
Net interest income (d)  753   667   797   722   556 
Dividends paid in cash (e)  348   366   417   345   259 
AHP expense  49   52   62   53   45 
Return on average equity (f)(i)  5.59%  6.53%  7.20%  6.30%  5.86%
Return on average assets (i)  0.28%  0.32%  0.36%  0.32%  0.31%
Net OTTI impairment losses  -   (1)  -   -   - 
Other non-interest income (loss)  (51)  35   (24)  (58)  7 
Total other income (loss)  (51)  34   (24)  (58)  7 
Operating expenses (g)  170   151   127   112(j)  99(j)
Finance Agency and                    
Office of Finance expenses  19   17   16   15   13 
Total other expenses (k)  207   176   151   131   115 
Operating expenses ratio (h)(i)  0.11%  0.10%  0.08%  0.07%(j)  0.08%
Earnings per share $7.22  $8.52  $9.09  $7.66  $7.02 
Dividends per share $5.74  $6.49  $6.66  $5.54  $4.73 
Headcount (Full/part time) (l)  354   342   314   308   280 

 

(dollars in millions) 
(except earnings and dividends per

 

December 31,

 

share, and headcount)

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2014

 

2013

 

Net income

 

$

479

 

$

401

 

$

415

 

$

315

 

$

305

 

Net interest income (d)

 

722

 

556

 

554

 

444

 

421

 

Dividends paid in cash (e)

 

345

 

259

 

228

 

231

 

200

 

AHP expense

 

53

 

45

 

46

 

35

 

34

 

Return on average equity (f)(i)

 

6.30

%

5.86

%

6.61

%

4.88

%

5.22

%

Return on average assets (i)

 

0.32

%

0.31

%

0.34

%

0.25

%

0.27

%

Other non-interest (loss) income

 

(58

)

7

 

25

 

6

 

13

 

Operating expenses (g)

 

116

 

102

 

103

 

86

 

83

 

Finance Agency and Office of Finance expenses

 

15

 

13

 

14

 

14

 

13

 

Total other expenses

 

131

 

115

 

117

 

100

 

96

 

Operating expenses ratio (h)(i)

 

0.08

%

0.08

%

0.08

%

0.07

%

0.07

%

Earnings per share

 

$

7.66

 

$

7.02

 

$

7.83

 

$

5.69

 

$

6.06

 

Dividends per share

 

$

5.54

 

$

4.73

 

$

4.22

 

$

4.19

 

$

4.12

 

Headcount (Full/part time)

 

308

 

280

 

273

 

258

 

258

 


(a)Investments include trading securities, available-for-sale securities, held-to-maturity securities, grantor truststrust owned by the FHLBNY, securities purchased under agreements to resell, federal funds, loans to other FHLBanks, and other interest-bearing deposits.

(b)Allowances for credit losses were $7.1 million, $0.7 million, $0.8 million, $1.0 million $1.6 million, $0.3 million, $4.5 million and $5.7$1.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017 2016, 2015, 2014 and 2013.2016.

(c)Equity to asset ratio is Capital stock plus Retained earnings and Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) as a percentage of Total assets.

(d)Net interest income is net interest income before the provision for credit losses on mortgage loans.

(e)Excludes dividends accrued to non-members classified as interest expense under the accounting standards for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.

(f)Return on average equity is Net income as a percentage of average Capital Stock plus average retained earnings and average Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss).

(g)Operating expenses include Compensation and Benefits.

(h)Operating expenses as a percentage of Total average assets.

(i)All percentage calculations are performed using amounts in thousands and may not agree if calculations are performed using amounts in millions.

Supplementary financial data

(j)Previously reported comparative numbers have been reclassified to conform to the retrospective adoption of ASU 2017-07 Compensation — Retirement Benefits (Topic 715). The ASU requires only the service cost component of Net periodic benefit cost of pension expenses to be included in compensation costs.
(k)Includes Operating expenses, Compensation and benefits, Finance Agency and Office of Finance expenses and Other expenses.
(l)Head count has increased for each quarter forstrategizing and executing the years ended December 31, 2017implementation of multiple, multi-year projects designed to modernize and 2016 are presented below (in thousands):

 

 

2017

 

 

 

4th Quarter

 

3rd Quarter

 

2nd Quarter

 

1st Quarter (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest income

 

$

646,804

 

$

616,115

 

$

519,997

 

$

459,387

 

Interest expense

 

455,382

 

435,576

 

343,883

 

285,938

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income

 

191,422

 

180,539

 

176,114

 

173,449

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

(3

)

(183

)

200

 

(301

)

Other income (loss)

 

5,986

 

692

 

1,102

 

(65,783

)

Other expenses and assessments

 

52,162

 

47,672

 

46,103

 

38,402

 

Net other expenses

 

46,173

 

46,797

 

45,201

 

103,884

 

Net income

 

$

145,249

 

$

133,742

 

$

130,913

 

$

69,565

 

 

 

2016

 

 

 

4th Quarter (b)

 

3rd Quarter

 

2nd Quarter

 

1st Quarter

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest income

 

$

398,660

 

$

344,596

 

$

318,359

 

$

299,232

 

Interest expense

 

238,046

 

204,950

 

189,375

 

172,066

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income

 

160,614

 

139,646

 

128,984

 

127,166

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Provision/(Reversal) for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

258

 

236

 

346

 

1,126

 

Other income (loss)

 

8,309

 

3,316

 

152

 

(4,924

)

Other expenses and assessments

 

45,899

 

39,381

 

37,150

 

37,715

 

Net other expenses

 

37,848

 

36,301

 

37,344

 

43,765

 

Net income

 

$

122,766

 

$

103,345

 

$

91,640

 

$

83,401

 

Interim period streamline our technology systems and technology infrastructures.


Supplementary financial data for each quarter for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 are presented below (in thousands):

  2020 
  4th Quarter  3rd Quarter  2nd Quarter  (a)  1st Quarter 
Interest income $336,796  $354,712  $502,305  $740,052 
Interest expense  (147,084)  (173,949)  (272,617)  (587,259)
                 
Net interest income  189,712   180,763   229,688   152,793 
                 
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses  (1,981)  2,536   3,030   136 
Other income  (21,448)  (14,283)  (22,817)  7,729 
Other expenses and assessments  (71,687)  (62,749)  (66,316)  (55,279)
Net other expenses  (91,154)  (79,568)  (92,163)  (47,686)
Net income $98,558  $101,195 $137,525 $105,107 

  2019 
  4th Quarter (b)  3rd Quarter (c)  2nd Quarter (c)  1st Quarter 
Interest income $828,929  $931,927  $1,022,556  $997,534 
Interest expense  (665,025)  (769,533)  (858,980)  (820,318)
                 
Net interest income  163,904   162,394   163,576   177,216 
                 
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses  16   134   (275)  (17)
Other income  26,186   (4,173)  (1,303)  13,178 
Other expenses and assessments  (61,818)  (56,675)  (54,466)  (55,573)
Net other expenses  (35,648)  (60,982)  (55,494)  (42,378)
Net income $128,256  $101,412 $108,082 $134,838 

Interim period Infrequently occurring items recognized.

 


(a)First2020 second quarter 2017 Net income declined due to the Lehman litigation settlement charge of $70.0 million.

(b)Fourth quarter2016 Net income benefitted from higherwas driven by significant increase in Net interest income, which grew in part by lower costparallel with a surge in member borrowings of fundingadvances. Advances balances declined in the third and fourth quarters of 2020.

(b)Fourth quarter 2019 — Net income benefited from valuation gains recorded in part by a growing book of advance business.  Other income (loss) on standalone derivatives and U.S. Treasury Securities. Operating expenses were higher in the quarterprimarily due to increase in Operating expenses.head count and technology related expenses related to multiple, multi-year technology modernization initiatives.
(c)2019 Net income declined after the first quarter primarily due to lower net interest income, which was impacted by price reductions on advances effective January 1, 2019 and higher funding cost through most of 2019.

29

Item 7.

Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

Statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including statements describing the objectives, projections, estimates, or predictions of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“we” “us,” “our,” “the Bank” or the “FHLBNY”) may be “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These statements may use forward-looking terminology, such as “anticipates,” “believes,” “could,” “estimates,” “may,” “should,” “will,” or other variations on these terms or their negatives. The Bank cautions that, by their nature, forward-looking statements are subject to a number of risks or uncertainties, including the Risk Factors set forth in Item 1A and the risks set forth below, and that actual results could differ materially from those expressed or implied in these forward-looking statements. As a result, you are cautioned not to place undue reliance on such statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they were made, and the Bank does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement herein. Forward-looking statements include, among others, the following:

 

·the Bank’s projections regarding income, retained earnings, dividend payouts, and the repurchase of excess capital stock;

·the Bank’s statements related to gains and losses on derivatives, future other-than-temporarycredit and impairment charges, and future classification of securities;

·the Bank’s expectations relating to future balance sheet growth;

·the LIBOR interest rate transition to other alternatives;
the Bank’s targets under the Bank’s retained earnings plan;

·the Bank’s expectations regarding the size of its mortgage loan portfolio, particularly as compared to prior periods; and

·the Bank’s statements related to reform legislation, including without limitation, housing, government-sponsored enterprise or COVID-19 pandemic legislation.

Actual results may differ from forward-looking statements for many reasons, including but not limited to:

Actual results may differ from forward-looking statements for many reasons, including, but not limited to, the risk factors set forth in Item 1A - Risk Factors and the risks set forth below:

·changes in economic and market conditions;conditions, including the evolving risks relating to the current coronavirus pandemic;

·changes in demand for Bank advances and other products resulting from changes in members’ deposit flows and credit demands or otherwise;

·an increase in advance prepayments as a result of changes in interest rates (including negative interest rates) or other factors;

·the volatility of market prices, rates, and indices that could affect the value of collateral held by the Bank as security for obligations of Bank members and counterparties to interest rate exchange agreements and similar agreements;

·political events, including legislative developments that affect the Bank, its members, counterparties, and/or investors in the Consolidated obligations (“COs”) of the FHLBanks;

·competitive forces including, without limitation, other sources of funding available to Bank members, other entities borrowing funds in the capital markets, and the ability to attract and retain skilled employees;

·the pace of technological change and the ability of the Bank to develop and support technology and information systems, including the internet, sufficient to manage the risks of the Bank’s business effectively;

·changes in investor demand for COs and/or the terms of interest rate exchange agreements and similar agreements;

·timing and volume of market activity;

·ability to introduce new or adequately adapt current Bank products and services and successfully manage the risks associated with those products and services, including new types of collateral used to secure advances;

·risk of loss arising from litigation filed against one or more of the FHLBanks;

·realization of losses arising from the Bank’s joint and several liability on COs;

·risk of loss due to fluctuations in the housing market;

·inflation or deflation;

·issues and events within the FHLBank System and in the political arena that may lead to regulatory, judicial, or other developments that may affect the marketability of the COs, the Bank’s financial obligations with respect to COs, and the Bank’s ability to access the capital markets;


·the availability of derivative financial instruments of the types and in the quantities needed for risk management purposes from acceptable counterparties;

·significant business disruptions resulting from natural or other disaster,disasters (including, but not limited to, health emergencies such as pandemics or epidemics, including the current coronavirus pandemic), acts of war or terrorism;

·the effect of new accounting standards, including the development of supporting systems;

·membership changes, including changes resulting from mergers or changes in the principal place of business of Bank members;

·the soundness of other financial institutions, including Bank members, nonmember borrowers, other counterparties, and the other FHLBanks; and

·the willingness of the Bank’s members to do business with the Bank whether or not the Bank is paying dividends or repurchasing excess capital stock.

Risks and other factors could cause actual results of the Bank to differ materially from those implied by any forward-looking statements. These risk factors are not exhaustive. The Bank operates in changing economic and regulatory environments, and new risk factors will emerge from time to time. Management cannot predict such new risk factors nor can it assess the impact, if any, of such new risk factors on the business of the Bank or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those implied by any forward-looking statements.


Organization of Management’s Discussion and Analysis (MD&A).

This MD&A is designed to provide information that will assist the readers in better understanding our financial statements, the changes in key items in our financial statements from year to year, the primary factors driving those changes as well as how accounting principles affect our financial statements. The MD&A is organized as follows:

 

Risks
Page
Executive Overview33
Other Developments38
Trends in the Financial Markets39
Recently Issued Accounting Standards and other factors could cause actual resultsInterpretations and Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates40
Legislative and Regulatory Developments44
Financial Condition49
Advances53
Investments57
Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio, Net62
Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations65
Recent Rating Actions71
Stockholders’ Capital71
Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities73
Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt77
Results of the Bank to differ materially from those implied by any forward-looking statements.  These risk factors are not exhaustive.  The Bank operates in changing economicOperations82
Net Income82
Net Interest Income, Margin and regulatory environments,Interest Rate Spreads84
Interest Income89
Interest Expense92
Analysis of Non-Interest Income (Loss)96
Operating Expenses, Compensation and new risk factors will emerge from time to time.  Management cannot predict such new risk factors nor can it assess the impact, if any, of such new risk factors on the business of the Bank or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those implied by any forward-looking statements.

Organization of Management’s DiscussionBenefits, and Analysis (“MD&A”).Other Expenses

98
Assessments98

MD&A TABLE REFERENCE
Table(s) Description Page(s)
  Selected Financial Data 27-28
  Supplementary Financial Data 29
  Replacement of London Interbank Offered Rates (LIBOR) 52
1.1 Market Interest Rates 39
2.1 Financial Condition 49
3.1 - 3.8 Advances 53-57
4.1 - 4.9 Investments 58-62
5.1 - 5.3 Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio 64-65
6.1 - 6.11 Consolidated Obligations 66-70
6.12 FHLBNY Ratings 71
7.1 - 7.4 Capital 71-73
8.1 - 8.8 Derivatives Instruments and Hedging Activities 73-76
9.1 - 9.3 Liquidity 77-78
9.4 Short Term Debt 80
9.5 - 9.6 FHFA MBS Limits and Core Mission Achievement 80-81
10.1 - 10.13 Results of Operations 82-98
11.1 Assessments 98

32

Executive Overview

This overview of management’s discussion and analysis highlights selected information and may not contain all of the information that is important to readers of this Form 10-K.  For a more complete understanding of events, trends and uncertainties, as well as the liquidity, capital, credit and market risks, and critical accounting estimates, affecting the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (FHLBNY or Bank), this Form 10-K should be read in its entirety.

Cooperative business model. As a cooperative, we seek to maintain a balance between our public policy mission and our ability to provide adequate returns on the capital supplied by our members. We achieve this balance by delivering low-cost financing to members to help them meet the credit needs of their communities and by paying a dividend on members’ capital stock. Our financial strategies are designed to enable us to expand and contract in response to member credit needs. By investing capital in high-quality, short- and medium-term financial instruments, we maintain sufficient liquidity to satisfy member demand for short- and long-term funds, repay maturing Consolidated obligations (CO bonds and CO discount notes), and meet other obligations. The dividends we pay are largely the result of earnings on invested member capital, net earnings on advances to members, mortgage loans and investments, offset in part by operating expenses and assessments. Our Board of Directors and Management determine the pricing of member credit and dividend policies based on the needs of our members and the cooperative as well as current and forecasted conditions in the marketplace.

Business segment. We manage our operations as a single business segment. Advances to members are our primary focus and the principal factor that impacts our operating results. Our Business Continuity Program (BCP) has been fully deployed and operational throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and the market uncertainties without any significant operational problems through the date of this report. The BCP is intended to help ensure the safety and welfare of our employees, to safeguard the Bank’s assets, including physical property and information, and to permit the continued operations of the Bank in the event of a short-term disruption or long-term catastrophic event. The BCP contains operating procedures for critical processes and identifies resources and staff necessary to continue operations based on business defined recovery time objectives and communication requirements for internal and external stakeholders. We continue to operate our business and serve our members remotely

COVID-19 and Business Continuity

In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, we activated and successfully executed on our business continuity protocols and continue to monitor the COVID-19 pandemic under such protocols. We have endeavored to protect our employees and customers and to safeguard the Bank’s assets, including physical property and information, and to permit the continued operations of the Bank. Substantially all our employees continue to work remotely. We continue to monitor conditions and are developing a phased approach to reopening our offices based on regional indicators of infection positivity rates and will continue to operate in compliance with all applicable laws and regulations.

The Bank continued to meet its funding needs throughout recent events. The disruptions in the funding markets during March has largely subsided, as spreads between the Bank’s consolidated debt obligations and U.S. Treasury securities returned to more normalized levels, and market access for required funding stabilized. The FHLBanks continued to coordinate and cooperate to ensure orderly access for the FHLBanks to the funding markets in the issuance of System consolidated debt obligations. As a consequence of the Federal Reserve’s Open Market Operations in response to market disruptions, the unusual relationships among interest rate curves seen at the height of the disruption has now largely normalized and funding market stability began to improve as early as in the second quarter of 2020. However, as the future path of the pandemic is unpredictable, so is its potential impact on the capital markets and the FHLBanks’ funding conditions.

The impact of the Covid-19 pandemic on the Bank’s future earnings and dividends continues to be difficult to forecast given the uncertainties about the health crisis, the actions of national and local policymakers, the impact on the economy, markets, and the business climate, and the potential impact of changes in consumer and business behavior on our members’ business. These and other factors may reduce the volume of assets on our balance sheet and the spreads we earn on those assets. Continued low market interest rates will reduce the income we earn from deploying capital. Changes in market conditions affecting CO issuance spreads may once again become volatile. Uncertainty about future investor appetite for increased Treasury and GSE issuance may indicate higher future debt costs and reduce our margins as issuance amounts rise.

We also note that the market disruption caused by the pandemic negatively affected mortgage collateral valuations. We responded by applying updated mortgage valuations to pledged mortgage collateral. Where necessary, members have pledged


additional qualifying collateral to reflect current market conditions and/or to address increased advance demand to comply with their collateral maintenance requirements. We remain adequately collateralized and will continue to monitor credit and collateral conditions and endeavor to make adjustments as needed. In addition, we have implemented certain relief measures to help members serve their customers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. These accommodations include forbearance and deferrals for MPF program loans, forbearance, and modifications for pledged loan collateral, and allowing electronic signatures on loan documentation in certain circumstances.

In May 2020, we began offering a variety of loan and grant programs to help assist members in responding to the challenges brought about by the COVID-19 pandemic. The Finance Agency took certain actions to allow the Federal Home Loans Banks to provide various forms of relief in response to the effects of the pandemic. We have established a small business relief program and has disbursed cash grants of $8.0 million through December 31, 2020.

Credit Losses under ASU 2016-13 (CECL)

Effective January 1, 2020, we adopted the new accounting standard on current expected credit losses (CECL) under which the allowance is measured based on management’s best estimate of lifetime expected credit losses. An adjustment to opening retained earnings of $3.8 million for credit loss allowance was recorded with the adoption of CECL at January 1, 2020. In the four quarters of 2020, we charged $3.4 million to earnings as the provision for credit losses under the new framework on mortgage loans, and $0.3 million as the provision for credit losses on certain held-to-maturity securities. No provision was deemed necessary on advances.

2020 Financial Results

Net income — 2020 Net income was $442.4 million, a decrease of $30.2 million, or 6.4% from the prior year. Our Net income is primarily driven by Net interest income, which is the spread between costing yields on debt, and the yields earned on advances, mortgage-backed securities, and other investments. The Fed has continued with its wide-ranging stimulus plans and interest rates remain very low, adversely impacting margin and net interest income.

Net Interest IncomeOur 2020 results were impacted by the March 2020 rate cuts. The Federal Reserve decreased its benchmark short-term interest rate to a range of 0-0.25%, a decrease of 150 basis points. These decreases were in addition to the three rate cuts implemented during 2019 (225 basis points in total).

2020 Net interest income, before loan loss provisions, was $753.0 million, an increase of $85.9 million, or 12.9% from the prior year. Primary driver was higher earning assets, specifically advances in the 2020 second and third quarters.

Financial markets in the third and fourth quarter exhibited less volatility. The Fed continued to provide support to the economy and the financial markets; interest rates remained very low. Given the relationship between our interest-sensitive assets and liabilities, decreases in short-term interest rates generally resulted in an overall decrease in our net interest margin, although the magnitude of the impact to our net interest margin depends on the yields on interest-earning assets relative to the cost of interest-bearing liabilities and yields earned on capital. Conversely, any increases in short-term interest rates generally have a positive impact on our net interest margin. Furthermore, the Fed’s acquisition program in the agency-issued mortgage-backed securities market has driven up pricing and limited the opportunities for acquiring investments that would meet our risk/reward targets. Spreads remained very low on our investments in U.S. Treasury securities, overnight Federal funds markets and repurchase programs, the principal investment vehicles for our balance sheet liquidity programs.

Net interest income during the quarters in 2020 were strong, despite the volatility in the financial markets: $152.8 million in the first quarter; $229.7 million in the second quarter; $180.8 million in the third quarter and $189.7 million in the fourth quarter. Fourth quarter 2020 net interest benefitted from $30.2 million in prepayment fees, although lower average earning assets, specifically lower advance balances in the fourth quarter of 2020 negatively impacted net interest income and margin (before prepayment fees). Net interest income grew in the middle two quarters largely driven by spreads earned from the surge in demand for advances at the onset of COVID-19 pandemic, and by favorable Consolidated obligation debt expense. CO debt costing yields/expenses declined in part due to a shift to greater use of discount notes to fund short-maturity assets, and in part due to advantageous pricing of CO discount notes. In 2020, CO discount notes funded 47.3% of our earning assets, up from 40.3% in the prior year (calculations are based on average balances). Discount note costing yield was 57 basis points in 2020, down from 221 basis points in the prior year. In the current volatile market, investor demand for FHLBank issued high-quality CO discount notes pushed yields down, resulting in favorable spreads and favorable funding through most of 2020.


In summary, volume related increases in earning assets and changes in funding mix together made a favorable impact of $91.6 million to margin, partly offset by decline of $5.8 million due to yield-related changes. We funded average interest-earning assets of $157.9 billion in 2020, compared to $144.6 billion in the prior year, the asset growth driven by significant increase in advances at the onset of COVID-19 in March 2020. However, starting in late second quarter of 2020, advance balances began to decline, gradually at first, when members did not roll over maturing short-term funds and began to prepay advances, followed by significant prepayments late in the fourth quarter of 2020. The decline adversely impacted fourth quarter 2020 net interest income. We ended 2020 with par advances at $90.7 billion, compared to $100.4 billion when we began the year. Average advance balance was $109.1 billion in 2020, up from $95.8 billion average in the prior year.

Stockholders’ capital stock, which is typically deployed to fund short-term interest-earning assets, increased to $8.0 billion in 2020, up from $7.3 billion in the prior year (as measured by average outstanding balance in the period). Increase in Capital stock was in line with increase in advances in 2020, as borrowing members are required to purchase capital stock in proportion to amounts borrowed.

Other income (loss) — Other income (loss) reported a loss of $50.8 million in 2020 compared to a gain of $33.9 million in 2019.

 

This MD&A is designed to provide information that will assist the readers in better understanding our financial statements, the changes in key items in our financial statements from year to year, the primary factors driving those changes as well as how accounting principles affect our financial statements.  The MD&A is organized as follows:

·

Page

Executive Overview

23

2017 Highlights

23

Business Outlook

25

Trends in the Financial Markets

27

Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations and Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates

28

Legislative and Regulatory Developments

31

Financial Condition

33

Advances

35

Investments

40

Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio

46

Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations

49

Recent Rating Actions

53

Stockholders’ Capital

54

Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

56

Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt

61

Results of Operations

66

Net Income

66

Net Interest Income

68

Interest Income

72

Interest Expense

74

Earnings Impact of Derivatives and Hedging Activities

79

Operating Expenses, Compensation and Benefits, and Other Expenses

82

Assessments

82

Quantitative And Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

83

MD&A TABLE REFERENCE

Table(s)

 

Description

 

Page(s)

 

 

Selected Financial Data

 

19 - 20

1.1

 

Market Interest Rates

 

27

2.1

 

Financial Condition

 

33

3.1 - 3.9

 

Advances

 

35 - 39

4.1 - 4.11

 

Investments

 

40 - 45

5.1 - 5.6

 

Mortgage Loans

 

47 - 49

6.1 - 6.10

 

Consolidated Obligations

 

50 - 53

6.11

 

FHLBNY Ratings

 

53

7.1 - 7.3

 

Capital

 

54 - 55

8.1 - 8.8

 

Derivatives

 

56 - 61

9.1 - 9.3

 

Liquidity

 

62

9.4

 

Short-Term Debt

 

64

9.5 - 9.7

 

Unpledged Asset Requirements, FHFA MBS Limits, and Core Mission Achievement

 

64 - 65

10.1 - 10.16

 

Results of Operations

 

66 - 82

11.1

 

Assessments

 

82

Executive Overview

This overview of management’s discussion and analysis highlights selected information and may not contain all of the information that is important to readers of this Form 10-K.  For a more complete understanding of events, trends and uncertainties, as well as the liquidity, capital, credit and market risks, and critical accounting estimates, affecting the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“FHLBNY” or “Bank”), this Form 10-K should be read in its entirety.

Cooperative business model.  As a cooperative, we seek to maintain a balance between our public policy mission and our ability to provide adequate returns on the capital supplied by our members.  We achieve this balance by delivering low-cost financing to members to help them meet the credit needs of their communities and also by paying a dividend on members’ capital stock.  Our financial strategies are designed to enable us to expand and contract in response to member credit needs.  By investing capital in high-quality, short- and medium-term financial instruments, we maintain sufficient liquidity to satisfy member demand for short- and long-term funds, repay maturing Consolidated obligations, and meet other obligations.  The dividends we pay are largely the result of earnings on invested member capital, net earnings on advances to members, mortgage loans and investments, offset in part by operating expenses and assessments.  Our Board of Directors and Management determine the pricing of member credit and dividend policies based on the needs of our members and the cooperative.

Business segment.  We manage our operations as a single business segment.  Advances to members are our primary focus and the principal factor that impacts our operating results.

Explanation of the use of certain non-GAAP measures of Interest Income and Expense, Net Interest income and margin.  The results of our operations are presented in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.  We have also presented certain information regarding our spread between Interest Income and Expense, Net Interest income spread and Return on Earning assets.  This spread combines interest expense on debt with net interest exchanged with swap dealers on interest rate swaps associated with debt hedged on an economic basis.  We believe these non-GAAP financial measures are useful to investors and members seeking to understand our operational performance and business and performance trends.  Although we believe these non-GAAP financial measures enhance investor and members’ understanding of the Bank’s business and performance, they should not be considered an alternative to GAAP.  We have provided GAAP measures in parallel whenever discussing non-GAAP measures.

Financial performance of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

 

 

December 31,

 

Net change in dollar amount

 

(Dollars in millions, except per share data)

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income before provision for credit losses

 

$

722

 

$

556

 

$

554

 

$

166

 

$

2

 

Provision/(Reversal) for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

 

2

 

 

(2

)

2

 

Other non-interest income

 

(58

)

7

 

25

 

(65

)

(18

)

Operating expenses

 

40

 

33

 

30

 

7

 

3

 

Compensation and benefits

 

76

 

69

 

73

 

7

 

(4

)

Net income

 

$

479

 

$

401

 

$

415

 

$

78

 

$

(14

)

Earnings per share

 

$

7.66

 

$

7.02

 

$

7.83

 

$

0.64

 

$

(0.81

)

Dividend per share

 

$

5.54

 

$

4.73

 

$

4.22

 

$

0.81

 

$

0.51

 

2017 Highlights

Net Income — For the FHLBNY, Net income is Net interest income, minus credit losses on mortgage loans, plus Other income/(loss), less Other Expenses and Assessments set aside for the FHLBNY’s Affordable Housing Program.  2017 Net income was $479.5 million, the second highest in the Bank’s history, and an increase of $78.3 million, or 19.5%, compared to the prior year.

Summarized below are the primary components of our Net income:

Net interest income — Net interest income (“NII”) is typically driven by the volume of earning assets, as measured by average balances of earning assets, and the net interest spread earned in the period.  Prepayment fees earned when advances are early terminated by our member/borrowers are also included in Net interest income.

2017 Net interest income was $721.5 million, an increase of $165.1 million, or 29.7%, from the prior year.  Net interest spread was 43 basis points in 2017, compared to 40 basis points in the prior year.

2017 Net interest income benefited from higher average earning assets, which grew to $148.8 billion, up from $128.4 billion in the prior year.  Average advance balances were $109.2 billion in 2017, compared to $96.2 billion in 2016.  In 2017, income from LIBOR-indexed assets, primarily ARC advances and floating-rate investments in mortgage-backed securities, benefited from the rising LIBOR.  Overnight and short-term investments in the federal funds and the overnight repurchase agreements benefited from rising yields for money market investments.  While funding costs were also higher in line with the rising rate environment, cost of funding continued to benefit from favorable investor demand for Consolidated obligation short-term and floating-rate bonds.

Other Income (Loss) — 2017 Other Income/(loss) reported a loss of $58.0 million, compared to a gain of $6.9 million in the prior year.  The Lehman settlement charge of $70.0 million was recorded in Other Income/(Loss) in the first quarter of the current year period.

·Service fees and other were $17.9 million in 2020 compared to $18.2 million in 2019. Service fees and others are primarily correspondent banking fees and fee revenues from financial letters of credit.  Such revenues were $15.8 million in the current year, compared to $13.8 million in the prior year.

·Financial instruments carried at fair values reported a net valuation lossgain of $4.5$0.1 million in the current year,2020 compared to a net valuation loss of $4.1 million in 2019.
·Derivative activities reported a charge to Other income of $151.7 million in 2020, compared to a charge of $40.7 million in 2019. The charges included net accrued interest expense on standalone swaps of $93.7 million and $12.5 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively. Fair value losses on standalone swaps hedging U.S. Treasury securities were $80.7 million and $33.2 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively. We also recorded net fair value gains of $16.7 million and $3.5 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively, on standalone swaps designated primarily to mitigate basis risks on certain advances and bonds.
·U.S. Treasury Securities held for liquidity (classified as trading) reported gains of $72.8 million and $51.3 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively. Gains included realized gains of $38.3 million and $1.9 million in the prior year.  For more information, see financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures2020 and 2019, respectively.
·Equity Investments, held to finance payments to retirees in Note 17.  Fair Valuesnon-qualified pension plans, reported net valuation gains of Financial Instruments.  Also see, Table 10.11 Other Income (Loss) and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

·Derivative and hedging activities reported a net gain of $1.9$9.8 million in the current year, compared to2020, a net loss of $1.7 million in the prior year.  For more information, see financial statements, Earnings Impact of Derivatives and Hedging Activities disclosures in Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities.  Also see Table 10.14 Earnings Impact of Derivatives and Hedging Activities and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

·Debt repurchases and transfers — Debt repurchases in the current year resulted in a loss of $0.1 million charged to earnings, compared to $3.6 million in the prior year.

Other Expenses were $130.9 million in the current year, compared to $115.4 million in the prior year.  Other Expenseslittle lower than 2019.

Other expenses were $206.9 million in 2020, compared to $176.0 million in 2019. Other expenses are primarily Operating expenses, Compensation and benefits, and our share of operating expenses of the Office of Finance and the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

 

·Operating expenses were $40.7$69.8 million in the current year,2020, up from $33.4$62.8 million in the prior year.

2019. Increase was primarily due to software and technology system contracts, including payments to professional staff.

·Compensation and benefits expenses were $75.6$100.2 million in the current year,2020, up from $69.1$88.2 million in the prior year.

2019. Increase was primarily due to addition of staff to design and execute on our long-term technology enhancement plans.

·The expenses allocated for our share of the costs to operate the Office of Finance and the Federal Housing Finance Agency were $14.7$19.4 million in the current year,2020, compared to $12.9$16.8 million in the prior year.

AHP assessments allocated from net income2019.

·Other expenses were $53.4$17.5 million in the current year,2020, compared to $44.8$8.3 million in the prior year.  Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.

Dividend payments — Four quarterly cash dividends were paid in 2017 for a total of $5.54 per share of capital, compared to $4.73 per share of capital in 2016 and $4.22 in 2015.

Financial Condition — December 31, 2017 compared to December 31, 2016

Total assets increased to $158.9 billion at December 31, 2017 from $143.6 billion at December 31, 2016, an increase of $15.3 billion, or 10.7%.

Advances — Par balances increased at December 31, 2017 to $122.7 billion, compared to $109.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  Short-term fixed-rate advances grew to $23.8 billion at December 31, 2017, up from $10.8 billion at December 31, 2016.  ARC advances, which are adjustable-rate borrowings, decreased to $37.1 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $42.7 billion at December 31, 2016.

Long-term investment securities — Long-term investment securities are designated as available-for-sale (“AFS”) or held-to-maturity (“HTM”).  The heavy concentration of GSE and Agency issued (“GSE-issued”) securities, and a declining balance of private-label MBS is our investment profile.

2019. In the AFS portfolio, long-term investments at December 31, 2017 were floating-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $528.6 million, compared to $656.1 million at December 31, 2016.  We own grantor trusts that invest in highly-liquid registered mutual funds designated as AFS; funds were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $48.6 million at December 31, 2017 and $41.7 million at December 31, 2016.

In the HTM portfolio, long-term investments at December 31, 2017 were predominantly GSE-issued fixed- and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities and housing finance agency bonds.  GSE securities were recorded at amortized cost.  Investments in mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), including private-label MBS, were $16.7 billion at December 31, 2017 and $15.0 billion at December 31, 2016.  Investments in PLMBS were less than 2.0% of the HTM portfolio of MBS.  Housing finance agency bonds, primarily New York and New Jersey, were carried at an amortized cost basis of $1.1 billion at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio — Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (“MPF” or “MPF Program”).  Unpaid principal balances of loans under this program stood at $2.9 billion at December 31, 2017, a net increase of $149.5 million from the balance at December 31, 2016.  Loans are primarily fixed-rate, single-family mortgages acquired through the MPF Program.  Credit performance has been strong and delinquency low.  Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive acquisitions.  Residential collateral values have remained stable in the New York and New Jersey sectors, the primary geographic concentration for our MPF portfolio, and historical loss experience remains very low.

Capital ratios — Our capital position remains strong.  At December 31, 2017, actual risk-based capital was $8.3 billion, compared to required risk-based capital of $912.6 million.  To support $158.9 billion of total assets at December 31, 2017, the minimum required total capital was $6.4 billion or 4.0% of assets.  Our actual regulatory risk-based capital was $8.3 billion, exceeding required total capital by $1.9 billion.  These ratios have remained consistently above the required regulatory ratios through all periods in this report.

Liquidity and Debt — Cash at banks was $127.4 million at December 31, 2017, compared to $151.8 million at December 31, 2016.

Money Market investments at December 31, 2017 were $10.3 billion in federal funds sold and $2.7 billion in overnight resale agreements.  At December 31, 2016, money market investments were $6.7 billion in federal funds and $7.2 billion in overnight resale agreements.  Market yields for overnight and term money market investments have improved, creating opportunities for earning a positive margin, and at the same time fulfilling our liquidity targets.  In addition, our balance sheet assets2020, Other expenses included a $528.6 million portfolio of high credit quality GSE-issued available-for-sale securities, which are readily marketable.

In December 2016, management approved a trading portfolio to meet short-term liquidity needs.  We invested in highly liquid U.S. Treasury Bills, U.S. Treasury Notes and GSE issued securities.  At December 31, 2017, trading investments were $239.1 million in U.S. Treasury bills, $1.0 billion in U.S. Treasury Notes and $356.9 million in GSE securities.  At December 31, 2016, trading investments were $100.2 million in U.S. Treasury notes and $31.0 million in GSE securities.

Business Outlook

The following forward-looking statements are based upon the current beliefs and expectations of the FHLBNY’s management and are subject to risks and uncertainties, which could cause our actual results to differ materially from those set forth in such forward-looking statements.

Earnings Our earnings performance is the result of many factors, among them: the state of the economy; conditions in the capital markets; level and shape of the yield curve; ability of members to source deposits and make loans; and impact of regulations on members’ business.  Changes to these and other factors could have significant effects, positive or negative, on the Bank’s financial results.  Based on our assumptions for these and other factors, we currently project 2018 Net income to be a little lower than earned in 2017.

Advances — We expect a stable book of advance business through 2018, although at levels a little lower than at December 31, 2017.  The pace of balance sheet growth in 2017 was concentrated along short-term borrowing.  Borrowing activities of a few large members have been the predominant driver of our book of advance business.  We cannot predict if short-term advances will be rolled over, or if advances borrowed by our larger members will be rolled over at maturity or prepaid prior to maturity.  At December 31, 2017, three members’ advance borrowings exceeded 10.0% of total advances outstanding  Citibank, N.A. 35.1%  (30.7% at December 31, 2016), Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 11.8%  (13.2% at December 31, 2016), and New York Community Bank/New York Commercial Bank 9.9% (10.7% at December 31, 2016).

We expect continued demand for variable-rate advances and short-term fixed-rate advances.  We expect limited demand for large, intermediate and long-term advances because many members have adequate liquidity.  Member banks are also likely to develop liquidity strategies to address regulatory liquidity frameworks, and those strategies may lead certain member banks to prepay advances ahead of their maturities.  Because of the complex interactions among a number of factors driving large banking institutions to address regulatory liquidity guidance, we are unable to predict future trends particularly with respect to borrowings by our larger members.  When advances are prepaid, we receive prepayment penalty fees to make us economically whole, and the FHLBNY’s earnings may not be adversely impacted in the periods when prepayments occur, but may impact revenue streams in future periods.

Demand for FHLBank debt — We expect generally favorable funding condition to exist through 2018, specifically for short and intermediate-term Consolidated obligation floating-rate bonds, although we may experience some volatility in funding conditions during the year, especially leading up to and around FOMC meeting dates.  Our primary source of funds is the sale of Consolidated obligations in the capital markets.  Our ability to obtain funds through the issuance of Consolidated obligations depends in part on prevailing conditions in the capital markets, which are beyond our control.  If we cannot access funding when needed on acceptable terms, our ability to support and continue operations could be adversely affected, which could negatively affect our financial condition and results of operations.  The pricing of our longer-term debt remains at levels that are still unfavorable.  To the extent we receive sub-optimal funding, our member institutions in turn may experience higher costs for advance borrowings.  To the extent the FHLBanks may not be able to issue long-term debt at economical spreads to the 3-month LIBOR, borrowing choices may also be less economical for our members, potentially affecting their demand for advances.

The cost of FHLBank debt is a key driver of profitability, and we expect to be able to issue CO bonds and discount notes at reasonable spreads to yields earned from advances and investments.  Consolidated obligation discount notes and floating-rate notes have been in demand by investors, and pricing and yields have been attractive, specifically relative to LIBOR.  Our business plans and funding strategies are predicated on the expectation that investor demand will continue.

Rating — The U.S. Government’s credit is rated by Moody’s as Aaa with the outlook as stable, and AA+ and stable by Standard & Poor’s (“S&P”).  Consolidated obligations of FHLBanks are rated Aaa/P-1 by Moody’s, and AA+/A-1+ by S& P.  Any rating actions on the US Government would likely result in all individual FHLBanks’ long-term deposit ratings and the FHLBank System long-term bond rating moving in lock step with any US sovereign rating action.  See FHLBNY Ratings Table 6.11 for more details about ratings and recent rating actions by Moody’s and S&P.

Other Developments

Commonwealth of Puerto Rico — Our district is comprised of the states of New Jersey and New York, as well as the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  With respect to the Puerto Rico government debt crisis, we do not own any debt issued by the government of Puerto Rico or its agencies.  In addition, lending to all Bank customers, including our Puerto Rico customers, is made on a secured basis.  In this regard, we note that lending to Puerto Rico-based members was immaterial, compared to total outstanding advances as of December 31, 2017.  Based on the foregoing, we do not expect the financial condition of the government of Puerto Rico to have a material impact on the Bank’s credit or business activities.

Impact of natural disasters in 2017 — We believe that our potential exposure in FEMA designated disaster areas in the continental United States, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands is relatively limited, and the impact, if any, will not be material to our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Disaster Recovery Grant Programs — In March 2018, we introduced a disaster recovery grant programs for the insured depository members of the FHLBNY in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands.  The program will provide a total of $5.0$8.0 million in cash grants to assist homeowners and small businesses in Puerto Rico andbusiness impacted by the U.S. Virgin Islands recover from hurricane damages.

Trends in the Financial Markets

Conditions in Financial Markets.  The primary external factors that affect net interest income are market interest rates and the general state of the economy.  The following table presents changes in key rates over the course of 2017 and 2016COVID-19 pandemic.

Affordable Housing Program Assessments (AHP) allocated from Net income were $49.2 million in 2020, compared to $52.6 million in 2019. Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.

Dividend payments — Four quarterly cash dividends were paid in 2020 for a total of $5.74 per share of capital, compared to $6.49 per share of capital paid in 2019.

35

Financial Condition — December 31, 2020 compared to December 31, 2019

Our financial condition is characterized by a solid balance sheet and ample liquidity readily available for our member institutions.

Total assets declined to $137.0 billion at December 31, 2020 from $162.1 billion at December 31, 2019, a decrease of $25.1 billion, or 15.5%. Cash at banks was $1.9 billion at December 31, 2020, compared to $603.2 million at December 31, 2019.

Liquidity investments

Money market investments at December 31, 2020 were $6.3 billion in federal funds sold and $4.7 billion in overnight resale agreements. At December 31, 2019, money market investments were $8.6 billion in federal funds sold and $15.0 billion in overnight resale agreements. Federal funds sold averaged $8.8 billion and $9.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. Resale agreements averaged $4.1 billion and $9.9 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. In 2020, we also established a program to invest in interest-earning deposits at highly rated financial institutions that are readily available as liquid funds; at December 31, 2020, the balance outstanding was $685.0 million.

For liquidity, we maintain a portfolio of U.S. Treasury securities designated as trading to meet short-term contingency liquidity needs. Trading investments are carried at fair value, with changes recorded through earnings. Trading investments were primarily U.S. Treasury securities of $11.7 billion and $15.3 billion at December 31, 2020 and 2019.

Our liquidity position remains strong, and in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and we do not foresee any changes to that position. In addition to the liquidity trading portfolio and assets discussed above, liquid assets at December 31, 2020 included $3.5 billion of high credit quality GSE-issued available-for-sale securities that are investment quality and readily marketable. The Finance Agency’s Liquidity Advisory Bulletin 2018-07 has specific initial liquidity levels to be maintained within certain ranges defined in an accompanying supervisory letter. We also have other liquidity measures in place, deposit liquidity and operational liquidity, and other liquidity buffers. We remain in compliance with the Advisory Bulletin and all liquidity regulations.

For more information about the Advisory Bulletin and our liquidity measures, see section Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt, and Tables 9.1 through Table 9.3 in this MD&A.

Advances — The pre-pandemic par balance of $93.0 billion at February 2020, surged to $134.4 billion at March 31, 2020, a 44.5% increase within a few weeks. However, soon after, advance balances began to decline, gradually at first, when members did not roll over maturing short-term funds and prepaid advances ahead of maturities, followed by significant prepayments late in the fourth quarter. We ended the year with par advances at $90.7 billion, compared to $100.4 billion at the beginning of the year. Advance transaction volume, as measured by average balance, was $109.1 billion in 2020, compared to $95.8 billion in the prior year.

Short-term fixed-rate advances decreased by 47.2% to $12.9 billion at December 31, 2020, down from $24.4 billion at December 31, 2019. ARC advances, which are adjustable-rate borrowings, increased by 4.2% to $17.1 billion at December 31, 2020, compared to $16.4 billion at December 31, 2019.

Given that advances are always well collateralized, a provision for credit loss was not necessary. We have no history of credit losses on advances.

Long-term investment debt securities — Long-term investment debt securities are designated as available-for-sale (AFS) or held-to-maturity (HTM). The heavy concentration of GSE and Agency issued (GSE-issued) securities, and a declining balance of private-label MBS, less than 1%, is our investment profile.

In the AFS portfolio, long-term investments of floating-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $281.3 million and $344.0 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Fixed-rate long-term investments in the AFS portfolio, comprising of fixed-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities, were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $3.2 billion and $2.3 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.


In the HTM portfolio, long-term investments were predominantly GSE-issued fixed- and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities and a small portfolio of housing finance agency bonds. Securities in the HTM portfolio are recorded at amortized cost adjusted for allowances for credit losses under the new credit loss framework. Fixed- and floating-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities in the HTM portfolio were $11.8 billion and $14.1 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

No allowance for credit losses were deemed necessary for GSE-issued investments. Credit loss allowance of $0.3 million was recorded on PLMBS at December 31, 2020.

Housing finance agency bonds, primarily New York and New Jersey, were carried at an amortized cost basis of $1.1 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Credit loss allowance of $0.7 million was recorded on the investments at December 31, 2020.

Equity Investments — We own a grantor trust that invests in highly-liquid registered mutual funds. Funds are classified as Equity Investments and were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $80.4 million and $60.0 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio — Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (MPF or MPF Program). Unpaid principal balance of MPF loans stood at $2.9 billion at December 31, 2020, a decrease of $265.8 million from the balance at December 31, 2019. Loans are primarily fixed-rate, single-family mortgages acquired through the MPF Program. Historically, credit performance has been strong and delinquency low. Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive acquisitions. Residential collateral values have remained stable in the New York and New Jersey sectors, the primary geographic concentration for our MPF portfolio, and historical loss experience remains very low. Rising delinquencies have resulted in increase in credit losses under the CECL methodology. Allowance for credit losses increased to $7.1 million at December 31, 2020, compared to $0.7 million at December 31, 2019.

We have introduced a new mortgage program, the Mortgage Asset Program sm (MAP) and plan to fully roll out the program in late March 2021. At December 31, 2020, MAP loans were $0.3 million. Effective March 31, 2021, we will cease to accept mortgage commitments to purchase loans under the MPF program; the MAP will become our alternative to MPF. The outstanding MPF portfolio will continue to be serviced, managed under its existing contractual and customary agreements and contracts.

Capital ratios — Our capital position remains strong. At December 31, 2020, actual risk-based capital was $7.3 billion, compared to required risk-based capital of $1.1 billion. To support $137.0 billion of total assets at December 31, 2020, the minimum required total capital was $5.5 billion or 4.0% of assets. Our actual regulatory risk-based capital was $7.3 billion, exceeding required total capital by $1.8 billion. These ratios have remained consistently above the required regulatory ratios through all periods in this report. For more information, see financial statements, Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

Leverage — At December 31, 2020 balance sheet leverage (based on U.S. GAAP) was 18.9 times shareholders’ equity. Balance sheet leverage has generally remained steady over the last several years, although from time to time we have maintained excess liquidity in highly liquid investments, or cash balances at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) to meet unexpected member demand for funds.

37

Other Developments

Replacement of London Interbank Offered Rates (LIBOR)

As noted throughout this report, much of the FHLBNY’s assets, liabilities and derivatives are indexed to LIBOR. We are actively reviewing LIBOR-indexed contracts to enable us to plan an orderly transition to SOFR.

On March 5, 2021 the ICE Benchmark Administration (IBA) announced its intentions to cease the publication of one week and two month USD LIBOR following the LIBOR publication on December 31, 2021, and to cease the publication of overnight, one, three, six, and 12 month USD LIBOR following the LIBOR publication on June 30, 2023. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee (ARRC) has confirmed that in its opinion the March 5, 2021 announcements by ICE Benchmarks Administration and the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority on future cessation and loss of representativeness of the LIBOR benchmarks constitutes a “Benchmark Transition Event” with respect to all USD LIBOR settings pursuant to the ARRC previous recommendations regarding fallback language for new issuances or originations of LIBOR floating rate notes, securitizations, syndicated business loans, and bilateral business loans.

The new cessation date on June 30, 2023 for LIBOR indices allows the FHLBNY more time to plan an orderly transition.

The FASB has issued two Accounting Standards Updates to Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848), Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting, and we are reviewing permissible expedients offered under Topic 848, including a one-time election to transfer/sell LIBOR-indexed securities in our held-to-maturity portfolio.

We are actively participating with the various industry groups, including the International Swaps and Derivatives Association (ISDA) and the ARRC to align our derivative contracts with IBOR Fallbacks Supplement and IBOR Fallbacks Protocol; the ISDA protocol was a major step in reducing the potentially systemic impact of LIBOR becoming unavailable while market participants, including the FHLBNY, continue to have exposure. The FHLBNY has elected to adhere to the ISDA protocol.

Legislative and Regulatory Developments in this MD&A includes more information.

Rating — The U.S. Government's credit is rated by Moody's as Aaa with outlook as stable, and AA+ and stable by Standard & Poor's (S&P). Consolidated obligations of the FHLBanks are rated Aaa/P-1 by Moody's and AA+/A-1+ by S&P. Fitch Ratings has rated the U.S. sovereign debt as AAA, but in July 2020 revised the outlook on its U.S. sovereign rating to “negative” from “stable” to reflect what Fitch described as “the ongoing deterioration in the U.S. public finances and the absence of a credible fiscal consolidation plan.” Any negative rating actions on the U.S. Government could potentially result in all individual FHLBanks' long-term deposit ratings and the FHLBank System long-term bond rating moving in lock step with any U.S. sovereign rating action.

Distribution received from Financing Corporation (FICO) — FICO was established by Congress in 1987 as a vehicle for recapitalizing the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. FICO was dissolved in 2019 in accordance with statute following payment in full of its obligations and all creditor claims. Funds remaining were distributed in June 2020 to the FHLBanks in proportion to the amounts of FICO stock owned by each FHLBank. The FHLBNY’s share was $18.2 million and was credited to Unrestricted retained earnings. More information is provided in financial statements Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

38

Trends in the Financial Markets

Conditions in Financial Markets. The primary external factors that affect net interest income are market interest rates and the general state of the economy. The following table presents changes in key rates over the course of 2020 and 2019 (rates in percent):

 

Table 1.1:1.1          Market Interest Rates

  December 31, 
  2020  2019  2020  2019 
  Average  Average  Ending Rate  Ending Rate 
Federal Funds Target Rate  0.53%  2.28%  0.25%  1.75%
Federal Funds Effective Rate (a)  0.36   2.16   0.09   1.55 
1-Month LIBOR  0.52   2.22   0.14   1.76 
3-Month LIBOR  0.65   2.33   0.24   1.91 
2-Year U.S.Treasury  0.39   1.97   0.12   1.57 
5-Year U.S.Treasury  0.53   1.95   0.36   1.69 
10-Year U.S.Treasury  0.89   2.14   0.91   1.92 
15-Year Residential Mortgage Note Rate  2.82   3.35   2.35   3.41 
30-Year Residential Mortgage Note Rate  3.33   3.98   2.87   3.86 

 

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

Average

 

Average

 

Ending Rate

 

Ending Rate

 

Federal Funds Target Rate (a)

 

1.10

%

0.51

%

1.50

%

0.75

%

Federal Funds Effective Rate (b)

 

1.00

 

0.39

 

1.33

 

0.55

 

3-Month LIBOR (a)

 

1.26

 

0.74

 

1.69

 

1.00

 

2-Year U.S.Treasury (a)

 

1.40

 

0.83

 

1.89

 

1.20

 

5-Year U.S.Treasury (a)

 

1.91

 

1.33

 

2.20

 

1.93

 

10-Year U.S.Treasury (a)

 

2.33

 

1.84

 

2.40

 

2.45

 

15-Year Residential Mortgage Note Rate (a)

 

3.10

 

2.81

 

3.20

 

3.24

 

30-Year Residential Mortgage Note Rate (a)

 

3.88

 

3.64

 

3.85

 

4.06

 


(a)(a)Source: Bloomberg L.L.P.

(b)Source: Board of Governors Federal Reserve System.System; all other sources are Bloomberg L.L.P.

During the fourth quarter, the markets continued to struggle with the fall-out from the COVID-19 pandemic. At its November meeting, the Fed maintained the target for the federal funds rate at a range between 0% and 0.25% and committed to continuing the programs in place to support the economy and increase purchases of U.S. Treasuries, and mortgage-backed securities. At its December meeting, the Fed maintained the federal funds rate at the same range and stated its intent to increase its holdings of Treasuries by $80 billion per month and mortgage-backed securities by $40 billion per month “until substantial further progress is made towards the Committee’s maximum employment and price stability goals”.

During the fourth quarter of 2020, yields on U.S. Treasuries decreased in the short end of the curve, but increased for maturities 2-years and longer relative to the prevailing yields at the end of the third quarter.

Impact of general level of interest rates on the FHLBNY.  The level of interest rates during a reporting period impacts our profitability, due primarily to the relatively shorter-term structure of earning assets and the impact of interest rates on invested capital.  We invest in Federal funds sold and repurchase agreements that typically are overnight investments.  We also use derivatives to effectively change the repricing characteristics of a significant proportion of our advances and Consolidated obligation debt to match shorter-term benchmark interest rates or overnight indices (LIBOR, Federal funds effective rate and SOFR) that reprice at intervals of three month or as frequently as daily. Consequently, the current level of short-term interest rates, as represented by the overnight Federal funds target rate, the overnight SOFR, and the 3-month LIBOR rate, has an impact on profitability.

The level of interest rates also directly affects our earnings on invested capital.  Compared to other banking institutions, we operate at comparatively low net spreads between the yield we earn on assets and the cost of our liabilities.  Therefore, we generate a relatively higher proportion of our income from the investment of member-supplied capital at the average asset yield.  As a result, changes in asset yields tend to have a greater effect on our profitability than they do on the profitability of other banking institutions.

In summary, our average asset yields and the returns on capital invested in these assets largely reflect the short-term interest rate environment because the maturities of our assets are generally short-term in nature, have rate resets that reference short-term rates, or have been hedged with derivatives in which a short-term or overnight rate is received.  Changes in rates paid on Consolidated obligations and the spread of these rates relative to LIBOR, SOFR, and the Federal funds rate or to U.S. Treasury securities may also impact profitability.  The rates and prices at which we are able to issue Consolidated obligations, and their relationship to other products such as Treasury securities, change frequently and are affected by a multitude of factors including: overall economic conditions; volatility of market prices, rates, and indices; the level of interest rates and shape of the Treasury curve; the level of asset swap rates and shape of the swap curve; supply from other issuers (including GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, supra/sovereigns, and other highly-rated borrowers); the rate and price of other products in the market such as mortgage-backed securities, repurchase agreements, and commercial paper; investor preferences; the total volume, timing, and characteristics of issuance by the FHLBanks; the amount and type of advance demand from our members; political events, including legislation and regulatory action; press interpretations of market conditions and issuer news; the presence of inflation or deflation; and actions by the Federal Reserve.


Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations and Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

For a discussion of recently issued accounting standards and interpretations, see financial statements, Note 2. FASB Standards Issued But Not Yet Adopted.

Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates

We have identified certain accounting policies that we believe are critical because they require management to make subjective judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because of the likelihood that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or by using different assumptions. These policies include estimating fair values of certain assets and liabilities, evaluating the impairment of our securities portfolios, estimating the allowance for credit losses on the advance and mortgage loan portfolios, and accounting for derivatives and hedging activities. We have discussed each of these critical accounting policies, the related estimates, and its judgment with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. Refer to Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates in this Form 10-K.

Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

The accounting standards on fair value measurements and disclosures discuss how entities should measure fair value based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable.  Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability between market participants at the measurement date.  This definition is based on an exit price rather than transaction or entry price.

The FHLBNY complied with the accounting guidance on fair value measurements and disclosures and has established a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability and would be based on market data obtained from independent sources.  Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect our assumptions about the parameters market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability and would be based on the best information available in the circumstances.  Our pricing models are subject to periodic validations, and we periodically review and refine, as appropriate, our assumptions and valuation methodologies to reflect market indications as closely as possible.  We have the appropriate personnel, technology, and policies and procedures in place to value our financial instruments in a reasonable and consistent manner and in accordance with established accounting policies.

Valuation of Financial Instruments — The following assets and liabilities, including those for which the FHLBNY has elected the fair value option, were carried at fair value on the Statement of Condition as of December 31, 2020:

 

Impact of general level of interest rates on the FHLBNY.  The level of interest rates during a reporting period impacts our profitability, due primarily to the relatively shorter-term structure of earning assets and the impact of interest rates on invested capital.  We invest in Federal funds sold and repurchase agreements that typically are overnight investments.  We also used derivatives to effectively change the repricing characteristics of a significant proportion of our advances and Consolidated obligation debt to match shorter-term LIBOR rates that repriced at intervals of three month or less.  Consequently, the current level of short-term interest rates, as represented by the overnight Federal funds target rate and the 3-month LIBOR rate, has an impact on profitability.

The level of interest rates also directly affects our earnings on invested capital.  Compared to other banking institutions, we operate at comparatively low net spreads between the yield we earn on assets and the cost of our liabilities.  Therefore, we generate a relatively higher proportion of our income from the investment of member-supplied capital at the average asset yield.  As a result, changes in asset yields tend to have a greater effect on our profitability than they do on the profitability of other banking institutions.

In summary, our average asset yields and the returns on capital invested in these assets largely reflect the short-term interest rate environment because the maturities of our assets are generally short-term in nature, have rate resets that reference short-term rates, or have been hedged with derivatives in which a short-term rate is received.  Changes in rates paid on Consolidated obligations and the spread of these rates relative to LIBOR and U.S. Treasury securities may also impact profitability.  The rate and price at which we are able to issue Consolidated obligations, and their relationship to other products such as Treasury securities and LIBOR, change frequently and are affected by a multitude of factors including: overall economic conditions; volatility of market prices, rates, and indices; the level of interest rates and shape of the Treasury curve; the level of asset swap rates and shape of the swap curve; supply from other issuers (including GSEs such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, supra/sovereigns, and other highly-rated borrowers); the rate and price of other products in the market such as mortgage-backed securities, repurchase agreements, and commercial paper; investor preferences; the total volume, timing, and characteristics of issuance by the FHLBanks; the amount and type of advance demand from our members; political events, including legislation and regulatory action; press interpretations of market conditions and issuer news; the presence of inflation or deflation; and actions by the Federal Reserve.

Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations and Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Recently issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations

For a discussion of recently issued accounting standards and interpretations, see financial statements, Note 2.  Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations.

Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates

We have identified certain accounting policies that we believe are significant because they require management to make subjective judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because of the likelihood that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or by using different assumptions.  These policies include estimating fair values of certain assets and liabilities, evaluating the impairment of our securities portfolios, estimating the allowance for credit losses on the advance and mortgage loan portfolios, and accounting for derivatives and hedging activities.  We have discussed each of these significant accounting policies, the related estimates and its judgment with the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors.  For additional discussion regarding the application of these and other accounting policies, see financial statements, Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

The accounting standards on fair value measurements and disclosures discuss how entities should measure fair value based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable.  Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability between market participants at the measurement date.  This definition is based on an exit price rather than transaction or entry price.

The FHLBNY complied with the accounting guidance on fair value measurements and disclosures and has established a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available.  Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and would be based on market data obtained from independent sources.  Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect our assumptions about the parameters market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and would be based on the best information available in the circumstances.  Our pricing models are subject to quarterly and annual validations, and we periodically review and refine, as appropriate, our assumptions and valuation methodologies to reflect market indications as closely as possible.  We have the appropriate personnel, technology, and policies and procedures in place to value our financial instruments in a reasonable and consistent manner and in accordance with established accounting policies.

Valuation of Financial Instruments — The following summarizes the valuation techniques for our significant assets and liabilities.  (For more information about fair values of other assets and liabilities, see financial statements, Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments):

·Fair values of derivative instruments — Derivative instrumentsDerivatives are valued using internal valuation techniques as no quoted market prices exist for such instruments, and we employ industry standard option adjusted valuation models that generate fair values of interest rate derivatives. We have classified derivatives as Level 2.

·Fair values of hedged assets and liabilities — Fair values of hedged advances and Consolidated obligation debt are valued using the Bank’s industry standard option adjusted models.  A significant percentage of fixed-rate advances and Consolidated obligation debt are hedged to mitigate the risk of fair value changes that are attributable solely to changes in LIBOR, which is our designated benchmark interest rate.

·

Fair values of instruments elected under the Fair Value OptionCertainWhen the FHLBNY elects the FVO, the election is made on an instrument-by-instrument basis on Consolidated obligation debt and advances, elected under the FVOwhich are recorded at their fair values.  Fair values of such instruments are valued using the Bank’s industry standard option adjusted models. We have classified instruments elected under the FVO as Level 2.

·Fair values of available-for-sale mortgage-backed securities — We request prices for all mortgage-backed securities from three specific third-party vendors. Depending on the number of prices received from the three vendors for each security, we select a median or average priceTypically, fair values are classified as defined by the methodology.  The methodologies also incorporated variance thresholds to assist in identifying median or average prices that may require our further review.  When prices fall outside of variance thresholds, we analyze for reasonableness and incorporate other relevant factors that would be considered by market participants to arrive at a fair value estimate.Level 2.

·Fair values of housing finance agency bonds — Fair values of such instruments are computed using third-party vendor prices, which are reviewed by management.

·Fair values of mortgage loans in the MPF programTrading Securities — The FHLBNY calculatesclassifies trading securities as Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy when we use quoted market prices in active markets to determine the fair value of the mortgage loan portfolio (held-for-portfolio) using internal valuation techniques.  Loans are aggregated into synthetic pass-throughtrading securities, based on product type, loan origination year, gross couponsuch as U.S. Government and loan term.  The fair values are based on TBA rates (or agency commitment rates), and adjusted primarily for seasonality.  The fair values of impaired MPF are also based on TBA rates and are adjusted for a haircut value on the underlying collateral value.

Other-Than-Temporary Impairment (“OTTI”)

GSE securities. We evaluate our investments quarterly for impairment to determine if unrealized losses are temporary.  Our evaluation is based in part on the creditworthinessclassify trading securities as Level 2 of the issuers, andfair value hierarchy when we use quoted market prices in part on the underlying collateral within the structure of the security and the cash flows expected to be collected on the security.  An OTTI has occurred if cash flow analysis determines that a credit loss exists.  To determine if a credit loss exists, management compares the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected to the amortized cost basis of the security.  If the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected is less than the security’s amortized cost, an OTTI exists, irrespective of whether management will be required to sell such a security.

For additional discussion regarding FHLBank impairment and pricing policies for mortgage-backed securities, see financial statements, Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.  For more information about credit losses due to OTTI, also see Note 7. Held-to-Maturity Securities.

Bond Insurer Analysis — Certain HTM private-label MBS owned by the FHLBNY are insured by third-party bond insurers (“monoline insurers”).  For such investments, the monoline insurers guarantee the timely payments of principal and interest if these payments cannot be satisfied from the cash flows of the underlying mortgage pool.  The FHLBNY performs cash flow credit impairment tests on all of its private-label insured securities, and the analysis of the MBS protected by such third-party insurance looks first to the performance of the underlying security, and considers its embedded credit enhancements in the form of excess spread, overcollateralization, and credit subordination,active markets to determine the collectabilityfair value of all amounts due.  If the embedded credit enhancement protectionstrading securities.


·Equity Investments — The FHLBNY has a grantor trust, which invests in money market, equity and fixed income and bond funds. Daily net asset values (NAVs) are deemed insufficient to make timely payment of all amounts due, then the FHLBNY considers the capacityreadily available and investments are redeemable at short notice. Because of the third-party bond insurer to cover any shortfalls.

Certain monoline insurers have been subject to adverse ratings, rating downgrades, and weakening financial performance measures.  In estimating the insurers’ capacity to provide credit protection in the future to cover any shortfall in cash flows expected to be collected for securities deemed to be OTTI, the FHLBNY has developed a methodology to assess the abilityhighly liquid nature of the monoline insurers to meet future insurance obligations.  Based on analysis, we have concluded that bond insurer Assured Guaranty Municipal Corp., can be relied upon for cash flow support for the life of the insured bond.  For MBIA Insurance Corp (“MBIA”),investments at their NAVs, they are categorized as Level 1 financial guarantee is at risk. However, based on financial resources and near term liquidity issues, no financial guarantees are assumed in 2018.  For Ambac Assurance Corp (“Ambac” or “Ambac Assurance”), the reliance period is 45% of the shortfall through December 31, 2023.

Provision for Credit Losses

No provision for credit losses on advances was necessary in the history of the program.  We have an established allowance for credit losses on mortgage loans acquiredinstruments under the Mortgage Partnership Finance Program (“MPF”). Our assessments represents management’s estimate of the probable credit losses inherent in these two portfolios.  Determining the amount of the provision for credit losses is considered a critical accounting estimate because management’s evaluation of the adequacy of the provision is subjective and requires significant estimates, including the amounts and timing of estimated future cash flows, estimated losses based on historical loss experience, and consideration of current economic trends, all of which are susceptible to change.  These assumptions and judgments on our provision for credit losses are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements.  Actual losses could differ from these estimates.

Advances — No provisions for credit losses were necessary.valuation hierarchy.

Provision for Credit Losses

The FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326), which became effective for the Bank as of January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance established a single allowance framework for all financial assets carried at amortized cost, including advances, loans, held-to-maturity securities, other receivables and certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. For available-for-sale securities where fair value is less than cost, credit related impairment, if any, will be recognized in an allowance for credit losses and adjusted each period for changes in expected credit risk. This framework requires that management’s estimate reflects credit losses over the full remaining expected life and considers expected future changes in macroeconomic conditions. We have established controls and validation processes over models pertaining to expected losses, including policies and control procedures.

The expected loss framework was applied to develop credit loss provisions in 2020. Incurred loss methodology was applied to develop provisions in 2019 and 2018. For an understanding of credit loss methodologies under ASU 2016-13 in 2020 and incurred loss methodologies applied in prior years, see financial statements and notes thereto: Note 8. Held-to-Maturity Securities, Note 9. Advances, and Note 10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

We adopted the guidance under ASU 2016-13 effective January 1, 2020 by recording a credit loss allowances of $3.8 million directly to beginning retained earnings, conforming with the adoption rules under the ASU 2016-13. In the four quarters of 2020, additional provisions of $3.4 million were recorded through earnings on mortgage loans, and $0.3 million on certain held-to-maturity securities. No provisions for credit losses on advances were necessary in 2020, and no provision has been necessary in the history of the advance program.

Determining the amount of the provision for credit losses is considered a critical accounting estimate because management’s evaluation of the adequacy of the provision is subjective and requires significant estimates, including the amounts and timing of estimated future cash flows, estimated losses based on historical loss experience, and consideration of current economic trends, all of which are susceptible to change. These assumptions and judgments on our provision for credit losses are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements. Actual losses could differ from these estimates.

Advances — No provisions for credit losses were necessary at December 31, 2020 and 2019. We have policies and procedures in place to manage our credit risk effectively. Outlined below are the underlying factors that we use for evaluating our exposure to credit loss.

 

·Monitoring the creditworthiness and financial condition of the institutions to which we lend funds.

·Reviewing the quality and value of collateral pledged by members.

·Estimating borrowing capacity based on collateral value and type for each member, including assessment of margin requirements based on factors such as cost to liquidate, and inherent risk exposure based on collateral type.

·Evaluating historical loss experience.

We are required by Finance Agency regulations to obtain sufficient collateral on advances to protect against losses, and to accept only certain kinds of collateral on our advances, such as U.S. government or government-agency securities, residential mortgage loans, deposits, and other real estate related assets. We have never experienced a credit loss on an advance. Based on the collateral held as security for advances, management’s credit analyses, and prior repayment history, no allowance for credit losses on advances was deemed necessary by management at December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018. During the periods in this report, we had the rights to collateral, either loans or securities, on a member-by-member basis, with an estimated liquidation value in excess of outstanding advances.


Significant changes to any of the factors described above could materially affect our provision for losses on advances. For example, our current assumptions about the financial strength of any member may change due to various circumstances, such as new information becoming available regarding the member’s financial strength or future changes in the national or regional economy. New information may require us to place a member on credit watch and require collateral to be delivered, adjust our current margin requirement, or provide for losses on advances.

For additional discussion regarding underwriting standards, including collateral held to support advances, see Tables 3.3 and 3.4 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Mortgage Loans — MPF Program. We have policies and procedures in place (pre-existing to CECL at December 31, 2019 and 2018, including policies and procedures that comply with the new CECL standards effective January 1, 2020) to manage our credit risk effectively. The pre-existing, pre-CECL standards included:

 

We are required by Finance Agency regulations to obtain sufficient collateral on advances to protect against losses, and to accept only certain kinds of collateral on our advances, such as U.S. government or government-agency securities, residential mortgage loans, deposits, and other real estate related assets.  We have never experienced a credit loss on an advance.  Based on the collateral held as security for advances, management’s credit analyses, and prior repayment history, no allowance for credit losses on advances was deemed necessary by management at December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.  At those dates, we had the rights to collateral, either loans or securities, on a member-by-member basis, with an estimated liquidation value in excess of outstanding advances.

Significant changes to any of the factors described above could materially affect our provision for losses on advances.  For example, our current assumptions about the financial strength of any member may change due to various circumstances, such as new information becoming available regarding the member’s financial strength or future changes in the national or regional economy.  New information may require us to place a member on credit watch and require collateral to be delivered, adjust our current margin requirement, or provide for losses on advances.

For additional discussion regarding underwriting standards, including collateral held to support advances, see Tables 3.3 and 3.4 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Mortgage Loans — MPF Program.  We have policies and procedures in place to manage our credit risk effectively.  These include:

·Evaluation of members to ensure that they meet the eligibility standards for participation in the MPF Program.

·Evaluation of the purchased and originated loans to ensure that they are qualifying conventional, conforming fixed-rate, first lien mortgage loans with fully amortizing loan terms of up to 30 years, secured by owner-occupied, single-family residential properties.

·Estimation of loss exposure and historical loss experience to establish an adequate level of loss reserves.

We assign a mortgage loan a non-accrual status when the collection of the contractual principal or interest is 90 days or more past due.  When a mortgage loan is placed on non-accrual status, accrued but uncollected interest is reversed against interest income.  For additional discussion regarding underwriting standards, allowances for credit losses and credit quality metrics, see financial statements, Note 9. Mortgage Loans Held-for-portfolio.  Also, see Tables 5.1 to 5.6

We assign a non-accrual status to a mortgage loan when the collection of the contractual principal or interest is 90-days or more past due.  When a mortgage loan is placed on non-accrual status, accrued but uncollected interest is reversed against interest income.  For additional discussion regarding underwriting standards, allowances for credit losses and credit quality metrics, see financial statements, Note 10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-portfolio.  Also, see Tables 5.1 to 5.3 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Derivatives and Hedging Activities

We enter into derivatives primarily to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates. Through the use of derivatives, we may adjust the effective maturity, repricing frequency, or option characteristics of financial instruments to achieve our risk management objectives. The accounting guidance related to derivatives and hedging activities is complex and contains prescriptive documentation requirements. At the inception of each hedge transaction, we formally document the hedge relationship, its risk management objective, and strategy for undertaking the hedge.

In compliance with accounting standards, primarily ASC 815, the accounting for derivatives requires us to make the following assumptions and estimates:  (i) assessing whether the hedging relationship qualifies for hedge accounting, (ii) assessing whether an embedded derivative should be bifurcated, (iii) calculating the effectiveness of the hedging relationship, (iv) evaluating exposure associated with counterparty credit risk, and (v) estimating the fair value of the derivatives.  Our assumptions and judgments include subjective estimates based on information available as of the date of the financial statements and could be materially different based on different assumptions, calculations, and estimates.

We record and report our hedging activities in accordance with ASC 815. All derivatives are recorded on the statements of condition at their fair values. Changes in the fair value of all derivatives, excluding those designated as cash flow hedges, are recorded in current period earnings, while changes in the fair value of derivatives that are designated and qualify as cash flow hedges are recorded in other comprehensive income (OCI) until earnings are affected by the variability of the cash flows of the hedged transaction. If our hedges do not qualify for hedge accounting, also known as economic hedges, then the changes in the fair value of the derivatives in the economic hedge would be recorded in earnings, without an offsetting change in the fair value of the hedged item. As a result, economic hedges have the potential to cause significant volatility on our results of operations. If hedges qualify under a qualifying ASC 815 hedge, we may use two approaches to hedge accounting: short-cut hedge accounting and long-haul hedge accounting.


A short-cut hedging relationship assumes no ineffectiveness and implies that the hedge between an interest-rate swap and an interest-bearing financial instrument is perfectly correlated. Therefore, it is assumed that changes in the fair value of the interest-rate swap and the interest-bearing financial instrument will perfectly offset one another; therefore, no ineffectiveness is recorded in earnings or OCI. To qualify for short-cut accounting treatment, a number of restrictive conditions must be met.

A long-haul hedging relationship requires us to assess, retrospectively and prospectively, on at least a quarterly basis, whether the derivative and hedged item have been and are expected to be highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows attributable to the hedged risk. We perform a prospective analysis based on a quantitative method at the inception of the hedge, and subsequently each quarter, we also perform retrospective hedge effectiveness analysis using regression to support our assertion that a hedge was and will remain effective. If the hedge fails the effectiveness test any time during its life, the hedge relationship no longer qualifies for hedge accounting and the derivative is marked to fair value through current period earnings without any offsetting changes in fair value related to the hedged item.

In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities (Topic 815). On October 25, 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-16, Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes (Topic 815). ASU 2018-16 added the OIS rate based on SOFR as a U.S. benchmark rate to facilitate the LIBOR to SOFR transition, and the amendments became effective concurrently with the FHLBNY’s adoption of ASU 2017-12 effective January 1, 2019. In addition, the amendments in this ASU also made certain targeted improvements to simplify the application of the hedge accounting guidance in current GAAP.

For more information about policies for our derivatives and hedging activities, see financial statements, Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates and Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

43

Legislative and Regulatory Developments

Finance Agency Final Rule on FHLBank Housing Goals Amendments 

On June 25, 2020, the Finance Agency published a final rule, effective August 24, 2020, amending the FHLBank housing goals regulation. Enforcement of the final rule will phase in over three years.  The final rule replaces the four existing retrospective housing goals with a single prospective mortgage purchase housing goal target in which 20% of Acquired Member Asset (AMA) mortgages purchased in a year must be comprised of loans to low-income or very low-income families, or to families in low-income areas. The final rule also establishes a separate small member participation housing goal with a target level in which 50% of the members selling AMA loans in a calendar year must be small members.  The final rule provides that an FHLBank may request Finance Agency approval of alternative target levels for either or both of the goals. The final rule also establishes that housing goals apply to each FHLBank that acquires any AMA mortgages during a year, eliminating the existing $2.5 billion volume threshold that previously triggered the application of housing goals for each FHLBank. 

The Bank is continuing to analyze the impact of the final rule and is working diligently to meet the requirements of the rule through its AMA programs.

Finance Agency Final Rule on Stress Testing

On March 24, 2020, the Finance Agency published a final rule, effective upon issuance, to amend its stress testing rule, consistent with section 401 of the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act of 2018 (EGRRCPA). The final rule (i) raises the minimum threshold for entities regulated by the Finance Agency to conduct periodic stress tests from $10 billion to $250 billion or more in total consolidated assets; (ii) removes the requirements for FHLBanks to conduct stress testing; and (iii) removes the adverse scenario from the list of required scenarios. FHLBanks are currently excluded from this regulation because no FHLBank has total consolidated assets over $250 billion, but the Finance Agency reserved its discretion to require an FHLBank with total consolidated assets below the $250 billion threshold to conduct stress testing. These amendments align the Finance Agency’s stress testing rule with rules adopted by other financial institution regulators that implement the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act) stress testing requirements, as amended by EGRRCPA.

This rule eliminates these stress testing requirements for the Bank, unless the Finance Agency exercises its discretion to require stress testing in the future. The Bank does not expect this rule to have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities

On July 1, 2020, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Reserve Board (Federal Reserve), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), the Farm Credit Administration, and the Finance Agency (collectively, Prudential Banking Regulators) jointly published a final rule, effective August 31, 2020, amending regulations that established minimum margin and capital requirements for uncleared swaps for covered swap entities under the jurisdiction of the Prudential Banking Regulators (Prudential Margin Rules). In addition to other changes, the final rule: (1) allows swaps entered into by a covered swap entity prior to an applicable compliance date to retain their legacy status and not become subject to the Prudential Margin Rules in the event that the legacy swaps are amended to replace an interbank offered rate (such as LIBOR) or other discontinued rate, or due to other technical amendments, notional reductions or portfolio compression exercises; (2) introduces a new Phase 6 compliance date for initial margin requirements for covered swap entities and their counterparties with an average daily aggregate notional amount (AANA) of uncleared swaps of at least $8 billion; and (3) clarifies that initial margin (IM) trading documentation does not need to be executed prior to the parties becoming obligated to exchange IM.

On the same date, the Prudential Banking Regulators published an interim final rule, effective September 1, 2020, extending the IM compliance date for Phase 6 counterparties to September 1, 2022. On November 9, 2020, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) published a final rule extending the IM compliance date for Phase 6 counterparties to September 1, 2022, thereby aligning with the Prudential Banking Regulators.


Further, on January 5, 2021, the CFTC published a final rule, effective February 4, 2021, that primarily amends the minimum margin and capital requirements for uncleared swaps under the jurisdiction of the CFTC (CFTC Margin Rules) by requiring covered entities to use a revised AANA calculation starting on September 1, 2022. The amendments, among other things, require entities subject to the CFTC’s jurisdiction to calculate the AANA for uncleared swaps during March, April and May of the current year, based on an average of month-end dates, as opposed to the previous requirement which required the calculation of AANA during June, July and August of the prior year, based on daily calculations. Parties would continue to be expected to exchange IM based on the AANA totals as of September 1 of the current year. These amendments align with the recommendation of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and Board of the International Organization of Securities Commissions. Separately, on January 25, 2021, the CFTC published a final rule, effective February 24, 2021, that amends the CFTC Margin Rules to permit, among other changes, covered swap entities to maintain separate minimum transfer amounts (MTA) for IM and variation margin for each swap counterparty, provided the combined MTA does not exceed $500,000.

We donot expect these rules to have a material effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

FDIC Brokered Deposits Restrictions

On January 22, 2021, the FDIC published a final rule, effective April 1, 2021, that amends its brokered deposits regulations that apply to less than well-capitalized insured depository institutions. The FDIC stated that the amendments are intended to modernize and clarify the FDIC’s brokered deposit regulations and they establish a new framework for analyzing the deposit broker definition, which determines whether deposits placed through deposit placement arrangements qualify as brokered deposits. These deposit placement arrangements include those between insured depository institutions and third parties, such as financial technology companies, for a variety of business purposes, including access to deposits. The amendments to the FDIC’s brokered deposit regulations, among other things, clarify what it means to be engaged in the business of facilitating the placement of deposits and expand the scope of the primary purpose exception. The rule amendments are expected to have the effect of narrowing the definition of deposit broker and excluding more deposits from treatment as brokered deposits. The amendments also establish an application and reporting process with respect to the primary purpose exception for businesses that do not meet one of several bright-line tests, and they affirm the FDIC’s position that the brokering of certificates of deposit constitutes deposit brokering.

This rule may have an effect on member demand for advances in certain changing interest rate environments, but we cannot predict the extent of the impact.

Finance Agency Advisory Bulletin 2020-01 Federal Home Loan Bank Risk Management of AMA

On January 31, 2020, the Finance Agency released guidance on risk management of AMA. The guidance communicates the Finance Agency’s expectations with respect to an FHLBank’s funding of its members through the purchase of eligible mortgage loans and includes expectations that an FHLBank will have board-established limits on AMA portfolios and management-established thresholds to serve as monitoring tools to manage AMA-related risk exposure. The guidance provides that the board of an FHLBank should ensure that the bank serves as a liquidity source for members, and an FHLBank should ensure that its portfolio limits do not result in the FHLBank’s acquisition of mortgages from smaller members being “crowded out” by the acquisition of mortgages from larger members. The advisory bulletin contains the expectation that the board of an FHLBank should set limits on the size and growth of portfolios and on acquisitions from a single participating financial institution. In addition, the guidance provides that the board of an FHLBank should consider concentration risk in the areas of geographic area, high-balance loans, and in third-party loan originations.

We do not expect this advisory bulletin to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.

45

LIBOR Transition

Finance Agency Supervisory Letter – Planning for LIBOR Phase-Out

On September 27, 2019, the Finance Agency issued a Supervisory Letter (LIBOR Supervisory Letter) to the FHLBanks that the Finance Agency stated is designed to ensure the FHLBanks will be able to identify and prudently manage the risks associated with the termination of LIBOR in a safe and sound manner. The LIBOR Supervisory Letter provided that the FHLBanks should, by March 31, 2020, cease entering into new LIBOR referenced financial assets, liabilities, and derivatives with maturities beyond December 31, 2021 for all product types except investments. With respect to investments, the FHLBanks were required, by December 31, 2019, to stop purchasing investments that reference LIBOR and mature after December 31, 2021. These phase-out dates did not apply to collateral accepted by the FHLBanks. The LIBOR Supervisory Letter also directed the FHLBanks to update their pledged collateral certification reporting requirements by March 31, 2020, in an effort to encourage members to distinguish LIBOR-linked collateral maturing after December 31, 2021. The FHLBanks were expected to cease entering into LIBOR-indexed financial instruments maturing after December 31, 2021, by the deadlines specified in the LIBOR Supervisory Letter, subject to limited exceptions granted by the FHFA for LIBOR-linked products serving compelling mission, risk mitigating, and/or hedging purposes that do not currently have readily available alternatives.

As a result of the market volatility experienced during 2020 due in part by the COVID-19 pandemic, the Finance Agency extended the FHLBanks’ authority to enter into LIBOR-based instruments that mature after December 31, 2021 from March 31, 2020 to June 30, 2020, except for investments and option embedded products. In addition, the Finance Agency extended the requirement to update pledged collateral certification reporting requirements from March 31, 2020, to September 30, 2020. The Bank has ceased purchasing investments that reference LIBOR and mature after December 31, 2021.

The Bank continues to evaluate the potential impact of the LIBOR Supervisory Letter and other LIBOR transition factors (including federal and international regulatory guidance, as well as financial market conditions) on its financial condition and results of operations. The Bank may experience lower overall demand or increased costs for its advances, which in turn may negatively impact the future composition of the Bank’s balance sheet, capital stock levels, primary mission assets ratio, and net income.

LIBOR Transition – ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol and Supplement to the 2006 ISDA Definitions

On October 23, 2020, the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, Inc. (ISDA), published a Supplement to the 2006 ISDA Definitions (Supplement) and the ISDA 2020 IBOR Fallbacks Protocol (Protocol). Both the Supplement and the Protocol took effect on January 25, 2021. On that date, all legacy bilateral derivative transactions subject to Protocol-covered agreements (including ISDA agreements) that incorporate certain covered ISDA definitional booklets and reference a covered Interbank Offered Rate (IBOR), including U.S. Dollar LIBOR, were effectively amended to apply the new ISDA-recommended IBOR fallbacks in the event of the relevant IBOR’s cessation. Both the Bank and our counterparty must have adhered to the Protocol in order to effectively amend legacy derivatives contracts, otherwise the parties must bilaterally amend legacy covered agreements (including ISDA agreements) to address LIBOR fallbacks. The Protocol will remain open for adherence after the effective date. As of January 25, 2021, all new derivative contracts are subject to the relevant IBOR fallbacks set forth in the Supplement.

On October 21, 2020, the Finance Agency issued a Supervisory Letter to the FHLBanks that required each FHLBank to adhere to the Protocol by December 31, 2020, and to the extent necessary, to amend any bilateral agreements regarding the adoption of the Protocol by December 15, 2020.

The Bank adhered to the Protocol on October 22, 2020, and all of its counterparties have adhered to the Protocol. The Bank also amended all outstanding bilateral over-the-counter derivative agreements referencing U.S. Dollar LIBOR with members to adopt the Protocol.


In December 2020, ICE Benchmark Administration (IBA) published its consultation on its intention to cease the publication of: (i) one-week and two-month U.S. dollar LIBOR settings immediately following the LIBOR publication on December 31, 2021; and (ii) the remaining U.S. dollar LIBOR settings (i.e., overnight and 1-, 3-, 6-, and 12-month) immediately following the LIBOR publication on June 30, 2023. The IBA consultation period ended on January 25, 2021. If adopted as proposed, the IBA consultation would extend certain U.S. dollar LIBOR transition date.

In March 2021, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) announced that LIBOR will either cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative immediately after December 31, 2021 (or, in the case of some more frequently used U.S. dollar LIBOR settings, immediately after June 30, 2023). Although the FCA does not expect LIBOR to become unrepresentative before the applicable cessation date and intends to consult on requiring the administrator of LIBOR to continue publishing LIBOR of certain currencies and tenors on a non-representative, synthetic basis for a period after the applicable cessation date, there is no assurance that LIBOR, of any particular currency or tenor, will continue to be published or be representative through any particular date.

Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Extended the Deadline to Implement Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) Rule 4210 Margin Requirements for the TBA Market

On January 11, 2021, the SEC published a notice of filing and immediate effectiveness of a proposed rule change to extend the deadline for compliance with the margining requirements imposed on “Covered Agency Transaction” (i.e., the purchase/sale of “to-be-announced” (“TBA”) agency mortgage-backed securities transactions) by the FINRA Rule 4210. The compliance date has been delayed several times, and the notice extended the current deadline of March 25, 2021, to October 26, 2021.

The FINRA Rule 4210, approved by the SEC on June 15, 2016, required FINRA members to collect from, but not post to, their customer’s maintenance margin (i.e., IM) and variation margin on transactions that are Covered Agency Transactions, subject to certain exemptions. A Covered Agency Transaction includes (certain terms are defined under FINRA rules):

·TBA transactions inclusive of ARM transactions, and Specified Pool Transactions, for which the difference between the trade date and contractual settlement date is greater than one business days; and
·Collateralized mortgage obligations issued in conformity with program of an agency or a GSE for which the difference between the trade date and contractual settlement date is greater than three business days.

Covered Agency Transactions with a counterparty in multifamily housing securities are exempt from the margin requirements provided that certain requirements are met.

Under the rule, the Bank is exempt from posting IM but would be required to post variation margin to its FINRA-member counterparty in connection with covered transactions, provided the Bank has more than $10 million in gross open positions with the counterparty. FINRA members were required to comply with the new margin requirements beginning in December 2017.

The Bank continues to evaluate the potential impact of the rule on its financial condition and results on operations, but does not expect the rule to materially affect the associated operations or availability of Covered Agency Transactions.

FHLB Membership Request for Input

On February 24, 2020, the Finance Agency issued a Request for Input on FHLB membership (the Membership RFI).  The Membership RFI, as part of a holistic review of FHLB membership, seeks public input on whether the Finance Agency’s existing regulation on FHLB membership, located at 12 CFR part 1263, remains adequate to ensure: (i) the FHLB System remains safe and sound and able to provide liquidity to members in a variety of conditions; and (ii) the advancement of the FHLBs’ housing finance and community development mission. The Finance Agency sought input on several broad questions relating to FHLB membership requirements, as well as on certain more specific questions related to the implementation of the current membership regulation. Responses were due on June 23, 2020.

While it is uncertain what actions, if any, the Finance Agency will take as a result of the responses received from the Membership RFI, any rulemaking actions to update the current FHLB membership regulation may impact FHLB membership eligibility or requirements, and ultimately our business, business opportunities, and results of operation.


COVID-19 Developments

Finance Agency Supervisory Letter – Paycheck Protection Program (PPP) Loans as Collateral for FHLBank Advances

On April 23, 2020, the Finance Agency issued a Supervisory Letter (PPP Supervisory Letter) permitting the FHLBanks to accept PPP loans as collateral for advances as “Agency Securities,” given the Small Business Administration’s (SBA) 100 percent guarantee of the unpaid principal balance. On April 20, 2020, the SBA published its third interim final rule related to PPP loans, which explicitly waived certain regulatory requirements that must be satisfied before a member could pledge PPP loans to the FHLBanks as collateral. The PPP Supervisory Letter establishes a series of conditions under which the FHLBanks may accept PPP loans as collateral, which conditions focus on the financial condition of members, collateral discounts, and pledge dollar limits.

On December 27, 2020, the President signed into law an extension of the PPP until March 31, 2021. The April 23, 2020 Supervisory Letter from the Finance Agency allowing FHLBanks to accept PPP loans as collateral remains in effect. The Bank has been accepting such loans as collateral.

Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act

The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) was signed into law on March 27, 2020. The $2.2 trillion package was the largest stimulus bill in U.S. history. The CARES Act is in addition to previous relief legislation passed by Congress in March 2020. The legislation provides the following:

Assistance to businesses, states, and municipalities.

Creates a loan program for small businesses, non-profits and physician practices that can be forgiven through employee retention incentives.

Provides the Treasury Secretary authority to make loans or loan guarantees to states, municipalities, and eligible businesses and loosens some regulations imposed through the Dodd-Frank Act.

Direct payments to eligible taxpayers and their families.

Expands eligibility for unemployment insurance and payment amounts.

Includes mortgage forbearance provisions and eviction and foreclosure moratoriums. In this regard, the Bank notes that a number of states, including New York and New Jersey, have also taken actions regarding forbearances and eviction and foreclosure moratoriums.  The Bank, through its Mortgage Partnership Finance (MPF) servicers, has been applying these provisions.

Funding for the PPP, which was created by the CARES Act, was increased with the enactment of subsequent laws, most recently by the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which was signed into law by President Biden on March 11, 2021 and which, among other items, appropriates another $7.25 billion for the PPP. Although not material to our operations, it is possible that the Bank may receive more PPP loans as collateral with the passage of this legislationWhile some provisions of the CARES Act have expired, others have been extended by regulatory and legislative action. Additional phases of the CARES Act or other COVID-19 pandemic relief legislation may be enacted by Congress. The Bank continues to evaluate the potential impact of such legislation on its business, including its continued impact to the U.S. economy; impacts to mortgages held or serviced by the Bank’s members and that the Bank accepts as collateral; and the impacts on the Bank’s MPF program.

Additional COVD-19 Presidential, Legislative and Regulatory Developments

In light of the COVID-19 pandemic, President Biden (and before him, President Trump), through executive orders, governmental agencies, including the SEC, OCC, Federal Reserve, FDIC, National Credit Union Administration, CFTC and the Finance Agency, as well as state governments and agencies, have taken, and may continue to take, actions to provide various forms of relief from, and guidance regarding, the financial, operational, credit, market, and other effects of the pandemic, some of which may have a direct or indirect impact on the Bank or our members. Many of these actions are temporary in nature. The Bank continues to monitor these actions and guidance as they evolve and to evaluate their potential impact on the Bank.


Financial Condition

Table2.1          Statements of Condition — Period-Over-Period Comparison

        Net change in  Net change in 
(Dollars in thousands) December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019  dollar amount  percentage 
Assets                
Cash and due from banks $1,896,155  $603,241  $1,292,914   214.33%
Interest-bearing deposits  685,000   -   685,000   NM   
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  4,650,000   14,985,000   (10,335,000)  (68.97)
Federal funds sold  6,280,000   8,640,000   (2,360,000)  (27.31)
Trading securities  11,742,965   15,318,809   (3,575,844)  (23.34)
Equity Investments  80,369   60,047   20,322   33.84 
Available-for-sale securities  3,435,945   2,653,418   782,527   29.49 
Held-to-maturity securities  12,873,646   15,234,482   (2,360,836)  (15.50)
Advances  92,067,104   100,695,241   (8,628,137)  (8.57)
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio  2,899,712   3,173,352   (273,640)  (8.62)
Loans to other FHLBanks  -   -   -   NM   
Accrued interest receivable  189,454   312,559   (123,105)  (39.39)
Premises, software, and equipment  77,628   63,426   14,202   22.39 
Operating lease right-of-use assets  70,733   75,464   (4,731)  (6.27)
Derivative assets  36,669   237,947   (201,278)  (84.59)
Other assets  11,003   9,036   1,967   21.77 
                 
Total assets $136,996,383  $162,062,022  $(25,065,639)  (15.47)%
                 
Liabilities                
Deposits                
Interest-bearing demand $1,677,526  $1,144,519  $533,007   46.57%
Non-interest-bearing demand  70,437   34,890   35,547   101.88 
Term  5,000   15,000   (10,000)  (66.67)
                 
Total deposits  1,752,963   1,194,409   558,554   46.76 
                 
Consolidated obligations                
Bonds  69,716,298   78,763,309   (9,047,011)  (11.49)
Discount notes  57,658,838   73,959,205   (16,300,367)  (22.04)
Total consolidated obligations  127,375,136   152,722,514   (25,347,378)  (16.60)
                 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  2,991   5,129   (2,138)  (41.68)
                 
Accrued interest payable  117,982   156,889   (38,907)  (24.80)
Affordable Housing Program  148,827   153,894   (5,067)  (3.29)
Derivative liabilities  70,760   32,411   38,349   118.32 
Other liabilities  186,550   175,516   11,034   6.29 
Operating lease liabilities  84,475   89,365   (4,890)  (5.47)
Total liabilities  129,739,684   154,530,127   (24,790,443)  (16.04)
Capital  7,256,699   7,531,895   (275,196)  (3.65)
Total liabilities and capital $136,996,383  $162,062,022  $(25,065,639)  (15.47)%

NM — Not meaningful.

Balance Sheet overview December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019

Total assets declined to $137.0 billion at December 31, 2020 from $162.1 billion at December 31, 2019, a decrease of $25.1 billion, or 15.5%.

Cash at banks was $1.9 billion at December 31, 2020, compared to $603.2 million at December 31, 2019.

Money market investments at December 31, 2020 were $6.3 billion in federal funds sold and $4.7 billion in overnight resale agreements. At December 31, 2019, money market investments were $8.6 billion in federal funds sold and $15.0 billion in overnight resale agreements. Federal funds sold averaged $8.8 billion and $9.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. Resale agreements averaged $4.1 billion and $9.9 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. Money market investments also included interest-bearing deposits at highly rated financial institutions. Balances were $685.0 million and $0 at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.


Advances — Par balances decreased at December 31, 2020 to $90.7 billion, compared to $100.4 billion at December 31, 2019. Short-term fixed-rate advances decreased by 47.2% to $12.9 billion at December 31, 2020, down from $24.4 billion at December 31, 2019. ARC advances, which are adjustable-rate borrowings, increased by 4.2% to $17.1 billion at December 31, 2020, compared to $16.4 billion at December 31, 2019.

Long-term investment debt securities — Long-term investment debt securities are designated as available-for-sale (AFS) or held-to-maturity (HTM). The heavy concentration of GSE and Agency issued (GSE-issued) securities, and a declining balance of private-label MBS, less than 1%, is our investment profile.

In the AFS portfolio, long-term investments of floating-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $281.3 million and $344.0 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Fixed-rate long-term investments in the AFS portfolio, comprising of fixed-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities, were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $3.2 billion and $2.3 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. We acquired $657.0 million of fixed-rate GSE-issued MBS in 2020. As permitted under the new hedging guidance, effective January 1, 2019 we made a one-time transfer of $1.6 billion of fixed-rate MBS from HTM to AFS. The transfer enhanced balance sheet management.

In the HTM portfolio, long-term investments were predominantly GSE-issued fixed- and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities and a small portfolio of housing finance agency bonds. Securities in the HTM portfolio are recorded at amortized cost, adjusted for credit and non-credit losses from the application of pre-ASU 2016-13 credit loss standards (formerly referred to as OTTI), and, beginning January 1, 2020, adjusted for allowances for credit losses under the new framework. Fixed- and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities in the HTM portfolio were $11.8 billion and $14.1 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Investments in PLMBS were less than 1% of the HTM portfolio. We acquired $297.9 million of fixed-rate GSE-issued MBS in 2020.

Housing finance agency bonds, primarily New York and New Jersey, were carried at an amortized cost basis of $1.1 billion at December 31, 2020 and at December 31, 2019. There were no new acquisitions in the 2020 and 2019 quarterly periods.

Trading securities (liquidity portfolio) — The objective of the trading portfolio is to meet short-term contingency liquidity needs. During the current year period, we continued to invest in highly liquid U.S. Treasury securities. Trading investments are carried at fair value, with changes recorded through earnings. At December 31, 2020, trading investments were $11.7 billion in U.S. Treasury securities and $2.2 million in Ambac corporate notes. We acquired $3.8 billion of U.S. Treasury securities in 2020. During the same period in 2020, proceeds from sales were $4.3 billion at a net gain of $38.3 million. In the 2019 period, we acquired $13.3 billion of U.S. Treasury securities; proceeds from sales were $1.2 billion at a gain of $1.9 million. At December 31, 2019, trading investments were $15.3 billion in U.S. Treasury securities and $3.2 million in Ambac corporate notes.

We will periodically evaluate our liquidity needs and may add to or dispose these liquidity investments as deemed prudent based on liquidity and market conditions. The Finance Agency prohibits speculative trading practices but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio.

Equity Investments — We own a grantor trust that invests in highly-liquid registered mutual funds. Funds are classified as Equity Investments and were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $80.4 million and $60.0 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio — Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (MPF or MPF Program). Unpaid principal balance of MPF loans stood at $2.9 billion at December 31, 2020, a decrease of $265.8 million from the balance at December 31, 2019. Loans are primarily fixed-rate, single-family mortgages acquired through the MPF Program. Paydowns in the twelve months of 2020 were $785.1 million, compared to $313.8 million in the prior year same period. Acquisitions in the twelve months of 2020 were $530.0 million, compared to $566.4 million in the prior year same period. Historically, credit performance has been strong and delinquency low. Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive acquisitions. Residential collateral values have remained stable in the New York and New Jersey sectors, the primary geographic concentration for our MPF portfolio, and historical loss experience remains very low. Serious delinquencies at December 31, 2020 were not materially different from prior periods, although we are seeing a rise in delinquencies. Rising delinquencies have resulted in increased credit losses under the CECL methodology. Allowance for credit losses increased to $7.1 million at December 31, 2020, compared to $0.7 million at December 31, 2019.


Capital ratios — Our capital position remains strong. At December 31, 2020, actual risk-based capital was $7.3 billion, compared to required risk-based capital of $1.1 billion. To support $137.0 billion of total assets at December 31, 2020, the minimum required total capital was $5.5 billion or 4.0% of assets. Our actual regulatory risk-based capital was $7.3 billion, exceeding required total capital by $1.8 billion. These ratios have remained consistently above the required regulatory ratios through all periods in this report. For more information, see financial statements, Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

Leverage — At December 31, 2020 balance sheet leverage (based on U.S. GAAP) was 18.9 times shareholders’ equity. Balance sheet leverage has generally remained steady over the last several years, although from time to time we have maintained excess liquidity in highly liquid investments, or cash balances at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (FRBNY) to meet unexpected member demand for funds. Increases or decreases in investments have a direct impact on leverage, but generally growth in or shrinkage of advances does not significantly impact balance sheet leverage under existing capital stock management practices. Members are required to purchase activity-based capital stock to support their borrowings from us, and when activity-based capital stock is in excess of the amount that is required to support advance borrowings, we redeem the excess capital stock immediately. Therefore, stockholders’ capital increases and decreases with members’ advance borrowings, and the capital to asset ratio remains relatively unchanged.

Liquidity — Our liquidity position remains strong, and in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and we do not foresee any changes to that position. In addition to the liquidity trading portfolio discussed previously, liquid assets at December 31, 2020 included $1.9 billion as demand cash balances at the FRBNY, $10.9 billion in short-term and overnight investments in the federal funds and the repo markets, and $3.4 billion of high credit quality GSE-issued available-for-sale securities that are investment quality and readily marketable.

The Finance Agency’s Liquidity Advisory Bulletin 2018-07 has specific initial liquidity levels to be maintained within certain ranges defined in an accompanying supervisory letter. We also have other regulatory liquidity measures in place, deposit liquidity and operational liquidity, and other liquidity buffers. We remain in compliance with the Advisory Bulletin and all liquidity regulations.

For more information about the Advisory Bulletin and our liquidity measures, see section Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt, and Tables 9.1 through Table 9.3 in this MD&A.

Replacement of London Interbank Offered Rates (LIBOR) — Central banks and regulators in a number of major jurisdictions have convened working groups to find and to implement the transition to suitable replacements for LIBOR. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee (ARRC) in the U.S. has settled on the establishment of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) as its recommended alternative to U.S. dollar LIBOR. As noted throughout this report, much of the FHLBNY’s assets, liabilities and derivatives are indexed to LIBOR.

On March 5, 2021 the ICE Benchmark Administration’s announcement to extend the cessation date for certain critical U.S. dollar LIBOR indexes have provided us with additional time to plan the transition and we have updated our plans. The IBA had previously released a consultation on its intent to cease the publication of U.S. dollar settings following their publication on December 31, 2021.

·LIBOR rates are derived from an average of submissions by panel banks. The underlying market that LIBOR seeks to reflect has become increasingly less active. Therefore, given the decrease in transactions, the Financial Stability Board (FSB) has observed that submissions used to determine LIBOR are increasingly based upon expert judgment. The United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which oversees LIBOR, has announced that the FCA would no longer persuade or compel member panel banks to make LIBOR quote submissions for 1-week and 2-months U.S. dollar setting will permanently cease after 2021.

·For publication of the overnight and 12-month U.S. dollar LIBOR settings will permanently cease after June 30, 2023. The 1-month, 3-month and 6-month U.S. dollar LIBOR settings will cease to be provided or, subject to the FCA’s consideration, may be provided on a synthetic basis and will no longer be representative of the underlying market and economic reality they are intended to measure and that representativeness will not be restored.


In March 2020, the FASB had issued Accounting Standards Update 2020-04, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848), Facilitation of the Effects of Reference Rate Reform on Financial Reporting. ASU 2020-04 provided temporary optional expedients and exceptions to the U.S. GAAP guidance on contract modifications and hedge accounting in light of the expected market transition from LIBOR and other reference interest rates to alternatives, such as SOFR. The relief in the amendments are effective as of March 12, 2020 through December 31, 2022.

In January 2021, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update 2021-01, Reference Rate Reform (Topic 848), which refines the scope of AC 848 and clarifies some of its guidance. The amendments in this ASU 2021-01 are elective and apply to all entities that have derivative instruments that use an interest rate for margining, discounting, or contract price alignment that is modified as a result of reference rate reform. The amendments in ASU 2021-01 are effective immediately for all entities.

Entities should use either of the following approaches to apply the amendments to modifications to the terms of the derivatives affected by the discounting transition:

·Retrospective as of any date from the beginning of an interim period that includes March 12, 2020.
·Prospective from any date within an interim period that includes or is after January 7, 2021, up to the date that the financial statements are available to be issued.

Entities should apply the amendments to either of the following types of eligible hedging relationships affected by the discounting transition:

·Those existing as of the beginning of the interim period that includes March 12, 2020.
·Those entered into after the beginning of the interim period that includes March 12, 2020.

We are actively reviewing optional expedients and elections under the relief available under the ASU to facilitate the accounting and operational aspects of changing LIBOR-indexed contracts to SOFR.

We are actively reviewing LIBOR-indexed contracts to plan an orderly transition to SOFR. Adoption of the guidance under the two ASU 2020’s will minimize the operational impact of modifying LIBOR-Indexed contracts absent provisions offered under ASU 2020-04.

·Under the guidance, we could choose not to apply certain modification accounting requirements in U.S. GAAP to contracts affected by what the proposal calls reference rate reform if certain criteria are met. If we made this election, we would present and account for a modified contract as a continuation of the existing contract.
·The guidance provides optional expedients that would enable us to continue to apply hedge accounting for hedging relationships in which the critical terms change due to reference rate reform if certain criteria are met.

We are also assessing the benefits to our LIBOR transitioning efforts if we adopted the one-time election under the ASU to re-classify/sell LIBOR-indexed securities in our held-to-maturity portfolio. If the one-time expedient is elected, it is possible that its impact could be material.

The following data provides an overview of LIBOR-indexed instruments outstanding at December 31, 2020 with maturities beyond June 30, 2023, which is the relevant LIBOR cessation date for the FHLBNY (in thousands):

  Outstanding at 
Maturing after June 30, 2023 December 31, 2020 
LIBOR indexed Derivatives (notionals) $13,228,852 
     
LIBOR indexed Variable-rate mortgage-backed securities (UPB) $3,833,756 
     
LIBOR indexed Variable-rate housing finance agency bonds (UPB) $900,440 
     
LIBOR indexed Variable-rate Other securities (UPB) $- 
     
Variable-rate Advances $1,165,000 
     
LIBOR indexed Variable-rate CO bonds (UPB) $- 


Advances

Our primary business is making collateralized loans to members, referred to as advances. Generally, the growth or decline in advances is reflective of demand by members for both short-term liquidity and term funding. This demand is driven by economic factors such as availability of alternative funding sources that are more attractive, or by the interest rate environment and the outlook for the economy. Members may choose to prepay advances (which may generate prepayment penalty fees) based on their expectations of interest rate changes and demand for liquidity.

Advance volume is also influenced by merger activity, where members are either acquired by non-members or acquired by members of another FHLBank. When our members are acquired by members of another FHLBank or by non-members, these former members no longer qualify for membership and we may not offer renewals or additional advances to the former members. If maturing advances are not replaced, it may have an impact on business volume.

Interest rate hedging and basis adjustments — A significant percentage of fixed-rate, longer-term advances and all putable advances were designated under an ASC 815 fair value accounting hedge. Also, certain advances were hedged by interest rate swaps in economic hedges. From time to time, we have also elected the fair value option (FVO) on an instrument by instrument basis for advances.

Carrying value of advances outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 were $92.1 billion and $100.7 billion. Carrying values included cumulative hedging basis adjustment gains of $1.3 billion and $299.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. For more information about basis adjustments, see Table 3.6 Advances by Maturity and Yield Type in this MD&A.

 

Accounting for Derivatives

We record and report our hedging activities in accordance with accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.  In compliance with the standards, the accounting for derivatives requires us to make the following assumptions and estimates:  (i) assessing whether the hedging relationship qualifies for hedge accounting, (ii) assessing whether an embedded derivative should be bifurcated, (iii) calculating the effectiveness of the hedging relationship, (iv) evaluating exposure associated with counterparty credit risk, and (v) estimating the fair value of the derivatives.  Our assumptions and judgments include subjective estimates based on information available as of the date of the financial statements and could be materially different based on different assumptions, calculations, and estimates. We specifically identify the hedged asset or liability and the associated hedging strategy.  Prior to execution of each transaction, we document the following items:

·                  Hedging strategy

·                  Identification of the item being hedged

·                  Determination of the accounting designation

·                  Determination of method used to assess the effectiveness of the hedge relationship

·                  Assessment that the hedge is expected to be effective in the future if designated as a qualifying hedge under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.

All derivatives are recorded on the Statements of Condition at their fair value and designated as either fair value or cash flow hedges for qualifying hedges or as non-qualifying hedges (economic hedges, or customer intermediations) under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.  In an economic hedge, we execute derivative contracts, which are economically effective in reducing risk, either because a qualifying hedge is not available or because the cost of a qualifying hedge is not economical.  Changes in the fair values of a derivative that qualifies as a fair value hedge are recorded in current period earnings or in AOCI if the derivative qualifies as a cash flow hedge.

For more information, see financial statements, Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates, and Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Legislative and Regulatory Developments

Finance Agency Final Rule on Minority and Women Inclusion.On July 25, 2017, the Finance Agency published a final rule, effective August 24, 2017, amending its Minority and Women Inclusion regulations to clarify the scope of the FHLBanks’ obligation to promote diversity and ensure inclusion. The final rule updates the existing Finance Agency regulations aimed at promoting diversity and the inclusion and participation of minorities, women, and individuals with disabilities, and the businesses they own (“MWDOB”) in all FHLBank business and activities, including management, employment, customer outreach and access, MWDOB participation in financial transactions with the FHLBank, and contracting. The final rule encourages the FHLBanks to expand contracting opportunities for MWDOBs and minorities, women, and individuals with disabilities through subcontracting arrangements and to track the cumulative spend associated with such diverse subcontracting arrangements. In addition, the final rule requires each FHLBank to:

·                                          develop stand-alone, board-approved diversity and inclusion strategic plans or incorporate diversity and inclusion principles into its existing strategic planning processes and adopt strategies for promoting diversity and ensuring inclusion;

·                                          amend its policies on equal opportunity in employment by adding sexual orientation, gender identity, and status as a parent to the list of protected classifications;

·                                          establish a process to grant or deny requests for accommodations to employees and job applicants based on their religious beliefs or practices;

·                                          provide information in its annual reports to the Finance Agency about its efforts to advance diversity and inclusion through identifying and selecting MWDOB firms for participation in financial transactions with the FHLBank, identifying ways in which it may give consideration to MWDOB business with the FHLBank when reviewing and evaluating vendor contract proposals, and enhancing customer access by MWDOB businesses (including through the FHLBank’s affordable housing and community investment programs;

·                                          report data regarding the number of diverse individuals currently in supervisory or managerial positions and its strategies for promoting the diversity of supervisors and managers;

·Table ��                              3.1classify and provide additional data in its annual reports about the number of, and amounts paid under, its MWDOB contracts, as well as demographic data regarding the categories of MWDOB entities to which it awards vendor contracts; and

·                                          provide data to the Finance Agency regarding the type of contracts it considers exempt from these diversity and inclusion requirements.

We do not expect this final rule to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations, but we anticipate that it may result in increased costs and substantially increase the amount of required data tracking, monitoring, and reporting.

Finance Agency Proposed Rule on Capital Requirements. On July 3, 2017, the Finance Agency published a proposed rule to adopt, with amendments, the Finance Board regulations pertaining to the capital requirements for the FHLBanks. The proposed rule would carry over most of the existing regulations without material change, but would substantively revise the credit risk component of the risk-based capital requirement, as well as the limitations on extensions of unsecured credit and derivative exposure. The main revisions would remove requirements that the FHLBanks calculate credit risk capital charges and unsecured credit limits based on ratings issued by an NRSRO, and instead require that the FHLBanks establish and use their own internal rating methodology. With respect to derivatives, the proposed rule would impose a new capital charge for cleared derivatives, which under the existing rule do not carry a capital charge, and would change the way that the capital charge and risk limits are calculated for uncleared derivatives, in both cases to align with the Dodd-Frank Act’s clearing mandate and derivatives reforms. The proposed rule also would revise the percentages used in the regulation’s tables to calculate credit risk capital charges for advances and for non-mortgage assets. The Finance Agency proposes to retain for now the percentages used in the tables to calculate capital charges for mortgage-related assets, and to address at a later date the methodology for residential mortgage assets. While a March 2009 regulatory directive pertaining to certain liquidity matters would remain in place, the Finance Agency also proposes to rescind certain minimum regulatory liquidity requirements and address these liquidity requirements in a new regulatory directive.

We submitted a joint comment letter with the other FHLBanks on August 31, 2017. We continue to evaluate the proposed rule, but do not expect this rule, if adopted substantially as proposed, to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Information Security Management Advisory Bulletin. On September 28, 2017, the Finance Agency issued Advisory Bulletin 2017-02, which supersedes previous guidance on an FHLBank’s information security program. The advisory bulletin describes three main components of an information security program and reflects the expectation that each FHLBank will use a risk-based approach to implement its information security program. The advisory bulletin contains expectations related to (i) governance, including guidance related to roles and responsibilities, risk assessments, industry standards, and cyber-insurance; (ii) engineering and architecture, including guidance on network security, software security, and security of endpoints; and (iii) operations, including guidance on continuous monitoring, vulnerability management, baseline configuration, asset life cycle, awareness and training, incident response and recovery, user access management, data classification and protection, oversight of third parties, and threat intelligence sharing.

We do not expect this advisory bulletin to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations, but we anticipate that it may result in increased costs relating to enhancements to our information security program.

FRB, FDIC and OCC Final Rules on Mandatory Contractual Stay Requirements for Qualified Financial Contracts (“QFCs”).On September 12, 2017, the FRB published a final rule, effective November 13, 2017, requiring certain global systemically important banking institutions (“GSIB”) regulated by the FRB to amend their covered QFCs to limit a counterparty’s immediate termination or exercise of default rights under the QFCs in the event of bankruptcy or receivership of the GSIB or an affiliate of the GSIB. Covered QFCs include derivatives, repurchase agreements (known as “repos”) and reverse repos, and securities lending and borrowing agreements. On September 27, 2017, and on November 29, 2017, the FDIC and OCC respectively adopted final rules that are both substantively identical to the FRB rule, both effective January 1, 2018, with respect to QFCs entered into with certain FDIC- and OCC-supervised institutions.

Although we are not a covered entity under these rules, as a counterparty to covered entities under QFCs, we may be required to amend QFCs entered into with FRB-regulated GSIBs or applicable FDIC- and OCC-supervised institutions.  These rules may impact our ability to terminate business relationships with covered entities and could adversely impact the amount we recover in the event of the bankruptcy or receivership of a covered entity. However, we do not expect these final rules to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Puerto Rico Developments. In January 2018, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico enacted legislation authorizing Federal Home Loan Bank letters of credit to collateralize municipal deposits. While this will likely not be financially material to our operations, we expect our Puerto Rico members to use our letters of credit for this purpose.

OCC, FRB, FDIC, Farm Credit Administration, and Finance Agency Proposed Rule on Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities.  On February 21, 2018, OCC, FRB, FDIC, Farm Credit Administration, and FHFA published a joint proposed amendment to each agency’s final rule on Margin and Capital Requirements for Covered Swap Entities (“Swap Margin Rules”) to conform the definition of “eligible master netting agreement” in such rules to the FRB’s, OCC’s, and FDIC’s final QFC rules, and to clarify that a legacy swap will not be deemed to be a covered swap under the Swap Margin Rules if it is amended to conform to the QFC Rules.

Comments on the proposed rule are due by April 23, 2018.  We continue to evaluate the proposed rule, but we do not expect this rule, if adopted substantially as proposed, to materially affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Affordable Housing Program Amendments.  On March 14, 2018, the FHFA published a proposed rule to amend the operating requirements of the Federal Home Loan Banks’ Affordable Housing Program (“AHP”).  The proposal is out for public comment through May 14, 2018.  The proposed AHP rule will, if adopted as proposed, among many other updates:

·                  permit a FHLBank to voluntarily increase its AHP homeownership set-aside funding program to 40% of annual available funds (up from the current rule’s 35% annual limit);

·                  increase the per household set-aside grant amount to $22,000 with an annual house price inflation adjustment (up from the current fixed limit of $15,000);

·                  remove the monitoring requirements of using mortgage retention agreements for owner-occupied homes;

·                  further align AHP monitoring with the federal low-income tax programs; and

·                  authorize a FHLBank using market research empirical data to create special targeted grant programs which would be a sub-set of the regular AHP competitive funding program.

The Bank, the FHLBank System and the housing industry are just starting to study this rulemaking.  We do not believe it, once finalized, will be material to our financial condition or results of operation, since, among other things, it does not increase the annual AHP funding assessment.  However, we do expect there will be increased costs in AHP monitoring as we upgrade our systems to implement the amended rule.

Financial Condition

Table 2.1:Statements of Condition — Period-Over-Period Comparison

(Dollars in thousands)

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Net change in
dollar amount

 

Net change in
percentage

 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and due from banks

 

$

127,403

 

$

151,769

 

$

(24,366

)

(16.05

)%

Securities purchased under agreements to resell

 

2,700,000

 

7,150,000

 

(4,450,000

)

(62.24

)

Federal funds sold

 

10,326,000

 

6,683,000

 

3,643,000

 

54.51

 

Trading securities

 

1,641,568

 

131,151

 

1,510,417

 

NM

 

Available-for-sale securities

 

577,269

 

697,812

 

(120,543

)

(17.27

)

Held-to-maturity securities

 

17,824,533

 

16,022,293

 

1,802,240

 

11.25

 

Advances

 

122,447,805

 

109,256,625

 

13,191,180

 

12.07

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

2,896,976

 

2,746,559

 

150,417

 

5.48

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

 

255,000

 

(255,000

)

NM

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

226,981

 

163,379

 

63,602

 

38.93

 

Premises, software, and equipment

 

29,697

 

12,621

 

17,076

 

NM

 

Derivative assets

 

112,742

 

328,875

 

(216,133

)

(65.72

)

Other assets

 

7,398

 

7,198

 

200

 

2.78

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total assets

 

$

158,918,372

 

$

143,606,282

 

$

15,312,090

 

10.66

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing demand

 

$

1,142,056

 

$

1,183,468

 

$

(41,412

)

(3.50

)%

Non-interest-bearing demand

 

17,999

 

22,281

 

(4,282

)

(19.22

)

Term

 

36,000

 

35,000

 

1,000

 

2.86

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total deposits

 

1,196,055

 

1,240,749

 

(44,694

)

(3.60

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

99,288,048

 

84,784,664

 

14,503,384

 

17.11

 

Discount notes

 

49,613,671

 

49,357,894

 

255,777

 

0.52

 

Total consolidated obligations

 

148,901,719

 

134,142,558

 

14,759,161

 

11.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

19,945

 

31,435

 

(11,490

)

(36.55

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued interest payable

 

162,176

 

130,178

 

31,998

 

24.58

 

Affordable Housing Program

 

131,654

 

125,062

 

6,592

 

5.27

 

Derivative liabilities

 

61,607

 

144,985

 

(83,378

)

(57.51

)

Other liabilities

 

204,178

 

167,234

 

36,944

 

22.09

 

Total liabilities

 

150,677,334

 

135,982,201

 

14,695,133

 

10.81

 

Capital

 

8,241,038

 

7,624,081

 

616,957

 

8.09

 

Total liabilities and capital

 

$

158,918,372

 

$

143,606,282

 

$

15,312,090

 

10.66

%

NM — Not meaningful.

Balance Sheet overview December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016

Total assets increased to $158.9 billion at December 31, 2017 from $143.6 billion at December 31, 2016, an increase of $15.3 billion, or 10.7%.

Cash at banks was $127.4 million at December 31, 2017, compared to $151.8 million at December 31, 2016.  The cash balance at December 31, 2017, included $41.1 million at Citibank that was maintained as a compensating balance in lieu of fees for certain outsourced processes, and the remaining liquidity was at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Money Market investments at December 31, 2017 were $10.3 billion in federal funds sold and $2.7 billion in overnight resale agreements.  At December 31, 2016, money market investments were $6.7 billion in federal funds sold and $7.2 billion in overnight resale agreements.  Market yields for overnight and term money market investments have improved, creating opportunities for earning a positive margin, and at the same time fulfilling our liquidity targets.

Advances — Par balances increased at December 31, 2017 to $122.7 billion, compared to $109.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  Short-term fixed-rate advances grew by 119.9% to $23.8 billion at December 31, 2017, up from $10.8 billion at December 31, 2016.  ARC advances, which are adjustable-rate borrowings, decreased by 13.2% to $37.1 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $42.7 billion at December 31, 2016.

Long-term investment securities — Long-term investment securities are designated as available-for-sale (“AFS”) or held-to-maturity (“HTM”).  The heavy concentration of GSE and Agency issued (“GSE-issued”) securities, and a declining balance of private-label MBS, less than 2.0%, is our investment profile.

In the AFS portfolio, long-term investments at December 31, 2017 were floating-rate GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $528.6 million, compared to $656.1 million at December 31, 2016.  We own grantor trusts that invest in highly-liquid registered mutual funds designated as AFS; funds were carried on the balance sheet at fair values of $48.6 million at December 31, 2017 and $41.7 million at December 31, 2016.  In the HTM portfolio, long-term investments at December 31, 2017 were predominantly GSE-issued fixed- and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities and housing finance agency bonds.  GSE securities were recorded at

amortized cost.  Private-label issued mortgage-backed securities (“PLMBS”) were carried at amortized cost, adjusted for credit and non-credit OTTI.  Investments in mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), including PLMBS, were $16.7 billion at December 31, 2017 and $15.0 billion at December 31, 2016.  Investments in PLMBS were less than 2.0% of the HTM portfolio of MBS.  Housing finance agency bonds, primarily New York and New Jersey, were carried at an amortized cost basis of $1.1 billion at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Trading securities (Securities liquidity portfolio) — In December 2016, management approved a trading portfolio to meet short-term contingency liquidity needs.  We invest in highly liquid U.S. Treasury Bills, U.S. Treasury Notes and GSE issued securities.  Trading investments are carried at fair value, with changes recorded through earnings.  At December 31, 2017, trading investments were $239.1 million in U.S. Treasury bills, $1.0 billion in U.S. Treasury Notes and $356.9 million in GSE securities.  At December 31, 2016, trading investments were $100.2 million in U.S. Treasury notes and $31.0 million in GSE securities.  We will periodically evaluate our liquidity needs and may dispose these liquidity investments as deemed prudent based on liquidity and market conditions.  The Finance Agency prohibits speculative trading practices but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio.

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio — Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (“MPF” or “MPF Program”).  Unpaid principal balances of loans under this program stood at $2.9 billion at December 31, 2017, a net increase of $149.5 million from the balance at December 31, 2016.  Loans are primarily fixed-rate, single-family mortgages acquired through the MPF Program.  Pay downs in the twelve months of 2017 were $268.4 million, compared to $330.7 million in the prior year same period.  Acquisitions in the twelve months of 2017 were $425.1 million, compared to $564.1 million in the prior year same period.  Credit performance has been strong and delinquency low.  Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive acquisitions.  Residential collateral values have remained stable in the New York and New Jersey sectors, the primary geographic concentration for our MPF portfolio, and historical loss experience remains very low.

Stress test results — Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FHFA, regulator of the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks), has adopted supervisory stress tests for the FHLBanks.  The FHFA requires the annual stress testing for the FHLBanks based on the FHFA’s scenarios, summary instructions and guidance.  The tests are designed to determine whether the FHLBanks have the capital to absorb losses as a result of adverse economic conditions.  The FHFA rules require that the FHLBanks take the results of the annual stress test into account in making any changes, as appropriate, to its capital structure (including the level and composition of capital); its exposure, concentration, and risk positions; any plans for recovery and resolution; and to improve overall risk management.  Consultation with FHFA supervisory staff is expected in making such improvements.  In accordance with these rules, the FHLBNY executed its third annual stress test, and publicly disclosed the stress test results on November 16, 2017 on our website (www.fhlbny.com).

The stress test results in all scenarios, including the scenario run under the FHFA’s severely adverse economic scenario, demonstrated capital adequacy.

Capital ratios — Our capital position remains strong.  At December 31, 2017, actual risk-based capital was $8.3 billion, compared to required risk-based capital of $912.6 million.  To support $158.9 billion of total assets at December 31, 2017, the minimum required total capital was $6.4 billion or 4.0% of assets.  Our actual regulatory risk-based capital was $8.3 billion, exceeding required total capital by $1.9 billion.  These ratios have remained consistently above the required regulatory ratios through all periods in this report.  For more information, see financial statements, Note 13.  Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

Leverage — At December 31, 2017, balance sheet leverage (based on U.S. GAAP) was 19.3 times shareholders’ equity, compared to 18.8 times at December 31, 2016.  Balance sheet leverage has generally remained steady over the last several years, although from time to time we have maintained excess liquidity in highly liquid investments, or cash balances at the FRBNY to meet unexpected member demand for funds.  Increases or decreases in investments have a direct impact on leverage, but generally growth in or shrinkage of advances does not significantly impact balance sheet leverage under existing capital stock management practices.  Members are required to purchase activity-based capital stock to support their borrowings from us, and when activity-based capital stock is in excess of the amount that is required to support advance borrowings, we redeem the excess capital stock immediately.  Therefore, stockholders’ capital increases and decreases with members’ advance borrowings, and the capital to asset ratio remains relatively unchanged.

Liquidity and Debt — In addition to the trading portfolio maintained for liquidity, liquid assets at December 31, 2017 included $86.0 million as demand cash balances at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York (“FRBNY”), $41.1 million as compensating cash balances at Citibank that could be withdrawn at short notice, $13.0 billion in short-term and overnight loans in the federal funds and the repo markets, and $528.6 million of high credit quality GSE-issued available-for-sale securities that are investment quality, and readily marketable.  In December 2016, we established a trading portfolio with the primary objective of increasing our liquidity.  The trading portfolio is invested in highly-liquid U.S. Treasury bonds and GSE issued securities.  Our liquidity position remains strong, and in compliance with all regulatory requirements, and we do not foresee any changes to that position.

The primary source of our funds is the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes to the public.  Our GSE status enables the FHLBanks to raise funds at rates that are typically at a small to moderate spread above U.S. Treasury security yields.  Our ability to access the capital markets, which has a direct impact on our cost of funds, is dependent to a degree on our credit ratings from the major ratings organizations.  The FHLBank debt performance has withstood the impact of the controversy surrounding the debt ceiling in the recent past.  However, we cannot say with certainty the long-term impact of such actions on our liquidity position, which could be adversely affected by many causes both internal and external to our business.

During the periods in this report, we maintained continual access to funding and adapted our debt issuance to meet the liquidity needs of our members and our asset/liability risk management objectives.  Our short-term funding was largely driven by member demand for short-term advances and was achieved through the issuance of Consolidated discount notes and short-term Consolidated bonds.  Access to short-term debt markets has been reliable.  Investor demand has been strong, partly due to the money market fund reform and partly due to investors’ preference for liquidity.  Investors have sought the FHLBank’s short-term debt as an asset of choice, and that has led to advantageous funding opportunities and increased utilization of shorter-term debt.

There are inherent risks in utilizing short-term funding and we may be exposed to refinancing and investor concentration risks or market access risk.  Market access risk includes the risk that we would be unable to issue Consolidated obligations in the event of disruptions in the capital markets.  Refinancing risk includes the risk that we could have difficulty rolling over short-term obligations when market conditions become unfavorable for debt issuance.

We measure and monitor interest rate-risk with commonly used methods, which include the calculations of market value of equity, duration of equity, and duration gap.

Among other liquidity measures, the Finance Agency requires FHLBanks to maintain sufficient liquidity through short-term investments in an amount at least equal to our anticipated cash outflows under two different scenarios.  The first scenario assumes that we cannot access capital markets for 15 days, and during that period members do not renew their maturing, or prepay or exercise their option to call advances that are callable.  The second scenario assumes that we cannot access the capital markets for five days, and during that period, members renew maturing advances.  We remain in compliance with regulations under both scenarios.

We also hold contingency liquidity in an amount sufficient to meet our liquidity needs if we are unable to access the Consolidated obligation debt market for at least 5 days.  The actual contingency liquidity under the 5-day scenario in the current year quarter was $29.1 billion, well in excess of the required $2.3 billion.

We also have other liquidity measures in place, deposit liquidity and operational liquidity, and those liquidity buffers remain in excess of required reserves.  For more information about our liquidity measures, please see section Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt in this MD&A.

Advances

Our primary business is making collateralized loans to members, referred to as advances.  Generally, the growth or decline in advances is reflective of demand by members for both short-term liquidity and term funding.  This demand is driven by economic factors such as availability of alternative funding sources that are more attractive, or by the interest rate environment and the outlook for the economy.  Members may choose to prepay advances (which may generate prepayment penalty fees) based on their expectations of interest rate changes and demand for liquidity.

Advance volume is also influenced by merger activity, where members are either acquired by non-members or acquired by members of another FHLBank.  When our members are acquired by members of another FHLBank or by non-members, these former members no longer qualify for membership and we may not offer renewals or additional advances to the former members.  If maturing advances are not replaced, it will have an impact on business volume.

The increase in amounts outstanding at December 31, 2017, relative to December 31, 2016 has been largely driven by member demand for short- and long-term fixed-rate advances, partly offset by maturing adjustable-rate advances.

Table 3.1:

Advance Trends

Member demand for advance products

Par amount of advances outstanding was $122.7 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $109.2 billion at December 31, 2016.

Carrying value of advances outstanding at December 31, 2017 was $122.4 billion, compared to $109.3 billion at December 31, 2016.  Carrying values included unrealized net fair value hedging basis adjustments recorded on hedges eligible under ASC 815, and basis adjustments recorded on advances elected under the fair value option (“FVO”).  For advances hedged under the ASC 815 qualifying hedging rules, the basis adjustment was a fair value loss of $265.3 million at December 31, 2017 and a fair value gain of $2.0 million at December 31, 2016.  For advances elected under the fair value option (“FVO”), the basis adjustments were valuation gains of $5.6 million at December 31, 2017 and $13.7 million at December 31, 2016.  For more information about basis adjustments, see Table 3.6  Advances by Maturity and Yield Type in this MD&A.

 

Member demand for advance products

Par amount of advances outstanding was $90.7 billion at December 31, 2020, down from $104.6 billion at September 30, 2020, $112.0 billion at June 30, 2020, $134.4 billion at March 31, 2020 and $100.4 billion at December 31, 2019. Advance demand had increased notably in March 2020 as the larger members borrowed in anticipation of their customers’ needs for cash in the face of deterioration in the financial markets caused by the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 2020 fourth quarter, the same larger member banks that had borrowed short-term advances in March 2020 were prepaying advances or not rolling over certain short-term borrowings at maturity.

Future demand from our members for advances is difficult to forecast as it is uncertain what the impact will be on our members’ businesses from multiple uncertainties, including supply of deposits and other funding to members’ businesses, risk of credit losses, and other potential disruptions to our members’ businesses. For more information on how the risks related to COVID-19 may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, see Part II, Item 1A. Risk Factors.


Advances — Product Types

 

The following table summarizes par values of advances by product type (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 3.2:3.2      Advances by Product Type

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Amounts

 

of Total

 

Amounts

 

of Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adjustable Rate Credit - ARCs

 

$

37,060,467

 

30.20

%

$

42,716,370

 

39.10

%

Fixed Rate Advances

 

50,517,644

 

41.17

 

46,180,158

 

42.28

 

Short-Term Advances

 

23,818,181

 

19.41

 

10,831,782

 

9.92

 

Mortgage Matched Advances

 

352,859

 

0.29

 

407,731

 

0.37

 

Overnight & Line of Credit (OLOC) Advances

 

3,748,677

 

3.05

 

2,962,224

 

2.71

 

All other categories

 

7,209,613

 

5.88

 

6,142,727

 

5.62

 

Total par value

 

122,707,441

 

100.00

%

109,240,992

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments

 

(265,260

)

 

 

1,980

 

 

 

Fair value option valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

5,624

 

 

 

13,653

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

122,447,805

 

 

 

$

109,256,625

 

 

 

Adjustable Rate Credit Advances (“ARC Advances”) — ARC Advances declined in the first quarter of 2017 when maturing advances were not renewed.  Outstanding balances have since remained steady.  Typically, the larger members are borrowers of the adjustable rate advances.  ARC Advances are medium- and long-term loans that can be linked to a variety of indices, such as 1-month LIBOR, 3-month LIBOR, the federal funds rate, or Prime.  The ARC interest rate is set and reset (depending upon the maturity of the advance and the type of index) at a spread to LIBOR.  Principal is due at maturity and interest payments are due at each reset date, including the final payment date.  Members use ARC Advances to manage interest rate and basis risks by efficiently matching the interest rate index and repricing characteristics of floating-rate assets.  Some members may elect to use ARC Advances as part of a cash flow hedge strategy, where they will synthetically convert the floating-rate borrowing to fixed-rate with the use of interest rate swaps.

Fixed-rate Advances  Member demand for fixed-rate advances has grown steadily through the four quarters of 2017, with maturing advances replaced by new borrowings.  Despite the increase, we believe that members still remain uncertain about locking into long-term advances, perhaps because of higher coupons on longer-term advances, an uncertain outlook on the direction and timing of interest rate changes, or lukewarm demand from members’ customer base for longer-term fixed-rate loans.

Fixed-rate Advances are medium and long-term, comprising of putable and non-putable advances, and remain the largest category of advances.  Fixed-rate advances are offered in maturities of one year or longer.

Fixed-rate advances include advances with a “put” option feature (“putable advance”).  Putable advances were $597.8 million at December 31, 2017, compared to $2.5 billion at December 31, 2016.  Historically, in years prior to periods in this report, fixed-rate putable advances had been more competitively priced relative to fixed-rate “bullet” advances (without put option) because the “put” feature (that we have purchased from the member) reduces the coupon on the advance.  The price advantage of a putable advance increases with the number of puts sold and the length of the term of a putable advance.  With a putable advance, we have the right to exercise the put option and terminate the advance at predetermined exercise date(s).  We would normally exercise this option when interest rates rise, and the borrower may then apply for a new advance at the then-prevailing coupon and terms.  In the present interest rate environment, the price advantage has not been significant and member demand was weak.

Short-term Advances — Member demand for short-term fixed-rate advances grew steadily in 2017 to $23.8 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $10.8 billion at December 31, 2016.  Short-term advances are fixed-rate advances with original maturities of one year or less.

Overnight Advances — Overnight advance balances were $3.7 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $3.0 billion at December 31, 2016.  Member demand in the second quarter of 2017 increased outstanding balances to $7.8 billion at June 30, 2017.  Fluctuations in demand reflect the seasonal needs of certain member banks for their short-term liquidity requirements.  Some large members also use overnight advances to adjust their balance sheet in line with their own leverage targets.  The overnight advances program gives members a short-term, flexible, readily accessible revolving line of credit for immediate liquidity needs.  Overnight advances mature on the next business day, at which time the advance is repaid.

Collateral Security

Our member borrowers are required to maintain an amount of eligible collateral that adequately secures their outstanding obligations with the FHLBNY.  Eligible collateral includes: (1) one-to-four-family and multi-family mortgages; (2) Treasury and U.S. government agency securities; (3) mortgage-backed securities; and (4) certain other collateral that is real estate-related, provided that such collateral has a readily ascertainable value and the Bank can perfect a security interest in that collateral.  We also have a statutory lien priority with respect to certain member assets under the FHLBank Act as well as a claim on FHLBNY capital stock held by our members.

The FHLBNY’s loan and collateral agreements give us a security interest in assets held by borrowers that is sufficient to cover their obligations to the FHLBNY.  We may supplement this security interest by imposing additional reporting, segregation or delivery requirements on the borrower.  We assign specific collateral requirements to a borrower, based on a number of factors.  These include, but are not limited to: (1) the borrower’s overall financial condition; (2) the degree of complexity involved in the pledging, verifying, and reporting of collateral between the borrower and the FHLBNY, especially when third-party pledges, custodians, outside service providers and pledges to other entities are involved; and (3) the type of collateral pledged.

In order to ensure that the FHLBNY has sufficient collateral to cover credit extensions, the Bank has established a Collateral Lendable Value methodology.  This methodology determines the lendable value or amount of borrowing capacity assigned to each specific type of collateral.  Key components of the Lendable Value include measures of Market, Credit, Price Volatility and Operational Risk associated with the unique collateral types pledged to the FHLBNY.  Lendable Values are periodically adjusted to reflect current market and business conditions.

The following table summarizes pledged collateral at December 31, 2017 and 2016

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
     Percentage     Percentage 
  Amounts  of Total  Amounts  of Total 
Adjustable Rate Credit - ARCs $17,050,467   18.79% $16,364,967   16.30%
Fixed Rate Advances  54,632,262   60.21   49,548,877   49.35 
Short-Term Advances  12,883,629   14.20   24,401,935   24.31 
Mortgage Matched Advances  176,373   0.19   240,182   0.24 
Overnight & Line of Credit (OLOC) Advances  678,438   0.75   3,407,551   3.39 
All other categories  5,319,990   5.86   6,432,566   6.41 
Total par value  90,741,159   100.00%  100,396,078   100.00%
Hedge valuation basis adjustments  1,325,945       299,163     
Total $92,067,104      $100,695,241     

Collateral Security

Our member borrowers are required to maintain an amount of eligible collateral that adequately secures their outstanding obligations with the FHLBNY.  Eligible collateral includes: (1) one-to-four-family and multi-family mortgages; (2) Treasury and U.S. government agency securities; (3) mortgage-backed securities; and (4) certain other collateral that is real estate-related, provided that such collateral has a readily ascertainable value and the Bank can perfect a security interest in that collateral. We also have a statutory lien priority with respect to certain member assets under the FHLBank Act as well as a claim on FHLBNY capital stock held by our members.

The FHLBNY’s loan and collateral agreements give us a security interest in assets held by borrowers that is sufficient to cover their obligations to the FHLBNY.  We may supplement this security interest by imposing additional reporting, segregation, or delivery requirements on the borrower.  We assign specific collateral requirements to a borrower, based on a number of factors.  These include, but are not limited to: (1) the borrower’s overall financial condition; (2) the degree of complexity involved in the pledging, verifying, and reporting of collateral between the borrower and the FHLBNY, especially when third-party pledges, custodians, outside service providers and pledges to other entities are involved; and (3) the type of collateral pledged.

In order to ensure that the FHLBNY has sufficient collateral to cover credit extensions, the FHLBNY has established a Collateral Lendable Value methodology.  This methodology determines the lendable value or amount of borrowing capacity assigned to each specific type of collateral.  Key components of the Lendable Value include measures of Market, Credit, Price Volatility and Operational Risk associated with the unique collateral types pledged to the FHLBNY.  Lendable Values are periodically adjusted to reflect current market and business conditions.

COVID-19 pandemic related market disruption has negatively affected mortgage collateral valuations, and the FHLBNY has responded by applying updated mortgage valuations to pledged mortgage collateral. Where necessary, members have pledged additional qualifying collateral to reflect current market conditions and/or to address increased advance demand in order to comply with their collateral maintenance requirements. The FHLBNY will continue to monitor credit and collateral conditions and endeavor to make adjustments as needed.

The FHLBNY has or will be implementing certain relief measures to help members serve their customers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic. These measures include forbearance and modifications for pledged loan collateral.


The following table summarizes pledged collateral at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 (in thousands):

 

Table 3.3:3.3Collateral Supporting Indebtedness to Members

  Indebtedness  Collateral (a) 
  Advances (b)  Other
Obligations (c)
  Total
Indebtedness
  
Loans (d)
  Securities and
Deposits (d)
  Total (d) 
December 31, 2020 $90,741,159  $20,247,993  $110,989,152  $324,273,676  $56,685,358  $380,959,034 
December 31, 2019 $100,396,078  $22,108,414  $122,504,492  $308,663,555  $45,016,365  $353,679,920 

 

 

 

Indebtedness

 

Collateral (a)

 

 

 

Advances (b)

 

Other 
Obligations 
(c)

 

Total 
Indebtedness

 

Mortgage
Loans 
(d)

 

Securities and 

Deposits (d)

 

Total (d)

 

December 31, 2017

 

$

122,707,441

 

$

16,233,637

 

$

138,941,078

 

$

280,239,413

 

$

38,217,577

 

$

318,456,990

 

December 31, 2016

 

$

109,240,992

 

$

12,900,453

 

$

122,141,445

 

$

268,726,098

 

$

36,011,798

 

$

304,737,896

 


(a)The level of over-collateralization is on an aggregate basis and may not necessarily be indicative of a similar level of over-collateralization on an individual member basis.  At a minimum, each member pledged sufficient collateral to adequately secure the member’s outstanding obligation with the FHLBNY.  In addition, most members maintain an excess amount of pledged collateral with the FHLBNY to secure future liquidity needs.

(b)Par value.

(c)Standby financial letters of credit, derivatives, and members’ credit enhancement guarantee amount (“MPFCE”)(MPFCE).

(d)Estimated market value.

The following table shows the breakdown of collateral pledged by members between those in the physical possession of the FHLBNY or its safekeeping agent, and those that were specifically listed (in thousands):

 

Table 3.4: 3.4      Location of Collateral Held

  Estimated Market Values 
  

Collateral in
Physical

Possession

  

Collateral

Specifically Listed

  Total
 Collateral Received
 
December 31, 2020 $57,601,060  $323,357,974  $380,959,034 
December 31, 2019 $45,876,619  $307,803,301  $353,679,920 

 

 

 

Estimated Market Values

 

 

 

Collateral in 
Physical 

Possession

 

Collateral 
Specifically Listed

 

Total
Collateral 
Received

 

December 31, 2017

 

$

40,091,157

 

$

278,365,833

 

$

318,456,990

 

December 31, 2016

 

$

38,416,691

 

$

266,321,205

 

$

304,737,896

 

Advances — Interest Rate Terms

 

The following table summarizes interest-rate payment terms for advances (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 3.5: A3.5dvancesAdvances by Interest-Rate Payment Terms

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
     Percentage     Percentage 
  Amount  of Total  Amount  of Total 
Fixed-rate (a) $73,687,192   81.21% $84,027,611   83.70%
Variable-rate (b)  17,053,967   18.79   16,368,467   16.30 
Variable-rate capped or floored (c)  -   -   -   - 
Overdrawn demand deposit accounts  -   -   -   - 
Total par value  90,741,159   100.00%  100,396,078   100.00%
Hedge valuation basis adjustments  1,325,945       299,163     
Total $92,067,104      $100,695,241     

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate (a)

 

$

85,587,792

 

69.75

%

$

66,458,757

 

60.84

%

Variable-rate (b)

 

37,116,649

 

30.25

 

42,774,847

 

39.15

 

Variable-rate capped or floored (c)

 

3,000

 

 

6,000

 

0.01

 

Overdrawn demand deposit accounts

 

 

 

1,388

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

122,707,441

 

100.00

%

109,240,992

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments

 

(265,260

)

 

 

1,980

 

 

 

Fair value option valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

5,624

 

 

 

13,653

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

122,447,805

 

 

 

$

109,256,625

 

 

 


(a)(a)Fixed-rate borrowings remained the largest category of advances borrowed by members.  The presentation abovemembers and includes long-term and short-term fixed-rate advances. Long-term advances remain a small segment of the portfolio at December 31, 2017,2020, with only 2.5%13.4% of advances in the remaining maturity bucket of greater than 5 years (3.9%(10.5% at December 31, 2016)2019). For more information, see financial statements Note 8.9. Advances.

(b)(b)Variable-rate advances are ARC advances, which are typically indexed to LIBOR. The FHLBNY’s larger members are generally borrowers of variable-rate advances.

(c)(c)Category represents ARCs with options that “cap” increase or “floor” decrease in the LIBOR index at predetermined strikes (We have also purchased cap/floor options that mirror the terms of the options embedded in the advances sold to members, offsetting our exposure on the advance).

 


The following table summarizes maturity and yield characteristics of advances (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 3.6:3.6Advances by Maturity and Yield Type

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
     Percentage     Percentage 
  Amount  of Total  Amount  of Total 
Fixed-rate                
Due in one year or less $40,885,180   45.06% $54,411,782   54.20%
Due after one year  32,802,012   36.15   29,615,829   29.50 
Total Fixed-rate  73,687,192   81.21   84,027,611   83.70 
Variable-rate                
Due in one year or less  10,317,467   11.37   14,794,500   14.74 
Due after one year  6,736,500   7.42   1,573,967   1.56 
Total Variable-rate  17,053,967   18.79   16,368,467   16.30 
Total par value  90,741,159   100.00%  100,396,078   100.00%
Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)  1,325,945       299,163     
Total $92,067,104      $100,695,241     

Fair value basis and valuation adjustments — Key determinants of valuation adjustments are factors such as advance run offs and new transactions designated in hedging relationships.

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

Fixed-rate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year or less

 

$

 54,923,033

 

44.76

%

$

30,023,712

 

27.49

%

Due after one year

 

30,664,759

 

24.99

 

36,435,045

 

33.35

 

Total Fixed-rate

 

85,587,792

 

69.75

 

66,458,757

 

60.84

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variable-rate

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year or less

 

30,368,458

 

24.75

 

20,238,586

 

18.52

 

Due after one year

 

6,751,191

 

5.50

 

22,543,649

 

20.64

 

Total Variable-rate

 

37,119,649

 

30.25

 

42,782,235

 

39.16

 

Total par value

 

122,707,441

 

100.00

%

109,240,992

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)

 

(265,260

)

 

 

1,980

 

 

 

Fair value option valuation adjustments and accrued interest (b)

 

5,624

 

 

 

13,653

 

 

 

Total

 

$

122,447,805

 

 

 

$

109,256,625

 

 

 

(a)Fair value basis and valuation adjustmentsKey determinants of valuation adjustments are factors such as advance run offs and new transactions designated in hedging relationships or elected under the FVO, the forward swap curve, the volatility of the swap rates, the remaining duration to maturity, and for advances elected under the FVO, the changes in the spread between the swap rate and the Consolidated obligation debt yields.  For FVO advances change in interest receivable is also a factor as it is a component of the entire fair value of FVO advances.


(a)Hedging valuation basis adjustmentsThe reported carrying values of hedged advances are adjusted for changes in their fair values (fair value basis adjustments or fair value) that are attributable to changes in the benchmark risk being hedged.  SOFR and LIBOR are our primary benchmarks in addition to OIS-Fed Funds. We are actively engaged in transitioning away from LIBOR.  When an advance is hedged which is LIBOR forunder ASC 815, the FHLBNY, and iselected benchmark becomes the discounting basis for computing changes in the fair values forof the hedged advances.  Theadvance. Table 3.7 Hedged Advances by Type discloses notional amountamounts of advances hedged under ASC 815 was $53.6 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $41.2 billion at December 31, 2016.hedged.  The application of thisASC 815 accounting methodology resulted in the recognition of a net unrealized hedge valuation basis lossgains of $265.3$1.3 billion and $299.2 million at December 31, 2017, a year-over-year change of $267.2 million in valuation loss.2020 and 2019.  The LIBOR curve, which is theforward benchmark yield curves declined sharply at December 31, 2020 relative to December 31, 2019.  As hedge valuation basis for hedged advances under ASC 815, has continued to rise for short maturities and through the longer-term sectors (through 8-years) that make up the majority of our outstanding hedged advances.  Valuations of fixed-rate LIBOR benchmark hedge advances move inversely with the LIBORrise and fall of the forward interest rates, fair value gains increased as the forward swap discounting curve and the net cumulative basis loss was consistent with the LIBOR yield curve at December 31, 2017.  At December 31, 2016, valuation gains on vintage long-term advances offset valuation losses for a net valuation gain of $2.0 million.

declined.  Generally, hedge valuation basis gains and losses are unrealized and willare expected to reverse to zero if the advance is held to maturity or is put or called on the early option exercise dates.

For more information, see Table 10.14: Earnings Impact

Hedge volume — We hedge putable advances and certain “vanilla” fixed-rate advances under the hedge accounting provisions when they qualify under those standards and as economic hedges when the hedge accounting provisions are operationally difficult to establish or a high degree of hedge effectiveness cannot be asserted.

The following table summarizes advances hedged under ASC 815 qualifying hedge by type of Derivatives and Hedging Activities — By Financial Instrument Type.

(b)FVO fair values Valuation basis adjustments are recorded to recognize changes in the entire fair values of advances elected under the FVO, including changes in accrued interest receivable.  The discounting basis for computing fair values of FVO advances is the Advance pricing curve, which is primarily derived from the FHLBNY’s cost of funds (yields paid on Consolidated obligation debt).  Fair value basis of a FVO advance reflect changes in the term structure and shape of the Advance pricing curve at the measurement dates.

Valuation adjustments and interest accrued receivable taken together reported a net basis gain of $5.6 million at December 31, 2017 and $13.7 million at December 31, 2016.  Advances elected under the FVO are typically variable rate LIBOR indexed advances, which re-priced frequently to market indices or fixed-rate with short remaining durations.  As a result, valuation basis remained near to par.  The notional amount of the FVO advance portfolio declined to $2.2 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $9.9 billion at December 31, 2016.  Run offs of advances elected under the FVO were not replaced by new transactions.

We have elected the FVO on an instrument-by-instrument basis.  With respect to credit risk, we have concluded that it was not necessary to estimate changes attributable to instrument-specific credit risk, as we consider our advances to remain fully collateralized through to maturity.  For more information, see financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

Hedge volume — We hedge putable advances and certain “bullet” fixed-rate advances under the hedge accounting provisions when they qualify under those standards and as economic hedges when the hedge accounting provisions are operationally difficult to establish or a high degree of hedge effectiveness cannot be asserted.

The following table summarizes hedged advances by type of option feature (in thousands):

 

Table 3.7: 3.7Hedged Advances by Type

Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Qualifying hedges        
Fixed-rate bullets (a) $29,969,694  $32,335,675 
Fixed-rate putable (b)  7,945,750   8,365,750 
Fixed-rate with embedded cap  360,000   20,000 
         
Total qualifying hedges $38,275,444  $40,721,425 
         
Aggregate par amount of advances hedged (c) $47,962,396  $40,721,425 
Fair value basis (hedging adjustments) $1,325,945  $299,163 

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Qualifying Hedges

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate bullets (a)

 

$

 52,983,896

 

$

 38,554,066

 

Fixed-rate putable (b)

 

567,000

 

2,497,850

 

Fixed-rate callable

 

16,575

 

5,000

 

Fixed-rate with embedded cap

 

30,000

 

180,075

 

Total Qualifying Hedges

 

$

 53,597,471

 

$

 41,236,991

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Aggregate par amount of advances hedged (c)

 

$

 53,674,759

 

$

 41,334,436

 

Fair value basis (Qualifying hedging adjustments)

 

$

 (265,260

)

$

 1,980

 


(a)(a)    Generally, non-callable fixed-rate medium- and longer termlonger-term advances are hedged to mitigate the risk in fixed-rate lending.
(b)

(b)Putable advances are hedged by cancellable swaps, and the paired long put and short call optionsoption mitigate the put/callput option risks; additionally,in the hedge, fixed-rate iscash flows are also synthetically converted to LIBOR, mitigating the risk in fixed-rate lending for the FHLBNY.benchmark floating-rate. In a rising rate environment, swap dealers would likely exercise their call option, and the FHLBNY will exercise its put option with the member and both instruments terminate at par. Members may borrow new advances at the then prevailing rate.

(c)(c)Represents par values of advances in ASC 815 qualifying hedge relationships. Typically, the longer term fixed-rateAmounts do not include advances andthat were in ASC 815 hedges but have since been de-designated or advances with optionalitythat are hedged.

Advances elected under the FVO — Advances elected under the FVO at December 31, 2017 were shorter-term adjustable-rate (“ARCs”)in economic hedges (not qualifying as ASC 815 accounting hedge).   At December 31, 2016, they also included shorter-term fixed-rate advances.  By electing the FVO for an asset instrument (the advance), the objective is to offset some of the volatility in earnings due to the designation of debt (liability) under the FVO.  Changes in the fair values of the advance were recorded through earnings, and the offset was recorded as a fair value basis adjustment to the carrying values of the advances.

The following table summarizes par amounts of advances elected under the FVO (in thousands):

Table 3.8:Advances under the Fair Value Option (FVO)

 

 

Advances

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Advances designated under FVO (a)

 

$

2,200,000

 

$

9,859,504

 


(a) Notional amounts of advances elected under the FVO have decreased as run offs were not replaced.

56

Economic hedges of floating-rate advances We issue floating-rate advances indexed to one or more benchmark rates (LIBOR, OIS/FF and OIS/SOFR) and may then execute interest rate basis swaps that would synthetically convert the cash flows to the desired floating-rate cash flows indexed to another benchmark to meet our asset/liability funding strategies. At December 31, 2020, notional amounts of basis swaps were $8.5 billion with maturities generally within two years. The carrying value of the advances in the economic hedge would not include fair value basis since the advance is recorded at amortized cost. The operational cost of designating the advances in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge outweighed the accounting benefits of marking the debt and the swap to fair values. We opted instead to designate the hedging basis swaps as standalone derivatives, and recorded changes in their fair values through earnings.

 

Putable Advances The following table summarizes par amounts of advances that were still putable or callable, with one or more pre-determined option exercise dates remaining (in thousands):

 

Table 3.9:3.8       Putable and Callable Advances(a)

  Advances 
Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Putable (a) $7,945,750  $8,365,750 
No-longer putable/callable $460,000  $5,000 

 

 

 

Advances

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Putable/callable

 

$

597,825

 

$

2,517,100

 

No-longer putable/callable

 

$

1,020,500

 

$

1,088,000

 


(a)Member demand has been weak for putablePutable advances whichwere typically long-term advances with one or more put options exercisable by the FHLBNY.  Putable advances are typically medium- and long-term.

Investments

We maintain long-term investment portfolios, which are principally mortgage-backed securities issued by GSEs and U.S. Agency (“GSE-issued”).  Investments include a small portfolio of MBS issued by private enterprises, and bonds issued by state or local housing finance agencies.  We also maintain short-term investments for our liquidity resources, for funding daily stock repurchases and redemptions, for ensuring the availability of funds to meet the credit needs of our members, and to provide additional earnings.  In December 2016, management approved a trading portfolio, the purpose of which is to augment our liquidity needs.  Investmentshedged in the trading portfolio were U.San ASC 815 qualifying fair value hedge with mirror image terms, including mirror image put option terms.

Investments

We maintain long-term investment portfolios of debt securities, which are principally mortgage-backed securities issued by GSEs and U.S. Agency (GSE-issued). Investments include a small portfolio of MBS issued by private enterprises, and bonds issued by state or local housing finance agencies. We also maintain short-term investments for our liquidity resources, for funding daily stock repurchases and redemptions, for ensuring the availability of funds to meet the credit needs of our members, and to provide additional earnings. We also invest in a liquidity trading portfolio, the purpose of which is to augment our liquidity needs. Investments in the trading portfolio are typically U.S. Treasury securities, and from time to time we have also invested in GSE-issued securities, all carried at their fair values. The Finance Agency prohibits speculative investments but allows the designation of a trading portfolio for liquidity purposes. We may dispose such investments if liquidity needs are met and market conditions deem the sale as advantageous.

We are subject to credit risk on our investments, generally transacted with GSEs and large financial institutions that are considered to be investment quality. The Finance Agency defines investment quality as a security with adequate financial backing so that full and timely payment of principal and interest on such security is expected and there is minimal risk that the timely payment of principal and interest would not occur because of adverse changes in economic and financial conditions during the projected life of the security.


The following table summarizes changes in investments by categories: Interest-bearing deposits, Money market investments, Trading securities, Equity investments in Grantor trust, Available-for-sale securities, and GSE-issued securities, all carried at their fair values.  The Finance Agency prohibits speculative investments, but allows the designation of a trading portfolio for liquidity purposes.  We may dispose such investments if liquidity needs are met and market conditions deem the sale as advantageous.

We are subject to credit risk on our investments, generally transacted with GSEs and large financial institutions that are considered to be of investment quality.  The Finance Agency defines investment quality as a security with adequate financial backing so that full and timely payment of principal and interest on such security is expected and there is minimal risk that the timely payment of principal and interest would not occur because of adverse changes in economic and financial conditions during the projected life of the security.

The following table summarizes changes in investments by categories: Trading securities, Available-for-sale securities, Held-to-maturity securities and money market investments (Carrying values, dollars in thousands):

 

Table 4.1:4.1Investments by Categories

  December 31,  December 31,  Dollar  Percentage 
  2020  2019  Variance  Variance 
State and local housing finance agency obligations, net (a) $1,097,752  $1,122,315  $(24,563)  (2.19)%
Trading securities (b)  11,742,965   15,318,809   (3,575,844)  (23.34)
Mortgage-backed securities                
Available-for-sale securities, at fair value (c)  3,435,945   2,653,418   782,527   29.49 
Held-to-maturity securities, at carrying value, net (c)  11,775,894   14,112,167   (2,336,273)  (16.56)
Total securities  28,052,556   33,206,709   (5,154,153)  (15.52)
                 
Equity investments in Grantor trust (d)  80,369   60,047   20,322   33.84 
Interest-bearing deposits  685,000   -   685,000   NM 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  4,650,000   14,985,000   (10,335,000)  (68.97)
Federal funds sold  6,280,000   8,640,000   (2,360,000)  (27.31)
                 
Total Investments $39,747,925  $56,891,756  $(17,143,831)  (30.13)%

 

 

 

December 31,

 

December 31,

 

Dollar

 

Percentage

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

Variance

 

Variance

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations (a)

 

$

1,147,510

 

$

1,063,500

 

$

84,010

 

7.90

%

Trading securities (b)

 

1,641,568

 

131,151

 

1,510,417

 

NM

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Available-for-sale securities, at fair value (c)

 

528,627

 

656,094

 

(127,467

)

(19.43

)

Held-to-maturity securities, at carrying value (c)

 

16,677,023

 

14,958,793

 

1,718,230

 

11.49

 

Total securities

 

19,994,728

 

16,809,538

 

3,185,190

 

18.95

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Grantor trust (d)

 

48,642

 

41,718

 

6,924

 

16.60

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell

 

2,700,000

 

7,150,000

 

(4,450,000

)

(62.24

)

Federal funds sold

 

10,326,000

 

6,683,000

 

3,643,000

 

54.51

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total investments

 

$

33,069,370

 

$

30,684,256

 

$

2,385,114

 

7.77

%


(a)State and local housing finance agency bonds wereare designated as HTM and wereare carried at amortized cost. AcquisitionsThere were $101.3 millionno acquisitions in the twelve months ending December 31, 2020 and paydowns were $23.8 million.
(b)Trading securities comprised of 2017.

(b)U.S. Treasury securities and GSE securities.corporate notes at December 31, 2020 and are carried at fair value. Trading portfolio is for liquidity and not for speculative purposes. We acquired $1.1$3.8 billion of U.S. Treasury notes $480.0 million of Treasury bills and $358.4 million of GSE securities in 2017.  We sold $100.2 million of treasury notes in 2017.2020.

(c)Mortgage-backed securities classified as AFS.  No acquisitions were designated as AFS inincludes $1.6 billion of Fixed-rate CMBS transferred at January 1, 2019 from the twelve months of 2017.HTM category. AFS securities outstanding arewere GSE and U.S. Agency issued floating-rate MBS and carried at fair value.  Mortgage-backed securities classified asvalues. MBS in the HTM $4.4 billion ofportfolio were predominantly GSE-issued, MBS were acquiredand less than 1% are PLMBS (private-label MBS).
(d)Funds in 2017 and designated as HTM.  Approximately 98.9% of HTM mortgage-backed securities are GSE-issued securities.

(d)Thethe grantor truststrust are designated as AFS.  In 2017, we invested $2.1 million in cash, which included $0.8 million as financing for two trusts added in 2017.  Payouts to retirees were $1.8 million.equity investments and are carried at fair value.  Trust fund balances represent investments in registered mutual funds and other fixed-income and equity funds. Funds are highly liquid and readily redeemable at their NAVs, which are the fair values of the investments. The funds are owned by the FHLBNY, and the intent is to utilize investments to fund current and potential future payment obligations of the non-qualified Benefits Equalization Pensionemployee retirement plans.  For more information about the pension plans, see financial statements, Note 15. Employee Retirement Plans.

Long-Term Investment Securities

Acquisition pricing of GSE-issued MBS fluctuated in 2017, and was generally unfavorable.  Purchases were made only when pricing justified our risk/reward criteria.  Unpaid principal balance of investments in the combined investment portfolios of held-to-maturity and available-for-sale securities was $17.2 billion at December 31, 2017, an increase of $1.6 billion (net of paydowns) compared to December 31, 2016.  By policy, we acquire only GSE-issued RMBS and CMBS.

The long-term investment securities at December 31, 2017 comprised of a portfolio of GSE-issued MBS, a small declining portfolio of vintage private label MBS, and a small portfolio of housing finance agency bonds, as summarized below:

·                  The AFS portfolio of GSE-issued floating-rate MBS were carried at their fair values of $528.6 million at December 31, 2017, compared to $656.1 million at December 31, 2016.  Unpaid principal balances decreased by $129.9 million in the twelve months of 2017 due to contractual paydowns.  No acquisitions and no sales were made in the period.  Fair values of the AFS securities were substantially all in unrealized fair value gain positions at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  The AFS securities are floating-rate securities indexed to LIBOR, and certain securities are capped, typically between 6.5% and 7.5%, and the risk arising from the capped floating-rate MBS in our portfolios of available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities is economically hedged by $2.7 billion notional amounts of interest rate caps.  For more information about the interest rate caps, see financial statements, Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities, and Table 8.4

Derivative Hedging Strategies — Balance Sheet and Intermediation in this MD&A.  No AFS securities was determined to be OTTI in any periods in this report.  For more information about AFS securities, see financial statements, Note 6.  Available-for-Sale Securities.

·                  The HTM portfolio of MBS comprised of portfolios of GSE issued fixed and floating-rate MBS, and a small portfolio of Private label MBS; 98.9% were GSE-issued; 1.1%, PLMBS.  Securities classified as HTM are carried at amortized cost adjusted for credit and non-credit OTTI losses and OTTI recoveries.  Unpaid principal balance of fixed-rate MBS was $8.4 billion at December 31, 2017 and $7.3 billion at December 31, 2016.  Acquisitions totaling $1.7 billion (par amounts) were designated to the fixed-rate portfolio in the twelve months of 2017; paydowns were $606.4 million.  Unpaid principal balance of floating-rate MBS was $8.2 billion at December 31, 2017 and $7.7 billion at December 31, 2016.  In the twelve months of 2017, we acquired $2.6 billion of floating-rate securities, ahead of $2.1 billion in paydowns.  HTM floating-rate securities are typically indexed to the 1-month LIBOR, and certain securities are capped, typically between 6.5% and 7.5%.  As discussed in the previous bullet, the risk arising from capped AFS and HTM floating-rate securities is economically hedged by the purchased interest rate caps.  No OTTI was recorded at December 31, 2017.  For more information about HTM securities, see financial statements, Note 7.  Held-to-Maturity Securities.

·                  Housing finance agency bonds (“HFA bonds”), all designated as HTM, were carried at amortized cost basis of $1.1 billion at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  We acquired $101.3 million of HFA bonds in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017.  HFA bonds are primarily floating-rate instruments indexed to LIBOR.  No HFA bonds were determined to be OTTI in any periods in this report.

Mortgage-Backed Securities — By Issuer

NM — Not meaningful.

The following table summarizes our investment debt securities issuer concentration (dollars in thousands):

The following table summarizes our investment securities issuer concentration (dollars in thousands):

Table 4.2:4.2Investment Debt Securities Issuer Concentration

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
        Carrying value as        Carrying value as 
  Carrying (a)     a Percentage  Carrying (a)     a Percentage 
Long Term Investment (c) Value  Fair Value  of Capital  Value  Fair Value  of Capital 
MBS                        
Fannie Mae $3,271,007  $3,338,484                          45.08% $4,008,977  $4,031,807                          53.23%
Freddie Mac  11,836,507   12,429,508   163.11   12,628,143   12,826,958   167.66 
Ginnie Mae  12,871   12,979   0.18   18,459   18,572   0.25 
All Others - PLMBS  91,454   107,889   1.26   110,006   133,182   1.46 
Non-MBS, net (b)  1,097,752   1,076,266   15.13   1,122,315   1,099,505   14.90 
Total Investment Debt Securities $16,309,591  $16,965,126   224.75% $17,887,900  $18,110,024   237.50%
                         
Categorized as:                        
                         
Available-for-Sale Securities $3,435,945  $3,435,945      $2,653,418  $2,653,418     
                         
Held-to-Maturity Securities, net $12,873,646  $13,529,181      $15,234,482  $15,456,606     

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Carrying value as a

 

 

 

 

 

Carrying value as a

 

 

 

Carrying (a)

 

 

 

Percentage

 

Carrying (a)

 

 

 

Percentage

 

Long Term Investment (c)

 

Value

 

Fair Value

 

of Capital

 

Value

 

Fair Value

 

of Capital

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

$

5,009,067

 

$

5,019,957

 

60.78

%

$

5,144,656

 

$

5,156,990

 

67.48

%

Freddie Mac

 

11,986,984

 

12,055,501

 

145.45

 

10,200,222

 

10,294,017

 

133.79

 

Ginnie Mae

 

28,237

 

28,412

 

0.34

 

36,630

 

36,755

 

0.48

 

All Others - PLMBS

 

181,362

 

216,793

 

2.20

 

233,379

 

288,620

 

3.06

 

Non-MBS (b)

 

1,196,152

 

1,163,379

 

14.51

 

1,105,218

 

1,068,401

 

14.50

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Investment Securities

 

$

18,401,802

 

$

18,484,042

 

223.28

%

$

16,720,105

 

$

16,844,783

 

219.31

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Categorized as:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Available-for-Sale Securities

 

$

577,269

 

$

577,269

 

 

 

$

697,812

 

$

697,812

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Held-to-Maturity Securities

 

$

17,824,533

 

$

17,906,773

 

 

 

$

16,022,293

 

$

16,146,971

 

 

 


(a)Carrying values include fair values for AFS securities.

(b)Non-MBS consists of housingIncludes Housing finance agency bonds and grantor trusts.bonds.

(c)Excludes Trading portfolio.

58

 

External rating information of the held-to-maturity portfolio was as follows (carrying values in thousands):

Table 4.3:4.3External Rating of the Held-to-Maturity Portfolio

  December 31, 2020 
      AAA-rated (a)      AA-rated (b)      A-rated      BBB-rated      Below
Investment
Grade
      Total   
Mortgage-backed securities $                     363  $11,684,817  $58,130  $7,486  $25,098  $11,775,894 
State and local housing finance agency obligations  23,100   1,069,068   1,946   3,638   -   1,097,752 
                         
Total Long-term securities $23,463  $12,753,885  $60,076  $11,124  $25,098  $12,873,646 

  December 31, 2019 
      AAA-rated (a)      AA-rated (b)      A-rated      BBB-rated      Below
Investment
Grade
      Total   
Mortgage-backed securities $                    520  $14,003,384  $69,701  $9,049  $29,513  $14,112,167 
State and local housing finance agency obligations  25,000   1,085,875   5,055   6,385   -   1,122,315 
                         
Total Long-term securities $25,520  $15,089,259  $74,756  $15,434  $29,513  $15,234,482 

See footnotes (a) and (b) under Table 4.4.

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

AAA-rated (a)

 

AA-rated (b)

 

A-rated

 

BBB-rated

 

Below 
Investment 
Grade

 

Total

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

$

989

 

$

16,497,280

 

$

114,833

 

$

19,637

 

$

44,284

 

$

16,677,023

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

36,400

 

1,085,220

 

25,890

 

 

 

1,147,510

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Long-term securities

 

$

37,389

 

$

17,582,500

 

$

140,723

 

$

19,637

 

$

44,284

 

$

17,824,533

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

AAA-rated (a)

 

AA-rated (b)

 

A-rated

 

BBB-rated

 

Below 
Investment
Grade

 

Total

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

$

1,185

 

$

14,729,099

 

$

140,579

 

$

25,805

 

$

62,125

 

$

14,958,793

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

47,800

 

986,625

 

29,075

 

 

 

1,063,500

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Long-term securities

 

$

48,985

 

$

15,715,724

 

$

169,654

 

$

25,805

 

$

62,125

 

$

16,022,293

 

See footnotes (a) and (b) under Table 4.4.

External rating information of the AFS portfolio was as follows (the carrying values of AFS investments are at fair values; in thousands):

 

Table 4.4:4.4External Rating of the Available-for-Sale Portfolio

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  AA-rated (b)  Unrated  Total  AA-rated (b)  Unrated  Total 
Available-for-sale securities                        
Mortgage-backed securities $3,435,945  $-  $3,435,945  $2,653,418  $-  $2,653,418 

Footnotes to Table 4.3 and Table 4.4.

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

AA-rated (b)

 

Unrated

 

Total

 

AA-rated (b)

 

Unrated

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Available-for-sale securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

$

528,627

 

$

 

$

528,627

 

$

656,094

 

$

 

$

656,094

 

Other - Grantor trust (c)

 

 

48,642

 

48,642

 

 

41,718

 

41,718

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Available-for-sale securities

 

$

528,627

 

$

48,642

 

$

577,269

 

$

656,094

 

$

41,718

 

$

697,812

 


(a)Footnotes to Table 4.3 and Table 4.4

(a)Certain PLMBS and housing finance bonds have been assigned AAA, based on the ratings by S&P and Moody’s.

(b)(b)We have assigned GSE-issued MBS a rating of AA+ based on the credit rating assigned to long-term senior debt issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, and U.S. Agency. The debt ratings are based on S&P’s rating of AA+ for the GSE Senior long-term debt and AA+ for the debt issued by the U.S. government; Moody’s debt rating is Aaa for the GSE Senior long-term debt and the U.S. government.

(c)Highly liquid equity and bond mutual funds, carried at net asset values (NAVs) as fair values.  In 2017, we added $2.1 million in cash to the trusts.

External credit rating information has been provided in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 as the information is used as another data point to supplement our credit quality indicators, and they serve as a useful indicator when analyzing the degree of credit risk to which we are exposed.  Significant changes in credit ratings classifications of our investment securities portfolio could indicate increased credit risk for us that could be accompanied by a reduction in the fair values of our investment securities portfolio.

Fair Value Levels of Investment Securities, and Unrecognized and Unrealized Holding Losses

To compute fair values at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, multiple vendor prices were received for substantially all of our MBS holdings, and substantially all of those prices fell within specified thresholds.  The relative proximity of the prices received from the multiple vendors supported our conclusion that the final computed prices were reasonable estimates of fair values.  GSE securities priced under such a valuation technique using the market approach are typically classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy.

For a comparison of carrying values and fair values of investment securities, see financial statements, Note 5. Trading securities, Note 6. Available-for-Sale Securities and Note 7. Held-to-Maturity Securities.  For more information about the corroboration and other analytical procedures performed, see Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

Weighted average rates — Mortgage-backed securities (HTM and AFS)

The following table summarizes weighted average rates and amortized cost by contractual maturities.  A significant portion of the MBS portfolio consisted of floating-rate securities and the weighted average rates will change in parallel with changes in the LIBOR rate

External credit rating information has been provided in Table 4.3 and Table 4.4 as the information is used as another data point to supplement our credit quality indicators, and they serve as a useful indicator when analyzing the degree of credit risk to which we are exposed. Significant changes in credit ratings classifications of our investment debt securities portfolio could indicate increased credit risk for us that could be accompanied by a reduction in the fair values of our investment debt securities portfolio.

59

Fair Value Levels of Investment Debt Securities

To compute fair values, multiple vendor prices were received for substantially all of our MBS holdings, and substantially all of those prices fell within specified thresholds. The relative proximity of the prices received from the multiple vendors supported our conclusion that the final computed prices were reasonable estimates of fair values. GSE securities priced under such a valuation technique using the market approach are typically classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy. For a comparison of carrying values and fair values of investment debt securities, see financial statements, Note 5. Trading securities, Note 7. Available-for-Sale Securities and Note 8. Held-to-Maturity Securities. For more information about the corroboration and other analytical procedures performed, see Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments. Also see Note 7. Available-for-sale securities for an explanation of amortized cost for securities hedged under ASC 815 fair value hedge.

Weighted average rates — Mortgage-backed securities (HTM and AFS) — The following table summarizes weighted average rates (yields) and amortized cost by contractual maturities (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 4.5:4.5Mortgage-Backed Securities Weighted Average Rates by Contractual Maturities

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Weighted

 

Amortized

 

Weighted

 

 

 

Cost

 

Average Rate

 

Cost

 

Average Rate

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year or less

 

$

880,774

 

2.45

%

$

101,348

 

3.32

%

Due after one year through five years

 

4,650,579

 

2.78

 

4,725,921

 

2.52

 

Due after five years through ten years

 

8,225,685

 

2.23

 

6,602,905

 

1.69

 

Due after ten years

 

3,458,160

 

2.57

 

4,211,581

 

2.07

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total mortgage-backed securities

 

$

17,215,198

 

2.46

%

$

15,641,755

 

2.05

%

OTTI — Base Case and Adverse Case Scenario

We evaluated our PLMBS under a base case (or best estimate) scenario by performing a cash flow analysis for each security under assumptions that forecasted increased credit default rates or loss severities, or both.  The stress test scenario and associated results do not represent our current expectations and therefore should not be construed as a prediction of future results, market conditions or the actual performance of these securities.  No OTTI was recorded in 2017.  Credit OTTI charged to income was $0.2 million in 2016 and 2015.

Credit OTTI recovered in 2017 was $6.1 million, recorded in Interest income as “accretable yield”, compared to $3.0 million and $3.2 million in 2016 and 2015.  The improved recoveries in 2017 resulted when certain previously OTTI securities paid-off in full, and unamortized credit OTTI was recovered.

The results of the adverse case scenario are presented next to expected outcome for the credit impaired securities (the base case) at the OTTI measurement dates reported below (dollars in thousands):

Table 4.6:Base and Adverse Case Stress Scenarios (a)

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Actual Results - Base Case Scenario

 

Adverse Case Scenario

 

 

 

 

 

# of Securities

 

UPB

 

OTTI Related 
to Credit Loss

 

# of Securities

 

UPB

 

OTTI Related 

to Credit Loss

 

RMBS

 

Prime

 

7

 

$

7,385

 

$

 

7

 

$

7,385

 

$

 

RMBS

 

Alt-A

 

5

 

2,612

 

 

5

 

2,612

 

(12

)

HEL

 

Subprime

 

26

 

161,340

 

 

26

 

161,340

 

(70

)

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

Subprime

 

2

 

47,667

 

 

2

 

47,667

 

 

Total Securities

 

 

 

40

 

$

219,004

 

$

 

40

 

$

219,004

 

$

(82

)

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Actual Results - Base Case Scenario

 

Adverse Case Scenario

 

 

 

 

 

# of Securities

 

UPB

 

OTTI Related 
to Credit Loss

 

# of Securities

 

UPB

 

OTTI Related 
to Credit Loss

 

RMBS

 

Prime

 

8

 

$

13,715

 

$

 

8

 

$

13,715

 

$

(31

)

RMBS

 

Alt-A

 

5

 

3,463

 

 

5

 

3,463

 

(3

)

HEL

 

Subprime

 

30

 

214,319

 

 

30

 

214,319

 

(109

)

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

Subprime

 

2

 

61,301

 

 

2

 

61,301

 

 

Total Securities

 

 

 

45

 

$

292,798

 

$

 

45

 

$

292,798

 

$

(143

)


(a)Generally, the Adverse Case is computed by stressing Credit Default Rate and Loss Severity.  Information presented is as of the period end dates.

FHLBank OTTI Governance Committee Common Platform Consistent with the guidelines provided by the OTTI Committee, the FHLBNY has contracted with the FHLBanks of San Francisco and Chicago to perform cash flow analysis for about 50% of our non-Agency PLMBS portfolio that were possible to be cash flow tested within the Common platform.  The results were reviewed and found reasonable by the FHLBNY.  For more information about the OTTI Committee and the Common platform, see Other-Than-Temporary Impairment (“OTTI”) — Accounting and Governance Policies, and Impairment Analysis in the financial statements, Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Non-Agency Private-label mortgage- and asset-backed securities

Our investments in privately-issued MBS are summarized below.  All private-label MBS were classified as Held-to-maturity (unpaid principal balance (a) in thousands):

Table 4.7:Non-Agency Private-Label Mortgage- and Asset-Backed Securities

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Private-label MBS

 

Fixed Rate

 

Variable 
Rate

 

Total

 

Fixed Rate

 

Variable 
Rate

 

Total

 

RMBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prime

 

$

6,235

 

$

1,150

 

$

7,385

 

$

12,336

 

$

1,379

 

$

13,715

 

Alt-A

 

1,623

 

989

 

2,612

 

2,278

 

1,185

 

3,463

 

Total RMBS

 

7,858

 

2,139

 

9,997

 

14,614

 

2,564

 

17,178

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Home Equity Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subprime

 

133,858

 

27,482

 

161,340

 

180,938

 

33,381

 

214,319

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subprime

 

47,667

 

 

47,667

 

61,301

 

 

61,301

 

Total UPB of private-label MBS (b)

 

$

189,383

 

$

29,621

 

$

219,004

 

$

256,853

 

$

35,945

 

$

292,798

 


(a)Unpaid principal balance (UPB) is also known as the current face or par amount of a mortgage-backed security.

(b)Paydowns of PLMBS have reduced outstanding unpaid principal balances.

The following table presents additional information of the fair values and gross unrealized losses of PLMBS by year of securitization and external rating

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amortized  Weighted  Amortized  Weighted 
  Cost  Average Rate  Cost  Average Rate 
Mortgage-backed securities                
Due in one year or less $690,206   3.10% $616,402   3.93%
Due after one year through five years  3,323,857   2.39   4,102,650   2.79 
Due after five years through ten years  8,687,883   2.50   8,838,096   2.97 
Due after ten years  2,279,164   1.47   3,129,733   2.59 
                 
Total mortgage-backed securities $14,981,110   2.35% $16,686,881   2.89%

A significant portion of the MBS portfolio consists of floating-rate securities and the weighted average rates will change in parallel with changes in the LIBOR rate.

Fair Value Hedges of Fixed-rate Available-for-sale Mortgage-backed Securities

The adoption of ASU 2017-12 provided an alternative guidance in the application of partial-term hedging. The ASU also provided a new approach that allows entities to hedge only the benchmark rate instead of the entire coupon of a fixed-rate instrument in a fair value hedge. We have adopted the guidance in the ASU to hedge designated available-for-sale fixed-rate CMBS. The following table summarizes key data (in thousands):

 

Table 4.8:4.6PLMBS by YearFair Value Hedges of Securitization and External RatingFixed-Rate Prepayable CMBS

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid Principal Balance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Private-label MBS

 

Ratings
Subtotal

 

Triple-A

 

Double-A

 

Single-A

 

Triple-B

 

Below
Investment
Grade

 

Amortized
Cost

 

Gross
Unrealized
(Losses)

 

Fair Value

 

RMBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2006

 

$

4,667

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

4,667

 

$

3,834

 

$

(488

)

$

3,388

 

2005

 

477

 

 

 

 

 

477

 

476

 

 

476

 

2004 and earlier

 

2,241

 

 

 

 

337

 

1,904

 

2,237

 

(36

)

2,204

 

Total RMBS Prime

 

7,385

 

 

 

 

337

 

7,048

 

6,547

 

(524

)

6,068

 

Alt-A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

2,612

 

989

 

 

157

 

823

 

643

 

2,612

 

(28

)

2,619

 

Total RMBS

 

9,997

 

989

 

 

157

 

1,160

 

7,691

 

9,159

 

(552

)

8,687

 

HEL Subprime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

161,340

 

 

1,619

 

67,022

 

23,683

 

69,016

 

139,346

 

(994

)

158,047

 

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subprime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

47,667

 

 

 

47,667

 

 

 

47,660

 

(40

)

50,059

 

Total PLMBS

 

$

219,004

 

$

989

 

$

1,619

 

$

114,846

 

$

24,843

 

$

76,707

 

$

196,165

 

$

(1,586

)

$

216,793

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid Principal Balance

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Private-label MBS

 

Ratings
Subtotal

 

Triple-A

 

Double-A

 

Single-A

 

Triple-B

 

Below
Investment
Grade

 

Amortized
Cost

 

Gross
Unrealized
(Losses)

 

Fair Value

 

RMBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2006

 

$

5,764

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

5,764

 

$

4,921

 

$

(383

)

$

4,614

 

2005

 

3,867

 

 

 

 

 

3,867

 

3,387

 

(1

)

3,861

 

2004 and earlier

 

4,084

 

 

917

 

904

 

2,263

 

 

4,073

 

(63

)

4,023

 

Total RMBS Prime

 

13,715

 

 

917

 

904

 

2,263

 

9,631

 

12,381

 

(447

)

12,498

 

Alt-A

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

3,463

 

1,185

 

 

473

 

873

 

932

 

3,463

 

(62

)

3,432

 

Total RMBS

 

17,178

 

1,185

 

917

 

1,377

 

3,136

 

10,563

 

15,844

 

(509

)

15,930

 

HEL Subprime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

214,319

 

 

5,206

 

77,915

 

29,140

 

102,058

 

186,476

 

(1,923

)

209,139

 

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subprime

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2004 and earlier

 

61,301

 

 

 

61,301

 

 

 

61,293

 

 

63,551

 

Total PLMBS

 

$

292,798

 

$

1,185

 

$

6,123

 

$

140,593

 

$

32,276

 

$

112,621

 

$

263,613

 

$

(2,432

)

$

288,620

 

Short-term investments

We typically maintain substantial investments in high quality short- and intermediate-term financial instruments such as secured overnight transactions collateralized by securities, and unsecured overnight and term federal funds sold to highly-rated financial institutions who also satisfy other credit quality factors.  These investments provide the liquidity necessary to meet members’ credit needs.  Short-term investments also provide a flexible means of implementing the asset/liability management decisions to adjust liquidity.  In December 2016, a trading portfolio was established with the objective of expanding our choice of investing for liquidity.

Monitoring — We actively monitor our credit exposures and the credit quality of our counterparties, including an assessment of each counterparty’s financial performance, capital adequacy, and sovereign support as well as related market signals, and actively limit or suspend existing exposures, as appropriate.  In addition, we are required to manage our unsecured portfolio subject to regulatory limits, prescribed by the Finance Agency, our regulator.  The Finance Agency regulations include limits on the amount of unsecured credit that may be extended to a counterparty or a group of affiliated counterparties, based upon a percentage of eligible regulatory capital and the counterparty’s overall credit rating.  Under these regulations, the level of eligible regulatory capital is determined as the lesser of our regulatory capital or the eligible amount of regulatory capital of the counterparty determined in accordance with Finance Agency regulations.

The Finance Agency regulations also permit us to extend additional unsecured credit, which could be comprised of overnight extensions and sales of federal funds subject to continuing contract.  Our total unsecured overnight exposure to a single counterparty may not exceed twice the regulatory limit for term exposures.  We are prohibited by Finance Agency regulation from investing in financial instruments issued by non-U.S. entities other than those issued by U.S. branches and agency offices of foreign commercial banks, and we did not own any financial instruments issued by foreign sovereign governments, including those countries that are members of the European Union in any periods in this report.

Securities purchased under agreements to resell — As part of our banking activities with counterparties, we have entered into secured financing transactions that mature overnight, and can be extended only at our discretion.  These transactions involve the lending of cash against securities, which are accepted as collateral.  The balance outstanding under such agreements was $2.7 billion at December 31, 2017 and $7.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  For more information, see financial statements, Note 4.  Federal Funds Sold, and Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell.

Federal funds sold — Federal funds sold was $10.3 billion at December 31, 2017 and $6.7 billion at December 31, 2016, representing

  Fair Value Hedges of Fixed-Rate Prepayable CMBS 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Current face value of hedged CMBS $   1,259,000  $602,000 
Partial-term hedge face value of hedged CMBS $1,134,000  $532,000 
Cumulative basis adjustment Gains (losses) $44,052  $11,593 
Interest rate swap contracts (par) $1,134,000  $532,000 

Short-term investments

We typically maintain substantial investments in high quality short- and intermediate-term financial instruments such as secured overnight transactions collateralized by securities, including unsecured overnight and term deposits and federal funds sold to highly-rated financial institutions who also satisfy other credit quality factors. These investments provide the liquidity necessary to meet members’ credit needs. Short-term investments also provide a flexible means of implementing the asset/liability management decisions to adjust liquidity. We also invest in a liquidity trading portfolio, consisting of U.S. treasury securities, with the objective of satisfying our liquidity requirements and expanding our choice of investing for liquidity.


Monitoring — We actively monitor our credit exposures and the credit quality of our counterparties, including an assessment of each counterparty’s financial performance, capital adequacy, and sovereign support as well as related market signals, and actively limit or suspend existing exposures, as appropriate. In addition, we are required to manage our unsecured portfolio subject to regulatory limits prescribed by our regulator, the Finance Agency. The Finance Agency regulations include limits on the amount of unsecured credit that may be extended to a counterparty or a group of affiliated counterparties, based upon a percentage of eligible regulatory capital and the counterparty’s overall credit rating. Under these regulations, the level of eligible regulatory capital is determined as the lesser of our regulatory capital or the eligible amount of regulatory capital of the counterparty determined in accordance with Finance Agency regulations.

The Finance Agency regulations also permit us to extend additional unsecured credit, which could be comprised of overnight extensions and sales of federal funds subject to continuing contract. Our total unsecured overnight exposure to a single counterparty may not exceed twice the regulatory limit for term exposures. We are prohibited by Finance Agency regulation from investing in financial instruments issued by non-U.S. entities other than those issued by U.S. branches and agency offices of foreign commercial banks, and we did not own any financial instruments issued by foreign sovereign governments, including those countries that are members of the European Union in any periods in this report.

Securities purchased under agreements to resell — As part of our banking activities with counterparties, we have entered into secured financing transactions that mature overnight and can be extended only at our discretion. These transactions involve the lending of cash against securities, which are accepted as collateral. The balances outstanding under such agreements were $4.7 billion at December 31, 2020 and $15.0 billion at December 31, 2019. Resale agreements averaged $4.1 billion and $9.9 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. For more information, see financial statements, Note 4. Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell.

Federal funds sold — Federal funds sold was $6.3 billion at December 31, 2020, and $8.6 billion at December 31, 2019, and averaged $8.8 billion and $9.0 billion in the fourth quarter of 2020 and 2019, respectively. Investments represent unsecured lending to major banks and financial institutions. We are a major lender in this market, particularly in the overnight market. The amount of unsecured credit risk that may be extended to individual counterparties is commensurate with the counterparty’s credit quality as assessed by our management, and the assessment would include reviews of credit ratings of counterparty’s debt securities or deposits as reported by NRSROs. Overnight and short-term federal funds allow us to warehouse funds and provide balance sheet liquidity to meet unexpected member borrowing demands.

 

The table below presents federal funds sold, the counterparty credit ratings, and the domicile of the counterparty or the domicile of the counterparty’s parent for U.S. branches and agency offices of foreign commercial banks in the U.S. (in thousands):

 

Table 4.9:4.7Federal Funds Sold by Domicile of the Counterparty(a)

  December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019 Year ended December 31, 2020 Year ended December 31, 2019 
Foreign Counterparties S&P
Rating
 Moody's
Rating
 S&P
Rating
 Moody's
Rating
 Daily Average Balance Balance at period end Daily Average Balance Balance at period end 
Australia AA- AA3 AA- AA3 $1,726,503 $1,795,000 $1,648,123 $1,870,000 
Austria A A2 A A2  546,940  -  563,630  - 
Canada A to AA- A3 to AA2 A to AA- A3 to AA2  2,819,167  3,115,000  2,910,110  2,755,000 
Finland AA- AA3 AA- AA3  390,150  -  225,959  1,000,000 
France A to A+ A1 to AA3 A to A+ A1 to AA3  858,115  500,000  894,466  - 
Netherlands A+ AA3 A+ AA3  804,352  870,000  798,608  500,000 
Norway AA- AA2 AA- AA2  524,833  -  430,562  100,000 
Sweden A+ to AA- AA3 to AA2 A+ to AA- AA2  322,773  -  664,068  - 
Switzerland A+ AA3 A+ A1  598,552  -  292,521  880,000 
UK A A1 A A2  25,301  -  15,644  - 
                      
Subtotal          8,616,686  6,280,000  8,443,691  7,105,000 
                      
USA A- to AA- A3 to AA2 A- to AA- A3 to AA2  733,896  -  1,847,268  1,535,000 
Total         $9,350,582 $6,280,000 $10,290,959 $8,640,000 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Year ended December 31, 2017

 

Year ended December 31, 2016

 

Foreign
Counterparties

 

S&P
Rating

 

Moody’s
Rating

 

S&P
Rating

 

Moody’s
Rating

 

Daily Average
Balance

 

Balance at
period end

 

Daily Average
Balance

 

Balance at
period end

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Australia

 

AA-

 

AA3

 

AA-

 

AA2

 

$

3,152,370

 

$

3,380,000

 

$

1,969,533

 

$

1,600,000

 

Austria

 

A

 

A3

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

193,214

 

 

 

 

Canada

 

A to AA-

 

A1 to AA2

 

A to AA-

 

AA3 to AA1

 

3,005,438

 

1,500,000

 

2,322,290

 

1,200,000

 

Finland

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

AA-

 

AA3

 

 

 

1,496,781

 

1,600,000

 

France

 

A

 

A2 to AA3

 

A

 

A1

 

684,745

 

100,000

 

22,131

 

 

Netherlands

 

A+

 

AA2

 

A+

 

AA2

 

803,077

 

800,000

 

754,639

 

907,000

 

Norway

 

A+

 

AA2

 

A+

 

AA2

 

929,258

 

920,000

 

831,216

 

825,000

 

Sweden

 

A+ to AA-

 

AA3 to AA2

 

A+ to AA-

 

AA3 to AA2

 

5,462,159

 

1,790,000

 

3,113,112

 

400,000

 

Switzerland

 

A

 

A1

 

A

 

A1

 

332,011

 

 

5,874

 

 

UK

 

A

 

A1

 

A-

 

A1

 

151,129

 

 

565,096

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Subtotal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

14,713,401

 

8,490,000

 

11,080,672

 

6,532,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

USA

 

A- to AA-

 

BAA1 to AA2

 

A- to AA-

 

BAA1 to AA2

 

1,239,290

 

1,836,000

 

477,415

 

151,000

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

15,952,691

 

$

10,326,000

 

$

11,558,087

 

$

6,683,000

 

Table 4.10:(a)Federal Funds Sold Quarterly Balances

The following table summarizes average balances and outstanding balances of Federal

Average investment in federal funds sold in each ofhas typically been greater than the quarters in 2017 and 2016 (in millions):

 

 

Federal Funds Sold

 

 

 

First Quarter

 

Second Quarter

 

Third Quarter

 

Fourth Quarter

 

Year

 

Daily
Average
Balance

 

Balance
at period
end

 

Daily
Average
Balance

 

Balance
at period
end

 

Daily
Average
Balance

 

Balance 
at period
end

 

Daily
Average
Balance

 

Balance
at period
end

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2017

 

$

15,771

 

$

12,808

 

$

14,904

 

$

10,700

 

$

17,049

 

$

11,130

 

$

16,089

 

$

10,326

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

2016

 

$

11,518

 

$

6,916

 

$

11,598

 

$

8,984

 

$

11,283

 

$

10,219

 

$

11,833

 

$

6,683

 

Table 4.11:period-end balance as counterparties appear to have less demand at quarter-end than during the quarter.Trading Securities

 


The following table summarizes par value, amortized cost and the carrying value (fair value) of the trading portfolio (in thousands):

 

 

 

Trading Securities

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Par value

 

$

1,648,377

 

$

130,930

 

Amortized cost

 

$

1,642,637

 

$

131,009

 

Carrying/Fair value

 

$

1,641,568

 

$

131,151

 

The Finance Agency prohibits speculative investments but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio.  We may dispose such investments if liquidity needs are met and market conditions deem the sale as advantageous.  For more information about fair values of securities in the trading portfolio, see Note 5.
Table4.8Trading Securities in the Notes to the Financial Statements.

Cash collateral pledged

Cash deposited as collateral with derivative counterparties — At December 31, 2017, we had deposited $11.1 million as cash collateral pledged to cover our obligations to derivative counterparties for uncleared swaps.  Non-cash collateral of $239.1 million, in the form of marketable securities, was pledged to central Derivative Clearing Organizations (“DCOs”) to meet our “Initial margin” (“IM” or “initial margin”) collateral requirements on cleared derivatives at December 31, 2017.

At December 31, 2016, we had deposited $24.1 million to derivative counterparties as cash collateral on uncleared derivatives; we had also posted $231.9 million in cash to DCOs, which comprised of $9.8 million as variation margin and $222.1 million as initial margin.  The year-over-year decline at December 31, 2017 in cash posted was primarily due to the substitution of marketable securities instead of cash to satisfy our initial margin obligations on cleared derivatives.

All cash posted as pledged collateral to derivative counterparties is reported as a deduction to Derivative liabilities in the Statements of Condition.  Cash posted in excess of required collateral is reported as a component of Derivative assets.  Non-cash collateral is not netted against derivative assets and liabilities in the Statements of Condition.  See derivative netting information and netting tables in Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

We execute derivatives with major financial institutions.  We enter into bilateral collateral netting agreements for derivatives that have not yet been approved for clearing by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”).  Such derivatives are also referred to as uncleared derivatives.  For derivative contracts that are mandated for clearing under the Dodd-Frank Act, we have obtained legal netting analyses that provide support for the right of offset of posted margins as a netting adjustment to the fair value exposures of the associated derivatives.  When our derivatives are in a liability position, counterparties are in a fair value gain position, and counterparties are exposed to the non-performance risk of the FHLBNY.  For cleared and uncleared derivatives, we are required to post cash collateral or margin to mitigate the counterparties’ credit exposure under agreed upon procedures.  For uncleared derivatives, bilateral collateral agreements include certain thresholds and pledge requirements under “ISDA agreements” that are generally triggered if exposures exceed the agreed-upon thresholds.  For cleared derivatives executed in compliance with CFTC rules, margins are posted daily as daily settlement values of open derivative contracts.  Certain triggering events such as a default by the FHLBNY could result in additional margins to be posted by the FHLBNY to our derivative clearing agents.  For more information, see Credit Risk Due to Non-performance by Counterparties in financial statements, Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.  Also see Tables 8.1 and 8.4 and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio

Mortgage loans are carried in the Statements of Condition at amortized cost, less allowance for credit losses.  The outstanding unpaid principal balance was $2.9 billion at December 31, 2017, an increase of $149.5 million (net of acquisitions and paydowns) from the balance at December 31, 2016.  Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (“MPF” or “MPF Program”).  We provide this product to members as another alternative for them to sell their mortgage production.  Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive growth.  MPF loans are fixed-rate mortgage loans secured primarily by single-family residential properties with maturities ranging from five to 30 years.

Mortgage Partnership Finance Program

We invest in mortgage loans through the MPF Program, which is a secondary mortgage market structure under which eligible mortgage loans are purchased or funded from or through members who are Participating Financial Institutions (“PFI”).  We may also acquire MPF loans through participations with other FHLBanks, although our current acquisition strategy is to limit acquisitions through our PFIs.  MPF loans are conforming conventional and Government i.e., insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (“FHA”), the Department of Veterans Affairs (“VA”) or the Rural Housing Service of the Department of Agriculture (“RHS”), fixed-rate mortgage loans secured primarily by single-family residential properties with maturities ranging from five to 30 years or participations in such mortgage loans.  The FHLBank of Chicago (“MPF Provider”) developed the MPF Program in order to help fulfill the housing mission and to provide an additional source of liquidity to FHLBank members that choose to sell mortgage loans into the secondary market rather than holding them in their own portfolios.  Finance Agency regulations define the acquisition of Acquired Member Assets (“AMA”) as a core mission activity of the FHLBanks.  In order for MPF loans to meet the AMA requirements, the purchase and funding are structured so that the credit risk associated with MPF loans is shared with PFIs.

MPF Loan Types  There are five MPF loan products under the MPF program that we participate in: Original MPF, MPF 100, MPF 125, MPF 125 Plus, and MPF Government.  While still held in our mortgage portfolio, we currently do not offer the MPF 100 or MPF 125 Plus loan products.  Original MPF, MPF 125, MPF 125 Plus, and MPF Government are “closed loan” products in which we purchase loans acquired or closed by the PFI.

The following table summarizes MPF loan by product types (par value,

  Trading Securities 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Par value $                11,637,153  $                 15,232,900 
Amortized cost $11,655,374  $15,265,745 
Carrying/Fair value $11,742,965  $15,318,809 

The Finance Agency prohibits speculative investments but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio. We may dispose such investments if liquidity needs are met and market conditions deem the sale as advantageous. For more information about fair values of securities in the trading portfolio, see Note 5. Trading Securities in the Notes to the Financial Statements.

The following table summarizes economic hedges of fixed-rate trading securities held for liquidity (in thousands):

 

Table 5.1:4.9MPF by Product TypesEconomic Hedges of Fixed-rate Liquidity Trading Securities

  Economic Hedges of Fixed-Rate Trading Securities 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Par/Face amounts of portfolio of U.S. Treasury fixed-rate securities (a) $                   11,635,000  $                15,230,000 
Par amounts of interest rate swaps $11,634,166  $15,230,000 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Original MPF (a)

 

$

491,541

 

$

473,415

 

MPF 100 (b)

 

1,472

 

2,120

 

MPF 125 (c)

 

2,041,700

 

1,891,353

 

MPF 125 Plus (d)

 

80,427

 

107,459

 

Other

 

235,232

 

226,560

 

Total par MPF loans

 

$

2,850,372

 

$

2,700,907

 


(a)(a)Original MPF — The first layerBalances represent outstanding amounts of losses is applied to the First Loss Account (“FLA” or “First Loss Account”).  We are responsible for the first layer of losses.  For new loans, the member then provides a credit enhancement up to Single A rating equivalent (Double A rating equivalent at December 31, 2016).  We would absorb any credit losses beyond the first two layers.

(b)MPF 100 — The first layer of losses is applied to the First Loss Account.  We are responsible for the first layer of losses. Losses incurred in the First Loss Account are deducted from credit enhancement fees payable to the member after the third year.  For new loans, the member then provides a credit enhancement up to Single A rating equivalent, minus the amount placed in the FLA (Double A rating equivalent at December 31, 2016).  We absorb any losses incurred in the FLA that are not recovered through credit enhancement fees (should the pool liquidate prior to repayment of losses).  We would absorb any credit losses beyond the first two layers.

(c)MPF 125 — The first layer of losses is applied to the First Loss Account.  We are responsible for the first layer of losses. Losses incurred in the First Loss Account are deducted from the credit enhancement fees payable to the member.  For new loans, the member then provides a creditenhancement up to Single A rating equivalent (Double A rating equivalent at December 31, 2016), minus the amount placed in the FLA.  We absorb any losses incurred in the FLA that are not recovered through credit enhancement fees (if the pool should liquidate prior to repayment of losses).  We would absorb any credit losses beyond the first two layers.

(d)MPF 125 Plus —The first layer of losses is applied to the First Loss Account in an amount equal to a specified percentage of loans in the pool as of the sale date. Losses incurred in the First Loss Account are deducted from the credit enhancement fees payable to the member.  We absorb any losses incurred in the FLA that are not recovered through credit enhancement fees (should the pool liquidate prior to repayment of losses).  The member acquires an additional Credit Enhancement (“CE”) coverage through a supplemental mortgage insurance (“SMI”) policy to cover second layer losses that exceed the deductible of the Supplemental Mortgage Insurance policy. Losses not covered by the First Loss Account or Supplemental Mortgage Insurance coverage will be paid by the member’s Credit Enhancement obligation up to Single A rating equivalent (Double A rating equivalent at December 31, 2016).  We would absorb losses that exceeded the Credit Enhancement obligation, though such losses are a remote possibility.

Mortgage loans — ConventionalU.S. Treasury notes and Insured Loansbills.

Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio, Net

 

Mortgage loans are carried in the Statements of Condition at amortized cost, less allowance for credit losses. The outstanding unpaid principal balance was $2.9 billion at December 31, 2020, a decrease of $265.8 million (net of acquisitions and paydowns) from the balance at December 31, 2019. Mortgage loans were investments in Mortgage Partnership Finance loans (MPF or MPF Program). Serious delinquencies at December 31, 2020 were not materially different from prior periods, although we are seeing a rise in delinquencies. Rising delinquencies have resulted in increased credit losses under the CECL methodology. Allowance for credit losses was $7.1 million at December 31, 2020 compared to $9.1 million at September 30, 2020, $6.5 million at June 30, 2020, $3.5 million at March 31, 2020 and $0.7 million at December 31, 2019.

Mortgage Partnership Finance Program — We invest in mortgage loans through the MPF Program, which is a secondary mortgage market structure under which eligible mortgage loans are purchased or funded from or through members who are Participating Financial Institutions (PFI). We may also acquire MPF loans through participations with other FHLBanks, although our current acquisition strategy is to limit acquisitions through our PFIs. MPF loans are conforming conventional and Government i.e., insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (FHA), the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) or the Rural Housing Service of the Department of Agriculture (RHS), fixed-rate mortgage loans secured primarily by single-family residential properties with maturities ranging from five to 30 years or participations in such mortgage loans. The FHLBank of Chicago (MPF Provider) developed the MPF Program in order to help fulfill the housing mission and to provide an additional source of liquidity to FHLBank members that choose to sell mortgage loans into the secondary market rather than holding them in their own portfolios. Finance Agency regulations define the acquisition of Acquired Member Assets (AMA) as a core mission activity of the FHLBanks. In order for MPF loans to meet the AMA requirements, the purchase and funding are structured so that the credit risk associated with MPF loans is shared with PFIs.

We provide this product to members as another alternative for them to sell their mortgage production. Loan origination by members and acceptable pricing are key factors that drive growth.


In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Government and various states have taken certain actions to allow the Federal Home Loans Banks to provide various forms of relief in response to the effects of the pandemic. These measures include forbearance and modification for MPF program loans.

On March 27, 2020, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the CARES Act) was signed into law. Section 4013 of the CARES Act provides optional, temporary relief from the accounting and reporting requirements for TDRs for certain loan modifications for which borrowers were adversely affected by COVID-19 (hereinafter referred to as COVID-related modifications) granted to borrowers that were not more than 30 days past due on payments as of December 31, 2019. Specifically, the CARES Act provides that a financial institution may elect to suspend: (1) the requirements under GAAP for certain loan modifications that would otherwise be categorized as a TDR, and (2) any determination that such loan modifications would be considered a TDR, including the related impairment for accounting purposes. TDR relief applies to COVID-related modifications made from March 1, 2020, until the earlier of December 31, 2020, or 60 days following the termination of the national emergency declared by the President of the United States on March 13, 2020. On December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, was signed into law, extending the applicable period to the earlier of January 1, 2022, or 60 days following the termination of the national emergency declared on March 13, 2020. In the second quarter of 2020, the FHLBanks elected to apply the TDR relief provided by the CARES Act. As such, all COVID-related modifications meeting the provisions of the CARES Act are excluded from TDR classification and accounting, and the FHLBanks consider these loans to have a current payment status as long as payments are being made in accordance with the new terms. Alternatively, COVID-related modifications that do not meet the provisions of the CARES Act continue to be assessed for TDR classification under the FHLBanks’ existing accounting policies. Additionally, the FHLBanks continue to apply their delinquency, non-accrual loans, and charge-off policies during the forbearance plan period. The FHLBanks estimate the allowance for credit losses for COVID-related modifications in the same manner as other mortgage loans held for portfolio.

We have received requests from a small number of borrowers for forbearance, or deferral of their loan payments to us, driven or exacerbated by the economic impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic. Loan modification requests received have been limited, short-term and within terms allowable under the MPF program and these were not considered TDR. Based on outstanding principal balances as of the end of December 31, 2020, we have active short-term payment deferrals on approximately $250 thousand of MPF loans.

The aggregate amount of loans in forbearance including COVID-19 related delinquent loans at December 31, 2020 was approximately $105 million. Confirmation of forbearance terms and agreements remain under review, and the MPF provider is actively continuing to resolve status of COVID-19 and non-COVID related delinquent loans along with monitoring and confirmation of loans in forbearance status. Loans are well collateralized, and we have generally received contractual cash flows from servicers. Projected credit losses on the loans were not material. When loans are seriously delinquent (typically delinquent for 90-days or more), we cease to recognize interest income, reverse cash received and record a liability. Amounts reversed were not material. If such loans are past-due for 180 days or more, we will apply our standard charge-off policies and consider the value of collateral to process charge-offs. As collection of forbearance information is ongoing, we cannot say with certainty the aggregate amounts that are likely to be approved, other than to report that we do not expect its impact to be material to our financial statements and cash flows.

We are continuing to apply our policies, and not delaying the recognition of charge-offs, delinquencies, and nonaccruals status for the borrowers who would have otherwise moved into past due or nonaccruals status.

Life-time loan losses recorded at December 31, 2020 on such loans were not material. Serious delinquent triggers (90-days plus past due) at December 31, 2020 were not material.

63

Mortgage loans — Conventional and Insured Loans — The following table classifies mortgage loans between conventional loans and loans insured by FHA/VA (in thousands):

 

Table 5.2:5.1MPF by Conventional and Insured Loans

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Federal Housing Administration and Veteran Administration insured loans $198,795  $220,990 
Conventional loans  2,707,676   2,953,015 
Allowance for credit losses on mortgage loans (a)  (7,073)  (653)
MPF loans held-for-portfolio, net (b) $2,899,398  $3,173,352 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal Housing Administration and Veteran Administration insured loans

 

$

235,232

 

$

226,504

 

Conventional loans

 

2,615,140

 

2,474,347

 

Others

 

 

56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par MPF loans

 

$

2,850,372

 

$

2,700,907

 

Mortgage Loans — Loss Sharing and(a)The FHLBanks’ methodology for determining the Credit Enhancement Waterfall

For allallowance for credit losses on mortgage loans acquiredchanged on January 1, 2020 with the adoption of new accounting guidance on measurement of credit losses on financial instruments. Consistent with the modified retrospective method of adoption, the prior period has not been revised to June 1, 2017, the credit enhancement was computed as the amount that would bring an uninsured loan to “Double A” credit risk.  For loans acquired after June 1, 2017, the credit enhancement is computed to a “Single A” credit risk.  In the credit enhancement waterfall, we are responsible for the first loss layer.  The second loss layer is the credit obligation of the PFI.  We assume all residual risk.  Also, see financial statements, Note 9.  Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

First loss layer The amount of the first layer or the First Loss Account serves as an information or memorandum account, and as an indicator of the amount of losses that the FHLBNY is responsible for in the first layer.  The table below provides changes in the FLA for the periods in this report.  Losses that exceed the liquidation value of the real property, and the value of any primary mortgage insurance (“PMI”) for loans with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 80% at origination, will be absorbed by the FHLBNY up to the FLA for each Master Commitment.

Table 5.3:Rollforward First Loss Account (in thousands)

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning balance

 

$

30,933

 

$

27,107

 

$

22,116

 

Additions

 

3,654

 

4,540

 

5,582

 

Resets(a)

 

(532

)

(373

)

(90

)

Charge-offs

 

(747

)

(341

)

(501

)

Ending balance

 

$

33,308

 

$

30,933

 

$

27,107

 


(a)For certain MPF products, the Credit Enhancement is periodically recalculated.  If the recalculated Credit Enhancement would result in a PFI Credit Enhancement obligation lower than the remaining obligation, the PFI’s Credit Enhancement obligation will be resetconform to the new lower level.basis of accounting.

(b)

Second loss layer The PFIBalances represent MPF portfolio; MAP portfolio balance of $0.3 million as of December 31, 2020 is required to cover the next layer of losses up to an agreed-upon credit enhancement obligation amount, which may consist of a direct liability of the PFI to pay credit losses up to a specified amount, or through a contractual obligation of a PFI to provide supplemental mortgage insurance, or a combination of both.  While the second loss obligation is computed at the time a loan is acquired, the PFI’s second loss credit obligation is pooled within a master commitment together with second losses for all loans within the Master commitment.

The credit enhancement becomes an obligation of the PFI.  For taking on the credit enhancement obligation, we pay to the PFI a credit enhancement fee.  For certain MPF products, the credit enhancement fee is accrued and paid each month to the PFI, and for other MPF products, the credit enhancement fee is accrued and paid monthly after being deferred for 12 months.  CE Fees are paid on a pool level (Master Commitment), and if the pool runs down, the amount of future CE fees would decline in line.

The portion of the credit enhancement that is an obligation of the PFI must be fully secured with pledged collateral.  A portion of the credit enhancement may also be covered by insurance, subject to limitations specified in the Acquired Member Assets regulation.  Each PFI that participates in the MPF program must meet our established financial performance criteria.  In addition, we perform financial reviews of each approved PFI annually.

For certain MPF products, the master commitment and the second loss obligation is reset, typically every ten years, to the then current amortized unpaid principal balance.  This generally results in lower amounts of the second loss obligation in line with the lower amortized balances of the loans within the MC.

PMI is required for loans with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 80% at origination.  In addition, for certain MPF loan products, Supplemental Mortgage Insurance (“SMI”) may be required from the PFI.  Typically, the FHLBNY will pay the PFI a higher credit enhancement fee in return for the PFI taking on the additional obligation.

Table 5.4:not included.

Mortgage Loans — Loss Sharing and the Credit Enhancement Waterfall — For all loans acquired prior to June 1, 2017, the credit enhancement was computed as the amount that would bring an uninsured loan to “Double A” credit risk. For loans acquired after June 1, 2017, the credit enhancement is computed to a “Single A” credit risk. In the credit enhancement waterfall, we are responsible for the first loss layer. The second loss layer is the credit obligation of the PFI. We assume all residual risk. Also, see financial statements, Note 10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

Loan and PFI Concentration Second Losses and SMI Coverage (in thousands)

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Second Loss Position (a)

 

$

73,363

 

$

139,610

 

SMI Coverage - NY share only (b)

 

$

12,142

 

$

13,134

 

SMI Coverage - portfolio (b)

 

$

12,383

 

$

13,420

 


(a)“Second Loss” amount is calculated at the time of loan acquisition, and the amount becomes the PFIs obligation on a pooled basis for all loans within a Master Commitment (“MC”).  As discussed previously, the MCs and the Second loss are reset periodically.  In the second quarter of 2017, certain eligible MCs and the Second Losses were reset prior to the contractual reset anniversaries in order to accommodate the one-time adjustment to “Single A”.  Second loss amounts were recalculated (reset) based on the lower amortized principal balance, and were reset to the Single A level.  Together, the contractual resets and migration to Single A explain the decline in the amount of the Second Loss.

(b)SMI coverage has declined since no new master commitments have been added under a MPF loan program, which requires a SMI coverage.  Additionally, certain existing SMI policies were cancelled.

Loan and PFI Concentration Loan concentration was in New York State, which is to be expected since the largest PFIs are located in New York. The tables below summarize concentrations — Geographic and PFI:

 

Table 5.5:5.2Geographic Concentration of MPF Loans

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Number of loans %  Amounts outstanding %  Number of loans %  Amounts outstanding % 
New York State (a)                                70.8%  64.7%                                68.6%  61.1%

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Number of
loans %

 

Amounts
outstanding %

 

Number of
loans %

 

Amounts
outstanding %

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York State

 

69.1

%

59.5

%

69.4

%

59.1

%

(a)MAP loans are not included in the above calculation.

 

Table 5.6:5.3Top Five Participating Financial Institutions — Concentration (par value, dollars in thousands)

  December 31, 2020 
  Mortgage  Percent of Total 
  Loans  Mortgage Loans 
Bethpage Federal Credit Union $264,322   9.24%
Teachers Federal Credit Union  243,599   8.51 
Investors Bank  239,069   8.35 
Sterling National Bank  186,289   6.51 
Manasquan Bank  163,396   5.71 
All Others  1,765,248   61.68 
         
Total (a) $2,861,923   100.00%

  December 31, 2019 
  Mortgage  Percent of Total 
  Loans  Mortgage Loans 
Bethpage Federal Credit Union $331,970   10.61%
Investors Bank  296,289   9.47 
Teachers Federal Credit Union  240,850   7.70 
Sterling National Bank  219,814   7.03 
New York Community Bank  219,729   7.03 
All Others  1,819,092   58.16 
         
Total $3,127,744   100.00%

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Mortgage

 

Percent of Total

 

 

 

Loans

 

Mortgage Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank (a)

 

$

273,060

 

9.58

%

Sterling National Bank (b)

 

265,526

 

9.32

 

Bethpage Federal Credit Union

 

189,025

 

6.63

 

Investors Bank

 

186,397

 

6.54

 

Teachers Federal Credit Union

 

177,230

 

6.22

 

All Others

 

1,759,134

 

61.71

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

2,850,372

 

100.00

%

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Mortgage

 

Percent of Total

 

 

 

Loans

 

Mortgage Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Astoria Bank

 

$

281,672

 

10.43

%

New York Community Bank

 

239,096

 

8.85

 

Investors Bank

 

179,358

 

6.64

 

Teachers Federal Credit Union

 

158,809

 

5.88

 

Bethpage Federal Credit Union

 

138,059

 

5.11

 

All Others

 

1,703,857

 

63.09

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

2,700,851

 

100.00

%


(a)New York Community Bancorp, Inc., parentMAP unpaid principal balance of New York Community Bank, sold its mortgage banking business in June 2017 to Freedom Mortgage Corporation, a non-member.

(b)Sterling National Bank, a member of the FHLBNY, acquired Astoria Bank in October 2017.

Accrued interest receivable

Other assets

Accrued interest receivable was $227.0$0.3 million at December 31, 2017 and $163.4 million at December 31, 2016, and represented interest receivable primarily from advances and investments.  Changes in balances would represent the timing of coupons receivable from advances and investments at the balance sheet dates.

Other assets, including prepayments and miscellaneous receivables, were $7.4 million and $7.2 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations

Our primary source of funds continues to be the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes.

Consolidated obligation bonds The carrying value of Consolidated obligation bonds (“CO bonds” or “Consolidated obligation bonds”) outstanding at December 31, 2017 was $99.3 billion (par, $98.9 billion), compared to $84.8 billion (par, $84.3 billion) at December 31, 2016.  On average, CO bonds funded 62.7% and 57.0% of earning assets in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.

A significant percentage of CO bonds was designated under an ASC 815 fair value accounting hedge.  Also, certain CO bonds were hedged by interest rate swaps in economic hedges.  We may also hedge the anticipatory issuance of fixed-rate CO bonds in a cash flow hedge under ASC 815.  Certain CO bonds were elected under the FVO.  Carrying values of CO bonds included valuation basis adjustments on bonds hedged under ASC 815, and on CO bonds elected under the FVO.  For more information about valuation basis adjustments, see Table 6.1.

Consolidated obligation discount notes The carrying value of Consolidated obligation discount notes outstanding was $49.6 billion at December 31, 2017 and $49.4 billion at December 31, 2016.  On average, discount notes funded 30.8% of earning assets in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, compared to 36.2% in the same period in the prior year.  No discount notes had been hedged under an ASC 815 fair value accounting hedge at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, although from time to time we have designated the instruments in economic hedges during the periods in this report.  Certain discount notes were hedged under an ASC 815 cash flow accounting hedge, and are discussed in financial statements, Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.  Certain discount notes were elected under the FVO.  Carrying values included valuation basis adjustments on discount notes elected under the FVO.  For more information about valuation basis adjustments, see Table 6.7 Discount Notes Outstanding.

A FHLBank’s ability to access the capital markets to issue debt, as well as our cost of funds, is dependent on our credit ratings from Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations.  Consolidated obligations of FHLBanks are rated Aaa/P-1 by Moody’s, and AA+/A-1+ by S& P.  Any rating actions onnot included.

Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations

Our primary source of funds continues to be the US Government would likely result in all individual FHLBanks’ long-term deposit ratings and the FHLBank System long-term bond rating moving in lock step with any US sovereign rating action.

The issuance and servicing of Consolidated obligation debt is performed by the Office of Finance, a joint office of the FHLBanks established by the Finance Agency.  Each FHLBank independently determines its participation in each issuance of Consolidated obligations based on, among other factors, its own funding and operating requirements, maturities, interest rates and other terms available for Consolidated obligations in the market place.  The two major debt programs offered by the Office of Finance are the Global Debt Program and the TAP issue programs.  We participate in both programs.  More information is provided in the introduction to this MD&A under Products and Services, describing Debt Financing — Consolidated Obligations.

Joint and Several Liability

Although we are primarily liable for our portion of Consolidated obligations (i.e. those issued on our behalf), we are also jointly and severally liable with the other FHLBanks for the payment of principal and interest on the Consolidated obligations of all the FHLBanks.  For more information, see financial statements, Note 18.  Commitments and Contingencies.

Consolidated obligation bonds

The following table summarizes types of bonds and discount notes. In aggregate, carrying balances of CO bonds and CO discount notes were $127.4 billion and $152.7 billion at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

CO bonds and CO discount notes The carrying value of Consolidated obligation bonds (CO bonds or Consolidated obligation bonds) was $69.7 billion (par, $68.9 billion) at December 31, 2020, compared to $78.8 billion (par, $78.1 billion) at December 31, 2019. The carrying value of Consolidated obligation discount notes outstanding was $57.7 billion at December 31, 2020 and $74.0 billion at December 31, 2019.

Interest rate hedging Significant amounts of CO bonds have been designated under an ASC 815 fair value accounting hedge. Also, certain CO bonds were hedged by interest rate swaps in economic hedges. From time to time, we have also hedged the anticipatory issuance of fixed-rate CO bonds in a cash flow hedge under ASC 815. Certain CO bonds were elected under the FVO. As a result of hedging elections under ASC 815 and the elections under the FVO, carrying values of CO bonds included valuation basis adjustments. For more information about valuation basis adjustments on CO bonds, see Table 6.1 CO Bonds by Type.

From time to time, we hedge discount notes under ASC 815 fair value accounting; additionally, certain discount notes are also hedged under ASC 815 cash flow accounting hedge. Certain discount notes were elected under the FVO. As a result of accounting elections, carrying values of discount notes may include valuation basis adjustments. For more information about valuation basis adjustments on discount notes, see Table 6.7 Discount Notes Outstanding. Also, see financial statements, Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Debt Ratings A FHLBank’s ability to access the capital markets to issue debt, as well as our cost of funds, is dependent on credit ratings from Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations. Consolidated obligations of FHLBanks are rated Aaa/P-1 by Moody’s, and AA+/A-1+ by S&P. Any rating actions on the U.S. Government would likely result in all individual FHLBanks’ long-term deposit ratings and the FHLBank System long-term bond rating moving in lock step with any U.S. sovereign rating action.

Joint and Several Liability Although we are primarily liable for our portion of Consolidated obligations (i.e. those issued on our behalf), we are also jointly and severally liable with the other FHLBanks for the payment of principal and interest on the Consolidated obligations of all the FHLBanks. For more information, see financial statements, Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies.

SOFR CO Bonds —The SOFR market continues to develop, and successful issuances of FHLBank System SOFR-linked floaters (Floating-rate notes or FRNs) have been an important development for the FHLBank debt and its support for SOFR.

The FHLBNY is an active participant in the issuance of SOFR-linked CO bonds. Outstanding balances were $8.6 billion at December 31, 2020, $9.8 billion at September 30, 2020, $12.6 billion at June 30, 2020 and $8.2 billion at December 31, 2019.


Consolidated obligation bonds

The following table summarizes types of Consolidated obligation bonds (CO Bonds) issued and outstanding (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 6.1:6.1Consolidated ObligationCO Bonds by Type

 December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amount  

Percentage

of Total

  Amount  

Percentage

of Total

 
Fixed-rate, non-callable $49,275,530   71.51% $32,588,805   41.72%
Fixed-rate, callable  1,434,000   2.08   4,803,000   6.15 
Step Up, callable  -   -   15,000   0.02 
Single-index floating rate  18,197,000   26.41   40,702,000   52.11 
                 
Total par value  68,906,530   100.00%  78,108,805   100.00%
                 
Bond premiums  184,084       95,560     
Bond discounts  (26,666)      (24,704)    
Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)  514,436       377,000     
Hedge basis adjustments on de-designated hedges (b)  132,450       139,605     
FVO (c) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest  5,464       67,043     
Total Consolidated obligation-bonds $69,716,298      $78,763,309     

Fair value basis and valuation adjustments — Key determinants are factors such as run-offs and new transactions designated under an ASC 815 hedge or elected under the FVO, the forward swap curve, the volatility of the swap rates, the remaining duration to maturity, and for bonds elected under the FVO, the changes in the spread between the swap rate and the Consolidated obligation debt yields, and changes in interest payable, which is a component of the entire fair value of FVO bonds.

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate, non-callable

 

$

24,080,150

 

24.36

%

$

32,878,545

 

38.99

%

Fixed-rate, callable

 

3,658,000

 

3.70

 

1,255,000

 

1.49

 

Step Up, callable

 

253,000

 

0.26

 

160,000

 

0.19

 

Single-index floating rate

 

70,860,000

 

71.68

 

50,034,000

 

59.33

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

98,851,150

 

100.00

%

84,327,545

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bond premiums

 

54,654

 

 

 

52,336

 

 

 

Bond discounts

 

(27,335

)

 

 

(28,527

)

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)

 

273,585

 

 

 

290,016

 

 

 

Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges (b)

 

134,920

 

 

 

140,331

 

 

 

FVO (c) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

1,074

 

 

 

2,963

 

 

 

Total Consolidated obligation-bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

 

 

$

84,784,664

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(a)Fair valueHedging valuation basis and valuation adjustmentsKey determinants are factors such as run offs and new transactions designated under an ASC 815 hedge or elected under the FVO, the forward swap curve, the volatility of the swap rates, the remaining duration to maturity, and for bonds elected under the FVO, the changes in the spread between the swap rate and the Consolidated obligation debt yields, and changes in interest payable, which is a component of the entire fair value of FVO bonds.


(a)Hedge valuation basisThe reported carrying values of hedged ConsolidatedCO bonds are adjusted for changes toin their fair values (fair value basis adjustments or fair value) that are attributable to changes in the benchmark risk being hedged, whichhedged.  Our benchmarks are LIBOR, SOFR and OIS/FedFunds, although we are actively transitioning away from LIBOR.  In the hedging relationships, a benchmark is LIBOR for the FHLBNY,elected on an instrument-by-instrument basis and isbecomes the discounting basis under ASC 815 for computing changes in fair values basis for hedged debt.  TheCO bonds. Table 6.2 CO Bonds Hedged under Qualifying Fair Value Hedges discloses notional amountamounts of CO bonds hedged under the fair value hedging standards under ASC 815 was $15.8 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $22.1 billion at December 31, 2016.  Run offs of fixed-rate hedged bonds were largely replaced by issuance of floating-rate CO bonds, which were hedged on an economic basis, explaining the decline in notional amountshedged. The application of ASC 815 qualifying CO bond hedges.

The application of the accounting methodology resulted in the recognition of $273.6 million as the net unrealizedcumulative hedge valuation basis loss at December 31, 2017, compared to a net basis losslosses of $290.0$514.4 million and $377.0 million at December 31, 2016.2020 and 2019. The benchmark curves, specifically the forward LIBOR yield curve, declined sharply at December 31, 2020. As hedge valuation basis losses were primarily driven by valuations of long-term vintage CO bonds, which had been issued atfixed-rate liabilities move with the then prevailing higher rate environment.  The year-over-year changerise and fall of the forward benchmark curves, the decline in the forward curves caused valuation basis losses was small, in line with changes at the long-end of the curve, which has remained relatively unchanged.  All CO bonds hedged under ASC 815 are fixed-rate liabilities, and fixed-rate cash flows are discounted by the LIBOR benchmark curve.  The remaining hedged bonds were primarily intermediate term fixed-rate CO bonds that generated small basis gains in a rising interest rate environment.to increase. Generally, hedge valuation basis gains and losses are unrealized and willare expected to reverse to zero if hedged debtthe CO bonds are held to their maturity or to their callare called on the early option exercise dates.  Also, see Table 6.2 Bonds Hedged under Qualifying Fair Value Hedges.

(b)(b)Valuation basis of terminated hedgesRepresents unamortized cumulative valuation basis of certain CO bonds that were no longer in fair value hedge relationships. When hedging relationships for the debt were de-designated, the net unrealized cumulative losses at the hedge termination dates were no longer adjusted for changes in the benchmark rate. Instead, the valuation basis areis being amortized on a level yield method, and the net amortization is recorded as a reduction of Interest expense. Unamortized basis adjustments on terminated hedges were basis losses of $134.9 million and $140.3 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  If the CO bonds are held to maturity, the basis losses will be fully amortized as an interest expense.

(c)(c)FVO valuation adjustments Valuation basis adjustments and accrued interest payable are recorded to recognize changes in the entire fair value (the full fair value) of CO bonds elected under the FVO. Valuations reported a net basis liability of $1.1 million at December 31, 2017 and a net liability of $3.0 million at December 31, 2016; substantially all ofTable 6.3 CO Bonds Elected under the amounts were accrued interest payable at the two dates.  The notionalFair Value Option (FVO) discloses par amounts of CO bonds elected under the FVO were $1.1 billionFVO. Valuation adjustments at December 31, 20172020 and $2.0 billion at December 31, 2016.  Run offs2019 were largely the accumulation of bonds elected undersemi-annual accrued unpaid interest included in the FVO were not replaced by new transactions, explainingfull fair value of the debt. Cumulative basis adjustments and unpaid interest have declined in line with the decline in the valuation basis.

The discounting basis for computing the change in fair value basisvolume of CO bonds elected under the FVO is the observable (FHLBank) CO bond yield curve.  All FVO bonds were short- and medium-term, and fluctuations in their valuations were not significant as the bonds re-priced relatively frequently to market indices, remaining near to par, although inter-period volatility is likely.FVO.

We have elected the FVO on an instrument-by-instrument basis.  For bonds elected under the FVO, it was not necessary to estimate changes attributable to instrument-specific credit risk, as we consider the credit worthiness of the FHLBanks to be secure and credit related adjustments unnecessary.  More information about debt elected under the FVO is provided in financial statements, Note 17.

The discounting basis for computing the change in fair value basis of bonds elected under the FVO is the observable (FHLBank) CO bond yield curve. All FVO bonds were short- and intermediate-term, and fluctuations in their “clean prices” (without accumulated unpaid interest) valuations were not significant as the bonds re-priced relatively frequently to market indices, keeping valuations near to par, although inter-period valuation volatility is likely.

We have elected the FVO on an instrument-by-instrument basis. For bonds elected under the FVO, it was not necessary to estimate changes attributable to instrument-specific credit risk, as we consider the credit worthiness of the FHLBanks to be secure and credit related adjustments unnecessary. More information about debt elected under the FVO is provided in financial statements, Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments (See Fair Value Option Disclosures).

66

Hedge volume

Hedge volume Tables 6.2 Tables 6.2 - 6.4 provide information with respect to par amounts of CO bonds based on accounting designation: (1) under hedge qualifying rules, (2) under the FVO, and (3) as an economic hedge qualifying rules, (2) under the FVO, and (3) as an economic hedge.

The following table provides information on CO bonds in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge relationship (in thousands):

 

Table 6.2: 6.2CO Bonds Hedged under Qualifying Fair Value Hedges

Qualifying hedges Generally, fixed-rate (bullet and callable) medium and long-term Consolidated obligation bonds are hedged in a Fair value ASC 815 qualifying hedge.

  Consolidated Obligation Bonds 
Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Qualifying hedges        
Fixed-rate bullet bonds $20,757,635  $11,802,950 
Fixed-rate callable bonds  15,000   70,000 
  $20,772,635  $11,872,950 

The following table provides information on CO bonds elected under the fair value option (in thousands):

 

Qualifying hedgesTable 6.3 Generally, fixed-rate (bullet and callable) medium and long-term Consolidated obligation bonds are hedged in a Fair value ASC 815 qualifying hedge.  Decline in ASC 815 fair value hedges of fixed-rate debt reflect an asset-liability management decision to replace maturing fixed-rate CO bonds with floating-rate CO bonds.

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Bonds

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Qualifying Hedges

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate bullet bonds

 

$

14,326,105

 

$

21,696,855

 

Fixed-rate callable bonds

 

1,453,000

 

400,000

 

 

 

$

15,779,105

 

$

22,096,855

 

Table 6.3:Bonds Elected under the Fair Value Option (FVO)

CO bonds elected under the FVO If at inception of a hedge we do not believe that a hedge would be highly effective in offsetting fair value changes between the derivative and the debt (hedged item), we may designate the debt under the FVO if operationally practical. We would record fair value changes of the FVO debt through earnings, and to the extent the debt is economically hedged, record changes in the fair values of the interest rate swap through earnings. The recorded balance sheet value of debt under the FVO would include the fair value basis adjustments, so that the debt’s balance sheet carrying values would be its full fair value.

  Consolidated Obligation Bonds 
Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Bonds designated under FVO $16,575,000  $12,067,000 

CO bonds elected under the FVO were generally in economic hedges by the execution of interest rate swaps that converted the fixed-rate bonds to a variable-rate instrument. We elected to account for the bonds under the FVO when we were generally unable to assert with confidence that the short- and intermediate-term bonds, or callable bonds, with short lock-out periods to the exercise of call options, would remain effective hedges as required under hedge accounting rules. Designation of CO bonds under the FVO is an asset-liability management decision. For more information, see financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.


The following table provides information on CO bonds in an economic hedge relationship (in thousands):

 

Table 6.4Economic Hedges of CO Bonds (data in table excludes CO bonds elected under the FVOFVO) If at inception of a hedge we do not believe that a hedge would be highly effective in offsetting fair value changes between the derivative and the debt (hedged item), we may designate the debt under the FVO if operationally practical.  We would record fair value changes of the FVO debt through earnings, and to the extent the debt is economically hedged, record changes of the fair values of the interest rate swap through earnings.  The recorded balance sheet value of debt under the FVO would include the fair value basis adjustments, so that the debt’s balance sheet carrying values would be its full fair value.

Economic hedges of CO bonds We issue floating-rate debt indexed to a benchmark rate (LIBOR, OIS/FF and OIS/SOFR) and may then execute interest rate swaps that would synthetically convert the cash flows to the desired floating-rate funding indexed to another benchmark to meet our asset/liability funding strategies. The operational cost of designating the debt instruments in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge outweighed the accounting benefits of marking the debt and the swap to fair values. We opted instead to designate the hedging basis swaps as standalone derivatives, and recorded changes in their fair values through earnings. The carrying value of the debt would not include fair value basis since the debt is recorded at amortized cost.

  Consolidated Obligation Bonds 
Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Bonds designated as economically hedged        
Floating-rate bonds (a) $10,875,000  $17,875,000 
Fixed-rate bonds (b)  265,000   50,000 
  $11,140,000  $17,925,000 

 

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Bonds

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Bonds designated under FVO

 

$

1,130,000

 

$

2,049,550

 

CO bonds elected under the FVO were generally in economic hedges by the execution of interest rate swaps that converted the fixed-rate bonds to a variable-rate instrument.  We elected to account for the bonds under the FVO when we were generally unable to assert with confidence that the short- and intermediate-term bonds, or callable bonds, with short lock-out periods to the exercise of call options, would remain effective hedges as required under hedge accounting rules.  Issuances of fixed-rate CO bonds have generally declined and run offs of CO bonds elected under the FVO were not replaced in an asset-liability management decision.  See financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

Table 6.4:(a)Economic Hedged Bonds (Excludes CO bonds elected under the FVO and designated in an economic hedge)

Economically hedged bonds We also issue variable rate debt with coupons that are not indexed to the 3-month LIBOR, our preferred funding base.  During the periods in this report, we issued variable-rate bonds indexed to the 1-month LIBOR.  To mitigate the economic risk of a change in the variable rate basis between the 3-month LIBOR and the 1-month LIBOR, we have executed basis rate swaps that have synthetically created 3-month LIBOR debt.  The operational cost of designating the debt instruments in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge outweighed the accounting benefits of marking the debt and the swap to fair values.  We opted instead to designate the hedging basis swaps as standalone derivatives, and recorded changes in their fair values through earnings.  The carrying value of the debt would not include fair value basis since the debt is recorded at amortized cost.

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Bonds

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Bonds designated as economically hedged

 

 

 

 

 

Floating-rate bonds (a)

 

$

35,390,000

 

$

10,225,000

 

Fixed-rate bonds (b)

 

15,000

 

 

 

 

$

35,405,000

 

$

10,225,000

 


(a)Floating-rate debt Floating-rate bonds were typically indexed to 1-month LIBOR.LIBOR and OIS-SOFR. With the execution of basis hedges, thecertain floating-rate bonds arewere swapped in economic hedges to 3-month LIBOR,indices (OIS-SOFR and OIS-FF) that met our asset/liability interest rate risk management objectives, mitigating the basis risk of a 1-month LIBOR indexed CO bond.  We have made greater use ofbetween the 1-month LIBOR indexed floating rate CO bonds as pricing was relatively favorable, driving downindex attached to the synthetic cost of funding utilizing interest rate swaps.debt and the target benchmark.

(b)

(b)Fixed-rate debt Bonds that were previously hedged and have fallen out of effectiveness.  The unamortized basis was not significant.

Consolidated obligation bonds — maturity or next call date (a)

CO Bonds — Maturity or Next Call Date (a)

 

Callable bonds contain an exercise date or a series of exercise dates that may result in a shorter redemption period. The following table summarizes par amounts of Consolidated bonds outstanding by years to maturity or next call date (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 6.5:6.5Consolidated ObligationCO Bonds — Maturity or Next Call Date

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
   Amount  Percentage
of Total
  Amount  Percentage
of Total
 
Year of maturity or next call date                
Due or callable in one year or less $46,411,150   67.36% $63,261,595   80.99%
Due or callable after one year through two years  10,750,545   15.60   4,266,125   5.46 
Due or callable after two years through three years  4,334,660   6.29   2,970,715   3.80 
Due or callable after three years through four years  1,477,355   2.14   1,388,835   1.78 
Due or callable after four years through five years  772,620   1.12   1,001,735   1.28 
Thereafter  5,160,200   7.49   5,219,800   6.69 
                 
Total par value $68,906,530   100.00% $78,108,805   100.00%

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

Amount

 

Percentage of
Total

 

Year of maturity or next call date

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due or callable in one year or less

 

$

84,436,565

 

85.42

%

$

56,586,690

 

67.10

%

Due or callable after one year through two years

 

7,266,255

 

7.35

 

19,523,965

 

23.16

 

Due or callable after two years through three years

 

1,917,400

 

1.94

 

3,206,095

 

3.80

 

Due or callable after three years through four years

 

973,595

 

0.98

 

1,035,175

 

1.23

 

Due or callable after four years through five years

 

947,835

 

0.96

 

845,320

 

1.00

 

Thereafter

 

3,309,500

 

3.35

 

3,130,300

 

3.71

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

98,851,150

 

100.00

%

84,327,545

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bond premiums

 

54,654

 

 

 

52,336

 

 

 

Bond discounts

 

(27,335

)

 

 

(28,527

)

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments

 

273,585

 

 

 

290,016

 

 

 

Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges

 

134,920

 

 

 

140,331

 

 

 

FVO - valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

1,074

 

 

 

2,963

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

 

 

$

84,784,664

 

 

 


(a)Contrasting Consolidated obligation bonds by contractual maturity dates (see financial statements, Note 11.12. Consolidated Obligations — Redemption Terms of Consolidated Obligation Bonds) with potential call dates (as reported in table above) illustrates the impact of hedging on the effective duration of the bond. With a callable bond, we have purchased the option to terminate debt at agreed upon dates from investors. CallThe call options are exercisable as either as a one-time option or as quarterly. Our current practice is to exercise our option to call a bond when the swap counterparty exercises its option to call the cancellable swap hedging the callable bond. Thus, issuance of a callable bond with an associated callable swap significantly alters the contractual maturity characteristics of the original bond and introduces the possibility of an exercise call date that is significantly shorter than the contractual maturity.


The following table summarizes callable bonds versus non-callable CO bonds outstanding (par amounts, in thousands):

 

Table 6.6: 6.6Outstanding Callable CO Bonds versus Non-callable CO bonds

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

��

Callable

 

$

3,911,000

 

$

1,415,000

 

Non-Callable

 

$

94,940,150

 

$

82,912,545

 

   December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Callable  $1,434,000  $4,818,000 
Non-Callable  $67,472,530  $73,290,805 

CO Discount Notes

 

The following table summarizes discount notes issued and outstanding (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 6.7:6.7Discount Notes Outstanding

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Par value $57,668,646  $74,094,586 
Amortized cost $57,642,972  $73,955,552 
Hedge value basis adjustments (a)  321   (105)
FVO (b) - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion  15,545   3,758 
Total discount notes $57,658,838  $73,959,205 
Weighted average interest rate  0.15%  1.60%

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Par value

 

$

49,685,334

 

$

49,392,445

 

Amortized cost

 

$

49,610,668

 

$

49,334,380

 

FVO (a) - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion

 

3,003

 

23,514

 

Total discount notes

 

$

49,613,671

 

$

49,357,894

 

Weighted average interest rate

 

1.23

%

0.48

%

(a)Hedging valuation basis adjustmentsThe reported carrying values of hedged CO discount notes are adjusted for changes in their fair values (fair value basis adjustments or fair value) that are attributable to changes in the benchmark risk being hedged. In the hedging relationships, a specific benchmark is elected on an instrument-by-instrument basis and becomes the discounting basis under ASC 815 for computing changes in fair values for the hedged CO discount notes. Notional amounts of $7.6 billion and $3.5 billion were hedged under ASC 815 qualifying fair value hedges at December 31, 2020 and 2019. The application of ASC 815 accounting methodology resulted in immaterial amounts of net cumulative hedge valuation adjustments as noted in the table above. Generally, hedge valuation basis gains and losses are unrealized and are expected to reverse to zero if the CO bonds are held to maturity or are called on the early option exercise dates.

 


(a)(b)FVO valuation adjustments Valuation basis adjustments, including unaccreted discounts, wereadjustment losses are recorded to recognize changes in the entire or full fair values, ofincluding unaccreted discounts on CO discount notes elected under the FVO.  The full fair values included unaccreted discounts.  The basis adjustment balances were net market value liabilities of $3.0 million at December 31, 2017 and $23.5 million at December 31, 2016.  At both dates, the valuation basis were predominantly unaccreted discounts.  Fair values, without unaccreted discounts, were deminimus at the two dates.  Run offs of discount notesNotional amounts elected under the FVO were not replaced by new transactions$7.1 billion and explains the decline in basis adjustments.  Notional amounts of instruments elected under the FVO were $2.3$2.2 billion at December 31, 20172020 and $12.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  2019. The discounting basis for computing changeschanges in fair values of discount notes elected under the FVO is the observable FHLBank discount note yield curve. ChangesValuation losses were largely liability balances representing unaccreted discounts. Other than unaccreted discount, changes in the valuation adjustments (clean prices) were not material. Clean prices represent fair value basis reflectchanges due to changes in the term structure of interest rates, the shape of the yield curve at the measurement dates, and the growth or decline in volume.  Ifvolume of hedged discount notes. When held to maturity, unaccreted discounts will be fully accreted to par, and unrealized fair value gains and losses will sum to zero over the term to maturity.

The following table summarizes Fair Value hedges of discount notes (in thousands):

Table 6.8Fair Value Hedges of Discount Notes

  Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes 
Principal Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Discount notes hedged under qualifying hedge $7,564,742  $3,481,705 


The following table summarizes economic hedges of discount notes (in thousands):

Table 6.9Economic Hedges of Discount Notes

  Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes 
Par Amount December 31, 2020 
Discount notes designated as economic hedges (a) $149,718 

(a)Represents CO discount notes that were de-designated; unamortized hedge basis adjustments were not material.

The following table summarizes discount notes elected and outstanding under the FVO (in thousands):

 

Table 6.8:6.10Discount Notes under the Fair Value Option (FVO)

  Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes 
Par Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Discount notes designated under FVO (a) $7,118,211  $2,182,845 

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Discount notes designated under FVO (a)

 

$

2,309,618

 

$

12,204,898

 

CO Discount notes elected under the FVO were generally in economic hedges by the execution of interest rate swaps that converted the fixed-rate notes to a variable-rate instrument.  We elected to account for the discount notes under the FVO when we were generally unable to assert with confidence that the discount notes would remain effective hedges as required under hedge accounting rules.  See financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.


(a)We elected the FVO for the discount notes to partly offset the volatility of floating-rate advances elected under the FVO.  Decline inFor CO discount notes elected under the FVO, was generally in line with the decline in advances elected under the FVO.  For discount notes elected under the FVO, it washas not been necessary to estimate changes attributable to instrument-specific credit risk, as we consider the credit worthiness of the FHLBanksFHLBank debt to be secured and credit related adjustments unnecessary.

CO discount notes elected under the FVO were generally in economic hedges with the execution of interest rate swaps that converted the fixed-rate notes to a variable-rate instrument. We elected to account for the discount notes under the FVO when we were generally unable to assert with confidence that the discount notes would remain effective hedges as required under hedge accounting rules. See financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

 

The following table summarizes Cash flow hedges of discount notes (in thousands):

 

Table 6.9:6.11Cash Flow Hedges of Discount Notes

  Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes 
Principal Amount December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Discount notes hedged under qualifying hedge (a) $2,139,000  $2,664,000 

 

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes

 

Principal Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Discount notes hedged under qualifying hedge (a)

 

$

2,349,000

 

$

1,839,000

 


(a)Par amountsAmounts represent discounts notes issued in cash flow “rollover” hedge strategies that hedged the variability of 91-day discount notes issued in sequencesequence. The original maturities of the interest rate swaps typically for periods up to 15ranged from 10-15 years. In this strategy, the discount note expense, which resets every 91 days, is synthetically converted to fixed cash flows over the hedge periods, thereby achieving hedge objectives. For more information, see financial statements, Cash Flow Hedgesflow hedge gains and losses in Note 16.17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

The following table summarizes economic hedges of discount notes (in thousands):

Table 6.10:Economic Hedges of Discount Notes (Excludes CO Discount notes elected under the FVO and designated in an economic hedge)

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Discount Notes

 

Par Amount

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Discount notes designated as economic hedges (a)

 

$

 

$

994,000

 


(a)Economic hedges of discount notes — We issue fixed rate discount note and convert cash flows to LIBOR to mitigate the economic risk of fixed-rate expenses.  Run offs of discount notes designated as economic hedges were not replaced by new transactions.


Recent Rating Actions

Table 6.11 below presents FHLBank’s long-term credit rating, short-term credit rating and outlook at February 28, 2018.

Table 6.11:FHLBNY Ratings

 

S&P

Moody’s

Long-Term/ Short-Term

Long-Term/ Short-Term

Year

Rating

Outlook

Rating

Outlook

2017

August 21, 2017

AA+/A-1+

Stable/Affirmed

November 3, 2017

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

2016

August 3, 2016

AA+/A-1+

Stable/Affirmed

November 11, 2016

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

May 6, 2016

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

April 20, 2016

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

2015

June 25, 2015

AA+/A-1+

Stable/Affirmed

December 22, 2015

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

June 24, 2015

Aaa/P-1

Stable/Affirmed

Accrued interest payable

Table 6.12 below presents FHLBank’s long-term credit rating, short-term credit rating and outlook at February 28, 2021.

 

Accrued interest payableTable 6.12FHLBNY Ratings Amounts outstanding were $162.2 million at December 31, 2017 and $130.2 million at December 31, 2016.  Accrued interest payable was comprised primarily of interest due and unpaid on Consolidated obligation bonds, which are generally payable on a semi-annual basis.  Fluctuations in unpaid interest balances on bonds are due to the timing of semi-annual coupon accruals and payments at the balance sheet dates.

 

Other liabilitiesS&P

Other liabilitiesMoody's — Amounts outstanding were $204.2 million at
Long-Term/ Short-TermLong-Term/ Short-Term
YearRatingOutlookRatingOutlook
2020July 21, 2020AA+/A-1+Stable/AffirmedDecember 31, 2017, and $167.2 million at December 31, 2016.23, 2020Aaa/P-1Stable/Affirmed
2019August 22, 2019AA+/A-1+Stable/AffirmedOctober 23, 2019Aaa/P-1Stable/Affirmed
2018August 2, 2018AA+/A-1+Stable/AffirmedOctober 24, 2018Aaa/P-1Stable/Affirmed

Accrued interest payable

Accrued interest payable Amounts outstanding were $118.0 million at December 31, 2020 and $156.9 million at December 31, 2019. Accrued interest payable was comprised primarily of interest due and unpaid on CO bonds, which are generally payable on a semi-annual basis. Fluctuations in unpaid interest balances on bonds are due to the timing of semi-annual coupon accruals and payments at the balance sheet dates.

Other Liabilities

Other liabilities — Amounts outstanding were $186.6 million at December 31, 2020 and $175.5 million at December 31, 2019. Other liabilities comprised of unfunded pension liabilities, Federal Reserve pass-through reserves held on behalf of members, and miscellaneous payables.

 

Stockholders’ CapitalStockholders’ Capital

 

The following table summarizes the components of Stockholders’ capital (in thousands):

 

Table 7.1:7.1Stockholders’ Capital

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Capital Stock (a) $5,366,830  $5,778,666 
Unrestricted retained earnings (b)  1,135,341   1,115,236 
Restricted retained earnings (c)  774,275   685,798 
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss)  (19,747)  (47,805)
Total Capital $7,256,699  $7,531,895 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Capital Stock (a)

 

$

6,750,005

 

$

6,307,766

 

Unrestricted retained earnings (b)

 

1,067,097

 

1,028,674

 

Restricted retained earnings (c)

 

479,185

 

383,291

 

Accumulated Other Comprehensive Loss

 

(55,249

)

(95,650

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Capital

 

$

8,241,038

 

$

7,624,081

 


(a)Stockholders’ Capital — Capital stock increased in line with the increase in advances borrowed. When an advance matures or is prepaid, the excess capital stock is re-purchasedrepurchased by the FHLBNY. When an advance is borrowed or a member joins the FHLBNY’s membership, the member is required to purchase capital stock.  For more information about activity and membership stock, see Note 13. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

(b)Unrestricted retained earnings Net Income for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 was $479.5 million; $95.9 million was set aside towardsincome is added to this balance. Dividends are paid out of this balance. Funds are transferred to Restricted retained earnings.  Fromearnings balances that are determined in line with the remaining amount, we paid $345.2 million to members as dividends inapproved provisions of the twelve months ended December 31, 2017.  As a result, Unrestrictedconduct of restricted retained earnings increased by $38.4 million to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2017.account.

(c)Restricted retained earnings Restricted retained earnings balance at December 31, 20172020 has grown to $479.2$774.3 million from the third quarter oftime the provisions were implemented in 2011 when the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, agreed to set up a restricted retained earnings account. The FHLBNY will allocate at least 20% of its net income to the FHLBNY’s Restricted retained earnings account until the balance of the account equals at least 1% of FHLBNY’s average balance of outstanding Consolidated Obligations for the previous quarter. By way of reference, if the Restricted retained earnings target was to be calculated at December 31, 2020, the target amount would be $1.3 billion based on the FHLBNY’s average consolidated obligations outstanding during the current quarter, as compared to actual Restricted retained earnings of $774.3 million at December 31, 2020. Also see Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.


The following table summarizes the components of AOCI (in thousands):

 

Table 7.2:7.2Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) (“AOCI”)(AOCI)

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)        
Non-credit portion on held-to-maturity securities, net (a) $(5,588) $(7,571)
Net market value unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale securities (b)  280,626   97,868 
Net Fair value hedging gains (losses) on available-for-sale securities (b)  (44,052)  (11,593)
Net Cash flow hedging gains (losses) (c)  (207,204)  (94,516)
Employee supplemental retirement plans (d)  (43,529)  (31,993)
Total Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) $(19,747) $(47,805)

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 

 

 

 

Non-credit portion of OTTI on held-to-maturity securities, net of accretion (a)

 

$

(14,803

)

$

(30,234

)

Net unrealized gains on available-for-sale securities (b)

 

10,178

 

4,224

 

Net unrealized losses on hedging activities (c)

 

(19,877

)

(47,018

)

Employee supplemental retirement plans (d)

 

(30,747

)

(22,622

)

Total Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

$

(55,249

)

$

(95,650

)


(a)OTTI — Non-credit OTTIRepresents cumulative unamortized non-credit losses (also referred to as non-credit OTTI) recorded prior to the application of the framework under ASU 2016-13.  Balances in AOCI have declined at December 31, 2017, primarily due to accretion recorded as a reduction in AOCI (and a corresponding increase in the balance sheet carrying values of the OTTIimpaired securities), and no additional OTTI was recorded in the period..

(b)Fair values of available-for-sale securitiesBalances represent net unrealized fairFair value gainsamounts of MBS securities and grantor trust funds designated as available-for-sale.  The valuation of MBS in the AFS portfolio were substantially in unrealized gain positions at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

(c)Cash flow hedge valuation losses — Cumulative fair value losses from the two cash flow hedging strategies were $19.9$280.6 million and $47.0$97.9 million at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016.  Financial statements, Note 16.  Derivatives2019 represent market value net unrealized gains of securities designated as AFS.  Amounts of $44.1 million and Hedging Activities, includes a rollforward analysis, which provides more information with respect$11.6 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 represent hedging valuation basis losses of AFS securities designated in ASC 815 fair value hedges. The hedge valuation losses were due to changes in AOCI.the benchmark rates, representing the risks being hedged. Hedging basis will reverse to zero if hedges are allowed to mature.

(c)Cash flow hedging losses recorded in AOCI were primarily the result of cash flow hedges of sequential issuance of discount notes; also included immaterial valuation basis of cash flow hedges of anticipatory issuance of CO bonds. See Table 7.3 AOCI Rollforward due to ASC 815 Hedging Programs.
(d)Employee supplemental plans — Balances represent actuarially determined supplemental pension and postretirement health benefit liabilities that were not recognized through earnings.  Amounts are amortized as an expense through Compensation and benefits over an actuarially determined period.

Table 7.3AOCI Rollforward due to ASC 815 Hedging Programs

The following table presents amounts recognized in and reclassified out of AOCI due to cash flow and fair value hedges (in thousands): Gains/ (losses) are recorded in AOCI.

  December 31, 2020 
  Cash Flow Hedges  Fair Value Hedges 
   

Rollover Hedge

Program

   

Anticipatory Hedge

Program

    AFS Securities 
Beginning balance $(89,083) $(5,433) $(11,593)
Changes in fair values (a)  (109,411)  (1,109)  (32,459)
Amount reclassified  -   1,352   - 
Fair Value - closed contract  -   (3,520)  - 
Ending balance $(198,494) $(8,710) $(44,052)
             
Notional amount of  swaps outstanding $2,139,000  $-  $1,134,000 

  December 31, 2019 
  Cash Flow Hedges  Fair Value Hedges 
   

Rollover Hedge

Program

   

Anticipatory Hedge

Program

    AFS Securities 
Beginning balance $17,412  $(653) $- 
Changes in fair values (a)  (106,495)  5,478   (11,593)
Amount reclassified  -   613   - 
Fair Value - closed contract  -   (10,871)  - 
Ending balance $(89,083) $(5,433) $(11,593)
             
Notional amount of  swaps outstanding $2,664,000  $89,000  $532,000 

(a)Represents fair value changes of open swap contracts in cash flow hedges. For more information, see financial statements,Financial Statements, Note 15.  Employee Retirement Plans.17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.


 

Dividends— By Finance Agency regulation, dividends may be paid out of current earnings or if certain conditions are met, may be paid out of previously retained earnings. We may be restricted from paying dividends if we do not comply with any of the Finance Agency’s minimum capital requirements or if payment would cause us to fail to meet any of the minimum capital requirements, including our Retained earnings target as established by the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY. In addition, we may not pay dividends if any principal or interest due on any Consolidated obligations has not been paid in full, or if we fail to satisfy certain liquidity requirements under applicable Finance Agency regulations. None of these restrictions applied for any period presented.

 

The following table summarizes dividends paid and payout ratios:

 

Table 7.3:7.4Dividends Paid and Payout Ratios

  Twelve months ended 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Cash dividends paid per share $5.74  $6.49 
Dividends paid (a) (c) $348,234  $365,636 
Pay-out ratio (b)  78.72%  77.37%

 

 

 

Twelve months ended

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Cash dividends paid per share

 

$

5.54

 

$

4.73

 

Dividends paid (a) (c)

 

$

345,152

 

$

259,326

 

Pay-out ratio (b)

 

71.99

%

64.65

%


(a)(a)In thousands.

(b)(b)Dividend paid during the period divided by net income for the period.

(c)(c)Does not include dividenddividends paid to non-member;non-members; for accounting purposes, such dividends are recorded as interest expense.

Derivative Instruments and Hedging ActivitiesDerivative Instruments and Hedging Activities

Interest rate swaps, swaptions, cap and floor agreements (collectively, derivatives) enable us to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates by adjusting the effective maturity, repricing frequency, or option characteristics of financial instruments. To a limited extent, we also use interest rate swaps to hedge changes in interest rates prior to debt issuance and essentially lock in funding costs. Finance Agency regulations prohibit the speculative use of derivatives. For additional information about the methodologies adopted for the fair value measurement of derivatives, see financial statements, Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

The following tables summarize the principal derivatives hedging strategies outstanding as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019:

 

Interest rate swaps, swaptions, cap and floor agreements (collectively, derivatives) enable us to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates by adjusting the effective maturity, repricing frequency, or option characteristics of financial instruments.  To a limited extent, we also use interest rate swaps to hedge changes in interest rates prior to debt issuance and essentially lock in funding costs. Finance Agency regulations prohibit the speculative use of derivatives.  For additional information about the methodologies adopted for the fair value measurement of derivatives, see financial statements, Note 17.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

The following tables summarize the principal derivatives hedging strategies outstanding as of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016:

Table 8.1:8.1Derivative Hedging Strategies — Advances

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Pay-fixed, receive float interest rate swap (without options) Converts the advance’s fixed rate to a variable-rate index. Fair Value $29,969  $32,336 
   Economic $1,237  $- 
Pay-fixed, receive float interest rate swap (with options) Converts the advance’s fixed rate to a variable-rate index and offsets option risk in the advance. Fair Value $7,946  $8,366 
Pay-fixed with embedded features, receive-float interest-rate swap (non-callable) Reduces interest-rate sensitivity and repricing gaps by converting the advance’s fixed rate to a variable-rate index and/or offsets embedded option risk in the advance. Fair Value $360  $20 
Pay float, receive float basis swap Reduces interest-rate sensitivity and repricing gaps by converting the advance’s variable-rate to a different variable-rate index. Economic $8,450  $- 

 

Derivatives/Terms

 

Hedging Strategy

 

Accounting Designation

 

December 31, 2017
Notional Amount
(in millions)

 

December 31, 2016
Notional Amount
(in millions)

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

To convert fixed rate advance to LIBOR floating rate advance

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value

 

$

60

 

$

77

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap cancellable by counterparty

 

To convert fixed rate putable advance to LIBOR floating rate putable advance

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value

 

$

14

 

$

14

Pay fixed, receive adjustable interest rate swap

 

To convert fixed rate advance (with embedded caps) to LIBOR adjustable rate

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

30

 

$

180

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap cancellable by FHLBNY

 

To convert fixed rate callable advance to LIBOR floating rate callable advance

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

17

 

$

5

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap cancellable by counterparty

 

To convert fixed rate putable advance to LIBOR floating rate putable advance

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

567

 

$

2,498

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap no longer cancellable by counterparty

 

To convert fixed rate advance (no-longer putable) to LIBOR floating rate advance (no-longer putable)

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

1,015

 

$

1,083

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap no longer cancellable by FHLBNY

 

To convert fixed rate advance (no-longer callable) to LIBOR floating rate advance (no-longer callable)

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

5

 

$

5

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

To convert fixed rate advance to LIBOR floating rate advance

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

51,963

 

$

37,466

Purchased interest rate options

 

To offset interest rate options in variable rate advance

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value Risk

 

$

3

 

$

6

Pay fixed, receive floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

Fixed rate advance converted to LIBOR floating rate advance; matched to advance accounted for under fair value option

 

Fair Value Option

 

$

 

$

430

Table 8.2Derivative Hedging Strategies — Investments

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Pay-fixed, receive float interest-rate swap Converts the investment’s fixed rate to a variable-rate index. Fair Value $1,134  $532 
    Economic $11,634  $15,230 


Table 8.3Derivative Hedging Strategies — Consolidated Obligation Bonds

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Receive-fixed or -structured, pay float interest rate swap (without options) Converts the bond’s fixed or structured rate to a variable-rate index. Fair Value $20,758  $11,803 
    Economic $16,840  $9,075 
Receive-fixed or -structured, pay float interest rate swap (with options) Converts the bond’s fixed- or structured-rate to a variable-rate index and offsets option risk in the bond. Fair Value $15  $70 
    Economic $-  $3,042 
Receive-float, pay-float basis swap Reduces interest-rate sensitivity and repricing gaps by converting the bond’s variable-rate to a different variable-rate index. Economic $10,875  $17,875 
Forward-starting interest rate swap Locks in the cost of funding on anticipated issuance of debt. Cash Flow $-  $   89 

 

Table 8.2:8.4Derivative Hedging Strategies — Consolidated Obligation LiabilitiesDiscount Notes

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Receive-fixed, pay float interest-rate swap Converts the discount note’s fixed rate to a variable-rate index. Fair Value $7,565  $3,482 
    Economic $7,268  $2,183 
Pay-fixed, receive float interest-rate swap Hedging sequential issuance of discount notes to reduce interest-rate sensitivity. Cash Flow $      2,139  $       2,664 

 

Derivatives/Terms

 

Hedging Strategy

 

Accounting Designation

 

December 31, 2017 Notional Amount
(in millions)

 

December 31, 2016 Notional Amount
(in millions)

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap cancellable by counterparty

 

To convert fixed rate callable consolidated obligation bond to LIBOR floating rate callable bond

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value

 

$

15

 

$

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap cancellable by counterparty

 

To convert fixed rate callable consolidated obligation bond to LIBOR floating rate callable bond

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

1,453

 

$

400

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap no longer cancellable

 

To convert fixed rate consolidated obligation bond (no-longer callable) to LIBOR floating rate bond (no-longer callable)

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

130

 

$

120

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

To convert fixed rate consolidated obligation bond to LIBOR floating rate bond

 

Fair Value Hedge

 

$

14,196

 

$

21,577

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap

 

To convert fixed rate consolidated obligation discount note to LIBOR floating rate discount note

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value

 

$

 

$

994

Pay fixed, receive LIBOR interest rate swap

 

To offset the variability of cash flows associated with interest payments on forecasted issuance of fixed rate consolidated obligation bond

 

Cash flow hedge

 

$

30

 

$

95

Pay fixed, receive LIBOR interest rate swap

 

To offset the variability of cash flows associated with interest payments on forecasted issuance of fixed rate consolidated obligation discount note

 

Cash flow hedge

 

$

2,349

 

$

1,839

Basis swap

 

To convert one LIBOR index to another LIBOR index to reduce interest rate sensitivity and repricing gaps

 

Economic Hedge of Cash Flows

 

$

35,390

 

$

10,225

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap cancellable by counterparty

 

Fixed rate callable consolidated obligation bond converted to LIBOR floating rate callable bond; matched to callable bond accounted for under fair value option

 

Fair Value Option

 

$

1,115

 

$

30

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap no longer cancelable

 

Fixed rate callable consolidated obligation bond converted to LIBOR floating rate bond; matched to bond no-longer callable accounted for under fair value option.

 

Fair Value Option

 

$

15

 

$

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

Fixed rate consolidated obligation bond converted to LIBOR floating rate bond; matched to bond accounted for under fair value option

 

Fair Value Option

 

$

 

$

2,020

Receive fixed, pay floating interest rate swap non-cancellable

 

Fixed rate consolidated obligation discount note converted to LIBOR floating rate discount note; matched to discount note accounted for under fair value option

 

Fair Value Option

 

$

2,310

 

$

12,205

Table 8.3:8.5Derivative Hedging Strategies — Economic hedges of Trading Securities

Derivatives/Terms

 

Hedging Strategy

 

Accounting Designation

 

December 31, 2017
Notional Amount
(in millions)

 

December 31, 2016
Notional Amount
(in millions)

Pay fixed, receive OIS index interest rate swaps

 

To convert fixed rate trading securities to the OIS indexed floating-rate.

 

Economic Hedge

 

$

1,408

 

$

131

Table 8.4:

Derivative Hedging Strategies — Balance Sheet and

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Interest-rate cap or floor Protects against changes in income of certain assets due to changes in interest rates. Economic $      800  $      800 

Table 8.6Derivative Hedging Strategies — Intermediation

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Pay-fixed, receive-float interest rate swap, and receive-fixed, pay-float interest rate swap To offset interest-rate swaps executed with members by executing interest rate swaps with derivatives counterparties. Economic $        888  $       1,072 

 

Derivatives/Terms

 

Hedging Strategy

 

Accounting Designation

 

December 31, 2017
Notional Amount
(in millions)

 

December 31, 2016
Notional Amount
(in millions)

Purchased interest rate cap

 

Economic hedge on the Balance Sheet

 

Economic Hedge

 

$

2,692

 

$

2,692

Intermediary positions- interest rate swaps

 

To offset interest rate swaps executed with members by executing offsetting derivatives with counterparties

 

Economic Hedge of Fair Value

 

$

386

 

$

258

Table 8.7Derivatives Financial Instruments by ProductDerivative Hedging Strategies — Stand-Alone

The following table summarizes the notional amounts and estimated fair values of derivative financial instruments (excluding accrued interest) by product and type of accounting treatment.  The table also provides a reconciliation of fair value basis gains and (losses) of derivatives to the Statements of Condition

Hedged Item / Hedging Instrument Hedging Objective Hedge Accounting
Designation
 December 31, 2020
Notional Amount
(in millions)
  December 31, 2019
Notional Amount
(in millions)
 
Mortgage delivery commitment Exposed to fair-value risk associated with fixed-rate mortgage purchase commitments. Economic $         10  $        45 

Derivative Credit Risk Exposure and Concentration

In addition to market risk, we are subject to credit risk in derivative transactions because of the potential for non-performance by the counterparties, which could result in the FHLBNY having to acquire a replacement derivative from a different counterparty at a cost that may exceed its recorded fair values. We are also subject to operational risks in the execution and servicing of derivative transactions. The degree of counterparty credit risk may depend on, among other factors, the extent to which netting procedures and/or the provision of collateral are used to mitigate the risk. Summarized below are our risk measurement and mitigation processes:

74

Risk measurement — We estimate exposure to credit loss on derivative instruments by calculating the replacement cost, on a present value basis, to settle at current market prices all outstanding derivative contracts in a gain position, net of collateral pledged by the counterparty. All derivative contracts with non-members are also subject to master netting agreements or other right of offset arrangements.

Exposure — In determining credit risk, we consider accrued interest receivable and payable, and the legal right to offset assets and liabilities by counterparty. We attempt to mitigate exposure by requiring derivative counterparties to pledge cash collateral if the amount of exposure is above the collateral threshold agreements. When we post excess cash collateral, we consider the excess collateral as our derivative exposure.

Our credit exposures (derivatives in a net gain position) were to highly-rated counterparties and Derivative Clearing Organizations (DCO) that met our credit quality standards. Our exposures also included open derivative contracts executed on behalf of member institutions, and the exposures were collateralized under standard advance collateral agreements with our members. For such transactions, acting as an intermediary, we offset the transaction by purchasing equivalent notional amounts of derivatives from unrelated derivative counterparties. For more information, see financial statements, Credit Risk due to non-performance by counterparties, in Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Risk mitigation — We attempt to mitigate derivative counterparty credit risk by contracting only with experienced counterparties with investment-quality credit ratings that meet our credit quality standards. Annually, our management and Board of Directors review and approve all non-member derivative counterparties. We monitor counterparties on an ongoing basis for significant business events, including ratings actions taken by a Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organization (NRSRO). All approved derivatives counterparties must enter into a master ISDA agreement with us before we execute a trade through that counterparty. In addition, for all bilateral OTC derivatives, we have executed the Credit Support Annex to the ISDA agreement that provides for collateral support at predetermined thresholds. For Cleared-OTC derivatives, margin requirements are mandated under the Dodd-Frank Act. We believe that such arrangements — margin requirements, the selection of experienced, highly-rated counterparties and ongoing monitoring — have sufficiently mitigated our exposures, and we do not anticipate any credit losses on derivative contracts.

75

Derivatives Counterparty Credit Ratings

For information, and an analysis of our exposure due to non-performance of swap counterparties, see Table “Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities — Net Presentation” in Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities to financial statements. For information about the methodologies adopted for the fair value measurement of derivatives, see financial statements, Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

The following tables summarize notional amounts and fair values for the FHLBNY’s derivative exposures as represented by derivatives in fair value gain positions (in thousands):

 

Table 8.5:8.8Derivatives Financial Instruments by Product

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Total Estimated

 

 

 

Total Estimated

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

 

 

 

 

(Excluding

 

 

 

(Excluding

 

 

 

Total Notional

 

Accrued

 

Total Notional

 

Accrued

 

 

 

Amount

 

Interest)

 

Amount

 

Interest)

 

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances-fair value hedges

 

$

53,597,471

 

$

264,700

 

$

41,236,991

 

$

(3,676

)

Consolidated obligation fair value hedges

 

15,779,105

 

277,315

 

22,096,855

 

293,821

 

Cash Flow-anticipated transactions

 

2,379,000

 

(23,334

)

1,934,000

 

(47,533

)

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments (b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances hedges

 

77,288

 

(149

)

97,445

 

(372

)

Trading securities

 

1,408,107

 

563

 

130,930

 

41

 

Consolidated obligation hedges

 

35,405,000

 

4,181

 

11,219,000

 

(573

)

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

12,952

 

(5

)

28,447

 

(40

)

Balance sheet

 

2,692,000

 

891

 

2,692,000

 

5,200

 

Intermediary positions hedges

 

386,000

 

384

 

258,000

 

319

 

Derivatives matching Advances designated under FVO (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps-advances

 

 

 

430,000

 

62

 

Derivatives matching COs designated under FVO (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps-consolidated obligation bonds

 

1,130,000

 

(295

)

2,049,550

 

(1,490

)

Interest rate swaps-consolidated obligation discount notes

 

2,309,618

 

(366

)

12,204,897

 

(3,528

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total notional and fair values excluding variation margin

 

$

115,176,541

 

$

523,885

 

$

94,378,115

 

$

242,231

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variation margin (Note 1)

 

 

 

(465,803

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total derivatives fair values excluding accrued interest

 

 

 

$

58,082

 

 

 

$

242,231

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash collateral pledged to counterparties (d)

 

 

 

11,064

 

 

 

255,967

 

Cash collateral received from counterparties

 

 

 

(48,660

)

 

 

(354,658

)

Accrued interest

 

 

 

30,649

 

 

 

40,350

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative balance net of cash collateral and variation margin

 

 

 

$

51,135

 

 

 

$

183,890

 

Statements of Condition balances

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net derivative asset balance ( e)

 

 

 

$

112,742

 

 

 

$

328,875

 

Net derivative liability balance (e)

 

 

 

(61,607

)

 

 

(144,985

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative balance net of cash collateral

 

 

 

$

51,135

 

 

 

$

183,890

 

Non-cash collateral

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Security collateral pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (f)

 

 

 

$

239,064

 

 

 

$

 

Security collateral received from counterparty (f)

 

 

 

(103,036

)

 

 

(104,470

)

 

 

 

 

$

136,028

 

 

 

$

(104,470

)

Net exposure from (to) counterparties

 

 

 

$

187,163

 

 

 

$

79,420

 


(a)Derivatives that qualified as a fair value or cash flow hedge under ASC 815 hedge accounting rules.

(b)Derivatives not designated under ASC 815 hedge accounting rules; such derivatives were utilized as economic hedges (“standalone”).

(c)Derivatives that were utilized as economic hedges of financial instruments elected under the FVO.

(d)Cash collateral pledged to counterpartiesAt December 31, 2016, cash collateral included $222.1 million of initial margins posted to Derivative Clearing Organizations through FCMs.

(e)As reported in the Statements of condition.

(f)Security collateral are U.S. Treasury securities.  Security collateral are not permitted to be offset, but would be eligible for offsetting to the extent an event of default occurred and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the netting and collateral rights has been obtained.

Note 1 For cleared derivatives, Variation margin (“VM” or “variation margin”) is exchanged daily between the DCOs and the FHLBNY.  Generally, variation margin represents mark to market gains and losses on derivative contracts.  At December 31, 2017, we held $465.8 million in variation margin in cash posted by DCOs.  At December 31, 2017, in accordance with our interpretation of the rulesof the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), we have classified VM as settlement values of cleared derivatives and not as collateral.  At December 31, 2016, VM held by the FHLBNY was $321.1 million, which amount was classified as collateral.

The categories “Fair value,” “Commitment,” and “Cash flow” hedges represented derivative transactions accounted for as hedges.  The category of “Economic” hedges represented derivative transactions under hedge strategies that did not qualify for hedge accounting treatment but were an approved risk management strategy.

Derivative Credit Risk Exposure and Concentration

In addition to market risk, we are subject to credit risk in derivative transactions because of the potential for non-performance by the counterparties, which could result in the FHLBNY having to acquire a replacement derivative from a different counterparty at a cost that may exceed its recorded fair values.  We are also subject to operational risks in the execution and servicing of derivative transactions.  The degree of counterparty credit risk may depend on, among other factors, the extent to which netting procedures and/or the provision of collateral are used to mitigate the risk.  Summarized below are our risk measurement and mitigation processes:

Risk measurement — We estimate exposure to credit loss on derivative instruments by calculating the replacement cost, on a present value basis, to settle at current market prices all outstanding derivative contracts in a gain position, net of collateral pledged by the counterparty.  All derivative contracts with non-members are also subject to master netting agreements or other right of offset arrangements.

Exposure — In determining credit risk, we consider accrued interest receivable and payable, and the legal right to offset assets and liabilities by counterparty.  We attempt to mitigate exposure by requiring derivative counterparties to pledge cash collateral if the amount of exposure is above the collateral threshold agreements.

Our credit exposures (derivatives in a net gain position) were to highly-rated counterparties and Derivative Clearing Organizations (“DCO”) that met our credit quality standards.  Our exposures also included open derivative contracts executed on behalf of member institutions, and the exposures were collateralized under standard advance collateral agreements with our members.  For such transactions, acting as an intermediary, we offset the transaction by purchasing equivalent notional amounts of derivatives from unrelated derivative counterparties.  For more information, see financial statements, Credit Risk due to non-performance by counterparties, in Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Risk mitigation — We attempt to mitigate derivative counterparty credit risk by contracting only with experienced counterparties with investment-quality credit ratings that meet our credit quality standards.  Annually, our management and Board of Directors review and approve all non-member derivative counterparties.  We monitor counterparties on an ongoing basis for significant business events, including ratings actions taken by Nationally Recognized Statistical Rating Organizations (“NRSRO”).  All approved derivatives counterparties must enter into a master ISDA agreement with our bank before we execute a trade through that counterparty.  In addition, for all bilateral OTC derivatives, we have executed the Credit Support Annex to the ISDA agreement that provides for collateral support at predetermined thresholds.  For Cleared-OTC derivatives, margin requirements are mandated under the Dodd-Frank Act.  We believe that such arrangements — margin requirements, the selection of experienced, highly-rated counterparties and ongoing monitoring — have sufficiently mitigated our exposures, and we do not anticipate any credit losses on derivative contracts.

Derivatives Counterparty Credit Ratings

With certain counterparties, specifically the derivative central clearing organizations, we post initial margin in addition to variation margin.  Together, it typically results in excess cash collateral posted by the FHLBNY.  We consider the excess collateral as our derivative exposure.  In such instances, the “Net Derivatives Fair Values before Collateral” may be negative (DCOs are exposed).  However, after including excess cash margins, the FHLBNY is exposed.

The following table summarizes notional amounts and fair values for the FHLBNY’s derivative exposures as represented by derivatives in fair value gain positions.  For derivatives where the counterparties were in gain positions, the fair values and notional amounts are grouped together (in thousands):

Table 8.6:

Derivatives Counterparty Credit Ratings

  December 31, 2020 
Credit Rating  Notional Amount   Net Derivatives
Fair Value
Before
Collateral
   Cash Collateral
Pledged To (From)
Counterparties (a)
   Balance Sheet Net
Credit Exposure
   Non-Cash Collateral
Pledged To (From)
Counterparties (b)
   Net Credit
Exposure to
Counterparties
 
Non-member counterparties                        
Asset positions with credit exposure                        
Uncleared derivatives                        
Single A asset (c) $2,515,000  $28,880  $(18,385) $10,495  $-  $10,495 
Cleared derivatives assets (d)  20,297,279   1,670   -   1,670   43,519   45,189 
   22,812,279   30,550   (18,385)  12,165   43,519   55,684 
Liability positions with credit exposure                        
Uncleared derivatives                        
Single A liability (c)  10,000   (300)  300   -   -   - 
Triple B liability (c)  2,833,000   (305,483)  309,300   3,817   -   3,817 
Cleared derivatives liability (d)  94,431,914   -   -   -   586,853   586,853 
   97,274,914   (305,783)  309,600   3,817   586,853   590,670 
Total derivative positions with non-member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure  120,087,193   (275,233)  291,215   15,982   630,372   646,354 
Member institutions                        
Derivative positions with member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure  444,000   20,659   -   20,659   (20,659)  - 
Delivery commitments                        
Derivative position with delivery commitments  9,777   28   -   28   (28)  - 
Total derivative position with members  453,777   20,687   -   20,687   (20,687)  - 
Total $120,540,970  $(254,546) $291,215  $36,669  $609,685  $646,354 
Derivative positions without credit exposure  7,346,674                     
Total notional $127,887,644                     

  December 31, 2019 
Credit Rating Notional Amount  Net Derivatives
Fair Value
Before
Collateral
  Cash Collateral
Pledged To (From)
Counterparties (a)
  Balance Sheet Net
Credit Exposure
  Non-Cash Collateral
Pledged To (From)
Counterparties (b)
  Net Credit
Exposure to
Counterparties
 
Non-member counterparties                        
Asset positions with credit exposure                        
Uncleared derivatives                        
Double A asset (c) $25,000  $6  $-  $6  $-  $6 
Single A asset (c)  4,415,000   122,157   (4,400)  117,757   (105,667)  12,090 
Cleared derivatives assets (d)  80,839,066   15,111   85,241   100,352   251,177   351,529 
   85,279,066   137,274   80,841   218,115   145,510   363,625 
Liability positions with credit exposure                        
Uncleared derivatives                        
Single A liability (c)  4,270,446   (43,240)  47,310   4,070   -   4,070 
Triple B liability (c)  2,893,000   (128,059)  134,250   6,191   -   6,191 
   7,163,446   (171,299)  181,560   10,261   -   10,261 
Total derivative positions with non-member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure  92,442,512   (34,025)  262,401   228,376   145,510   373,886 
Member institutions                        
Derivative positions with member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure  536,000   9,467   -   9,467   (9,467)  - 
Delivery commitments                        
Derivative position with delivery commitments  44,768   104   -   104   (104)  - 
Total derivative position with members  580,768   9,571   -   9,571   (9,571)  - 
Total $93,023,280  $(24,454) $262,401  $237,947  $135,939  $373,886 
Derivative positions without credit exposure  15,659,413                     
Total notional $108,682,693                     

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Net Derivatives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Value in a

 

 

 

Cash

 

 

 

Non-Cash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Asset

 

Cash Collateral

 

Initial

 

 

 

Collateral

 

Non-cash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Position Before

 

and Variation

 

Margin

 

Balance

 

Initial

 

Collateral

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collateral &

 

Margin Pledged

 

Exchanged

 

Sheet Net

 

Margin

 

Pledged

 

Net Credit

 

 

 

Notional

 

Variation

 

To (From)

 

With

 

Credit

 

Pledged

 

To (From)

 

Exposure to

 

Credit Rating

 

Amount

 

Margin (e)

 

Counterparties (a)(e)

 

DCOs (d)

 

Exposure

 

to DCOs (d)

 

Counterparties (b)

 

Counterparties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-member counterparties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asset positions with credit exposure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Single - A (c)

 

$

2,430,433

 

$

157,922

 

$

(45,180

)

$

 

$

112,742

 

$

 

$

(103,036

)

$

9,706

 

Liability positions - Cleared derivatives (d)

 

103,391,947

 

 

 

 

 

239,064

 

 

239,064

 

Total derivative positions with non-member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure

 

$

105,822,380

 

$

157,922

 

$

(45,180

)

$

 

$

112,742

 

$

239,064

 

$

(103,036

)

$

248,770

 

Member institutions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative positions with member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure

 

$

193,000

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Delivery Commitments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative position with delivery commitments

 

12,952

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total derivative position with members

 

205,952

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative positions with credit exposure

 

106,028,332

 

$

157,922

 

$

(45,180

)

$

 

$

112,742

 

$

239,064

 

$

(103,036

)

$

248,770

 

Derivative positions without fair value credit exposure

 

9,148,209

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total notional

 

$

115,176,541

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash

 

 

 

Non-Cash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Initial

 

 

 

Collateral

 

Non-cash

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Derivatives

 

Cash Collateral

 

Margin

 

Balance

 

Initial

 

Collateral

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

Pledged

 

Exchanged

 

Sheet Net

 

Margin

 

Pledged

 

Net Credit

 

 

 

Notional

 

Before

 

To (From)

 

With

 

Credit

 

Pledged

 

To (From)

 

Exposure to

 

Credit Rating

 

Amount

 

Collateral

 

Counterparties (a)

 

DCOs (d)

 

Exposure

 

to DCOs (d)

 

Counterparties (b)

 

Counterparties

 

Non-member counterparties

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asset positions with credit exposure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Single - A (c)

 

$

2,100,433

 

$

146,316

 

$

(33,600

)

$

 

$

112,716

 

$

 

$

(104,470

)

$

8,246

 

Cleared derivatives (d)

 

81,202,783

 

305,243

 

(311,216

)

222,067

 

216,094

 

 

 

216,094

 

 

 

83,303,216

 

451,559

 

(344,816

)

222,067

 

328,810

 

 

 

(104,470

)

224,340

 

Excess Collateral

 

 

 

65

 

 

65

 

 

 

65

 

Total derivative positions with non-member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure

 

$

83,303,216

 

$

451,559

 

$

(344,751

)

$

222,067

 

$

328,875

 

$

 

$

(104,470

)

$

224,405

 

Member institutions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative positions with member counterparties to which the Bank had credit exposure

 

$

129,000

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Delivery Commitments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative position with delivery commitments

 

28,447

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total derivative position with members

 

157,447

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivative positions with credit exposure

 

83,460,663

 

$

451,559

 

$

(344,751

)

$

222,067

 

$

328,875

 

$

 

$

(104,470

)

$

224,405

 

Derivative positions without fair value credit exposure

 

10,917,452

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total notional

 

$

94,378,115

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


(a)Includes marginsWhen collateral is posted to counterparties in excess of fair valuesvalue liabilities that were postedare due to counterparties, and werethe excess collateral is classified as a component of derivative assets, as they representedthe excess represents a receivable and an exposure for the FHLBNY.
(b)

(b)Non-cash collateral securities. Non-cash collateral iswas not deducted from net derivative assets on the balance sheet as control over the securities arewas not transferred.
(c)

(c)NRSRO Ratings.
(d)

(d)On Clearedcleared derivatives, we are required to pledge initial margin (considered as collateral) to Derivative Clearing Organizations (“DCOs”).(DCOs) in cash or securities. At December 31, 2017,2020 and 2019, we had pledged $239.1$630.4 million and $251.2 million in marketable securities to fulfill our obligation to pledge initial margin.  At December 31, 2016, wesecurities.  No cash was posted $222.1 million in cash as initial margin.

(e)Variation margin exchanged with our DCOson cleared swaps at December 31, 20172020; $85.2 million was considered the settlement of the fair value of the cleared derivative itself, and not collateral.  At December 31, 2016, variation margin was considered collateral.  The change in classification is in accordance with the rules of the CFTC, and had no impact on the net derivative assets and liabilities presented in the Statements of Condition.

Uncleared derivatives Notional amounts of uncleared (bilaterally executed) OTC derivatives were $11.8 billionposted at December 31, 2017 and $13.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  For bilaterally executed OTC derivatives (uncleared derivatives), many of the Credit Support Amount (“CSA”) agreements with swap dealers stipulate that so long as we retain our GSE status, ratings downgrades would not result in the posting of additional collateral.  Other CSA agreements with derivative counterparties would require us to post additional collateral based solely on an adverse change in our credit rating by S&P and Moody’s.  In the event of a split rating, the lower rating will apply.

On the assumption that we will retain our status as a GSE, for our uncleared derivatives we estimate that a one notch downgrade of our credit rating by S&P would not have permitted swap dealers and counterparties to make additional collateral calls at December 31, 2017.  At December 31, 2016, a one notch downgrade would have resulted in additional collateral calls of $20.3 million.  Additional collateral postings upon an assumed downgrade were estimated based on the individual collateral posting provisions of the CSA of the counterparty and the actual bilateral exposure of the counterparty and the FHLBNY at those dates for open uncleared derivatives.  We do not expect to post additional collateral.  We are rated AA+/stable by S&P’s and Aaa/stable by Moody’s.

Cleared derivatives2019. Notional amounts of cleared OTC derivatives were $103.4 billion at December 31, 2017 and $81.2 billion at December 31, 2016.  For cleared OTC derivatives, at December 31, 2017, collateral requirements are satisfied by initial margins that we are required to post to the Derivative Clearing Organizations (DCO).  Initial margin is determined by the DCO based on the fair value of the derivative portfolio and the volatility of the fair value of the portfolio, and generally credit ratings are not factored into the margin amounts.  At December 31, 2017, we pledged $239.1 million in marketable securities to DCOs to fulfill our initial margin requirements.  At December 31, 2016, we posted $221.1 million in cash as initial margins.  In addition, variation margin is exchanged between

the DCO and the FHLBNY.  Variation margin is considered a daily settlement of an open derivative contract between the DCO and the FHLBNY, and is not collateral.  When a derivative contract is in-the-money for the FHLBNY, the DCO would post variation margin to the FHLBNY, and when the contract is in-the-money for the DCO, the FHLBNY would post variation margin.  Variation margin is typically satisfied by an exchange of cash.  At December 31, 2017, we received $465.8 million in cash as variation margin.  At December 31, 2016, we received $321.1 million in cash as variation margin.  Clearing agents may require additional margin amounts to be posted based on credit considerations.  We were not subject to additional margin calls by our clearing agents at any periods in this report.  For cleared derivatives, neither our GSE status or bilateral threshold agreements apply.

Net Derivative asset and liability balances The net derivative asset balances recognized in the Statements of condition were $112.7 million at December 31, 2017 and $328.9 million at December 31, 2016.  The net derivative liability balances recognized were $61.6 million at December 31, 2017 and $145.0 million at December 31, 2016.


Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt

Our primary source of liquidity is the issuance of Consolidated Obligation bonds and discount notes. To refinance maturing Consolidated obligations, we rely on the willingness of our investors to purchase new issuances. We have access to the discount note market, and the efficiency of issuing discount notes is an important source of liquidity, since discount notes can be issued any time and in a variety of amounts and maturities. Member deposits and capital stock purchased by members are also sources of funds. Short-term unsecured borrowings from other FHLBanks and in the federal funds market, as well as secured borrowings in the repo market provide additional sources of liquidity. In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to purchase up to $4.0 billion of Consolidated obligations from the FHLBanks. Our liquidity position remains in compliance with all regulatory requirements and management does not foresee any changes to that position.

Finance Agency Regulations — Liquidity

Regulatory requirements are specified in Parts 1239, 1270 and 1277 of the Finance Agency regulations and Advisory Bulletin 2018-07. Each FHLBank shall at all times have at least an amount of liquidity equal to the current deposits received from its members that may be invested in: (1) Obligations of the United States; (2) Deposits in banks or trust companies; and (3) Advances with a remaining maturity not to exceed five years that are made to members in conformity with part 1266. We are required to hold positive cash flow assuming no access to capital markets and assuming renewal of all maturing advances for a period of between ten to thirty calendar days and to maintain liquidity limits to reduce the risks associated with a mismatch in asset and liability maturities, including an undue reliance on short-term debt funding.

In addition, the Bank provides for Contingency Liquidity, which is defined as the sources of cash the Bank may use to meet its operational requirements when its access to the capital markets is impeded. We met our Contingency Liquidity requirements during all periods in this report. Liquidity in excess of requirements is summarized in the table titled Contingency Liquidity. Advisory Bulletin 2018-07 concerning liquidity was by policy implemented in phases and was fully implemented on December 31, 2019.

Liquidity Management

We actively manage our liquidity position to maintain stable, reliable, and cost-effective sources of funds while taking into account market conditions, member demand and the maturity profile of our assets and liabilities. We recognize that managing liquidity is critical to achieving our statutory mission of providing low-cost ready liquidity to our members. In managing liquidity risk, we are required to maintain certain liquidity measures in accordance with the FHLBank Act, an Advisory Bulletin and policies developed by management and approved by our Board of Directors. The applicable liquidity requirements are described in the next four sections.

 

For additional information, and an analysis of our exposure due to non-performance of swap counterparties, see Table “Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities Net Presentation” in Note 16. Derivatives and Hedging Activities to financial statements.

Derivative Counterparty Country Concentration Risk

The following tables summarize derivative notional amounts and fair values by counterparty country of incorporation (dollars in thousands):

Table 8.7:FHLBNY Exposure Concentration (a)

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Ultimate Country

 

Notional

 

Percentage

 

Net Fair Value

 

Percentage

 

Counterparties (Asset position)

 

of Incorporation (b)

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

Exposure

 

of Total

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

U.S.A.

 

$

2,130,433

 

1.85

%

$

112,726

 

99.99

%

Counterparty (ies)

 

France

 

300,000

 

0.26

 

16

 

0.01

 

Total Credit Exposure (Fair values, net) - Balance sheet assets

 

 

 

2,430,433

 

2.11

 

$

112,742

 

100.00

%

Security collateral pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (c)

 

U.S.A.

 

 

 

 

 

$

239,064

 

 

 

Security collateral received from counterparty (c)

 

U.S.A.

 

 

 

 

 

(103,036

)

 

 

Net security

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

136,028

 

 

 

Net Exposure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

248,770

 

 

 

Counterparties (Liability position)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

U.S.A.

 

109,896,790

 

95.42

 

$

(50,329

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

Japan

 

1,100,000

 

0.95

 

(118

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

United Kingdom

 

556,000

 

0.48

 

(160

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

Switzerland

 

537,366

 

0.47

 

(246

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

Germany

 

450,000

 

0.39

 

(6,313

)

 

 

Member and Delivery Commitments

 

U.S.A.

 

205,952

 

0.18

 

(4,441

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

112,746,108

 

97.89

 

$

(61,607

)

 

 

Total notional

 

 

 

$

115,176,541

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Ultimate Country

 

Notional

 

Percentage

 

Net Fair Value

 

Percentage

 

Counterparties (Asset position)

 

of Incorporation (b)

 

Amount

 

of Total

 

Exposure

 

of Total

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

U.S.A.

 

$

83,303,216

 

88.26

%

$

328,810

 

99.98

%

Counterparty (ies)

 

Switzerland

 

559,110

 

0.59

 

65

 

0.02

 

Total Credit Exposure (Fair values, net) - Balance sheet assets

 

 

 

83,862,326

 

88.85

 

$

328,875

 

100.00

%

Security collateral received from counterparty (c)

 

U.S.A.

 

 

 

 

 

(104,470

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

224,405

 

 

 

Counterparties (Liability position)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

U.S.A.

 

8,023,974

 

8.50

 

$

(113,609

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

United Kingdom

 

1,224,368

 

1.30

 

(5,783

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

Germany

 

789,000

 

0.84

 

(19,967

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

France

 

315,000

 

0.33

 

(1,784

)

 

 

Member and Delivery Commitments

 

U.S.A.

 

157,447

 

0.17

 

(3,694

)

 

 

Counterparty (ies)

 

Canada

 

6,000

 

0.01

 

(148

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

10,515,789

 

11.15

 

$

(144,985

)

 

 

Total notional

 

 

 

$

94,378,115

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 


(a)   Notional concentration — Concentration is measured by fair value exposure and not by notional amounts.  Fair values for derivative contracts in a gain position represent the credit exposure we face due to potential non-performance of the derivative counterparty.  For such transactions, the FHLBNY’s potential exposure would be our inability to replace the contracts at a value that would be equal to or greater than the cash posted to the defaulting counterparty.  For derivative contracts that were in a liability position, the swap counterparties were exposed to a default or non-performance by the FHLBNY.

(b)Country of incorporation is based on domicile of the ultimate parent company.

(c)Security collateral are not permitted to be offset, but would be eligible for offsetting to the extent an event of default occurred and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the netting and collateral rights has been obtained.

The following table summarizes derivative notional and fair values (a) by contractual maturities (in thousands):

Table 8.8:Notional and Fair Value by Contractual Maturity

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Notional

 

Fair Value (a)

 

Notional

 

Fair Value (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Maturity less than one year

 

$

74,500,108

 

$

20,182

 

$

43,199,884

 

$

(29,164

)

Maturity from one year to less than three years

 

27,163,634

 

83,119

 

36,135,883

 

(28,896

)

Maturity from three years to less than five years

 

8,550,760

 

42,254

 

9,259,611

 

(67,329

)

Maturity from five years or greater

 

4,949,087

 

378,335

 

5,754,290

 

367,660

 

Delivery Commitments

 

12,952

 

(5

)

28,447

 

(40

)

 

 

$

115,176,541

 

$

523,885

 

$

94,378,115

 

$

242,231

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Variation Margin (b)

 

 

 

(465,803

)

 

 

 

 

Total derivatives excluding accrued interest

 

 

 

$

58,082

 

 

 

 

 


(a)Derivative fair values in aggregate were in a net asset position at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

(b)Variation margin (“VM”) on a cleared derivative is classified as settlement of the fair value of the open contract itself - a direct reduction of the fair value outstanding at December 31, 2017.  At December 31, 2016, VM was classified as collateral.

Liquidity, Cash Flows, Short-Term Borrowings and Short-Term Debt

Our primary source of liquidity is the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes.  To refinance maturing Consolidated obligations, we rely on the willingness of our investors to purchase new issuances.  We have access to the discount note market, and the efficiency of issuing discount notes is an important source of liquidity, since discount notes can be issued any time and in a variety of amounts and maturities.  Member deposits and capital stock purchased by members are another source of funds.  Short-term unsecured borrowings from other FHLBanks and in the federal funds market provide additional sources of liquidity.  In addition, the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized to purchase up to $4.0 billion of Consolidated obligations from the FHLBanks.  Our liquidity position remains in compliance with all regulatory requirements and management does not foresee any changes to that position.

Finance Agency Regulations — Liquidity

Regulatory requirements are specified in Parts 932, 1239 and 1270 of the Finance Agency regulations.  Each FHLBank shall at all times have at least an amount of liquidity equal to the current deposits received from its members that may be invested in: (1) Obligations of the United States; (2) Deposits in banks or trust companies; or (3) Advances with a remaining maturity not to exceed five years that are made to members in conformity with part 1266.

In addition, each FHLBank shall provide for contingency liquidity, which is defined as the sources of cash a FHLBank may use to meet its operational requirements when its access to the capital markets is impeded.  We met our contingency liquidity requirements during all periods in this report.  Liquidity in excess of requirements is summarized in the table titled Contingency Liquidity.  Violations of the liquidity requirements would result in non-compliance penalties under discretionary powers given to the Finance Agency under applicable regulations, which include other corrective actions.

Liquidity Management

We actively manage our liquidity position to maintain stable, reliable, and cost-effective sources of funds while taking into account market conditions, member demand and the maturity profile of our assets and liabilities. We recognize that managing liquidity is critical to achieving our statutory mission of providing low-cost funding to our members.  In managing liquidity risk, we are required to maintain certain liquidity measures in accordance with the FHLBank Act and policies developed by management and approved by our Board of Directors.  The applicable liquidity requirements are described in the next four sections.

Deposit Liquidity. We are required to invest an aggregate amount at least equal to the amount of current deposits received from members in: (1) Obligations of the United States; (2) Deposits in banks or trust companies; or (3) Advances with a remaining maturity not to exceed five years that are made to members in conformity with 12 CFR part 1266. In addition to accepting deposits from our members, we may accept deposits from other FHLBanks or from any other governmental instrumentality. We met these requirements at all times. Quarterly average reserves and actual reserves are summarized below (in millions):

 

Table 9.1:9.1Deposit Liquidity

 

 

Average Deposit

 

Average Actual

 

 

 

For the Quarters Ended

 

Reserve Required

 

Deposit Liquidity

 

Excess

 

December 31, 2017

 

$

1,654

 

$

108,241

 

$

106,587

 

September 30, 2017

 

2,461

 

110,343

 

107,882

 

June 30, 2017

 

1,561

 

102,799

 

101,238

 

March 31, 2017

 

1,479

 

102,549

 

101,070

 

December 31, 2016

 

1,509

 

100,524

 

99,015

 

  Average Deposit  Average Actual    
For the Quarters Ended Reserve Required  Deposit Liquidity  Excess 
December 31, 2020 $1,698  $84,479  $82,781 
September 30, 2020  1,553   96,315   94,762 
June 30, 2020  1,532   111,263   109,731 
March 31, 2020  1,229   90,508   89,279 
December 31, 2019  1,271   84,245   82,974 

 

Operational Liquidity. We must be able to fund our activities as our balance sheet changes from day-to-day. We maintain the capacity to fund balance sheet growth through regular money market and capital market funding and investment activities. We monitor our operational liquidity needs by regularly comparing our demonstrated funding capacity with potential balance sheet growth. We take such actions as may be necessary to maintain adequate sources of funding for such growth. Operational liquidity is measured daily. We met these requirements at all times.

 


The following table summarizes excess operational liquidity (in millions):

Table 9.2:9.2Operational Liquidity

 

 

Average Balance Sheet

 

Average Actual

 

 

 

For the Quarters Ended

 

Liquidity Requirement

 

Operational Liquidity

 

Excess

 

December 31, 2017

 

$

9,705

 

$

33,398

 

$

23,693

 

September 30, 2017

 

9,354

 

37,721

 

28,367

 

June 30, 2017

 

5,949

 

32,847

 

26,898

 

March 31, 2017

 

6,482

 

32,222

 

25,740

 

December 31, 2016

 

4,785

 

28,090

 

23,305

 

Contingency LiquidityWe are required by Finance Agency regulations to hold

  Average Balance Sheet  Average Actual    
For the Quarters Ended Liquidity Requirement  Operational Liquidity  Excess 
December 31, 2020 $9,367  $27,629  $18,262 
September 30, 2020  11,786   27,822   16,036 
June 30, 2020  21,874   29,604   7,730 
March 31, 2020  17,786   33,910   16,124 
December 31, 2019  17,138   35,360   18,222 

Contingency Liquidity. The Bank holds “contingency liquidity” in an amount sufficient to meet our liquidity needs if we are unable to access the Consolidated obligation debt markets for at least five business days. Contingency liquidity includes (1) marketable assets with a maturity of one year or less; (2) self-liquidating assets with a maturity of one year or less; (3) assets that are generally acceptable as collateral in the repurchase market; and (4) irrevocable lines of credit from financial institutions receiving not less than the second-highest credit rating from a NRSRO. We consistently exceed the Consolidated obligation debt markets for at least five business days.  Contingency liquidity includes (1) marketable assets with a maturity of one year or less; (2) self-liquidating assets with a maturity of one year or less; (3) assets that are generally acceptable as collateral in the repurchase market; and (4) irrevocable lines of credit from financial institutions receiving not less than the second-highest credit rating from a NRSRO.  We consistently exceeded the regulatory minimum requirements for contingency liquidity. Contingency liquidity is measured daily. We met these requirements at all times.

 

The following table summarizes excess contingency liquidity (in millions):

 

Table 9.3:9.3Contingency Liquidity

 

 

 

 

Average Five Day

 

Average Actual

 

 

 

For the Quarters Ended

 

Requirement

 

Contingency Liquidity

 

Excess

 

December 31, 2017

 

$

2,276

 

$

29,131

 

$

26,855

 

September 30, 2017

 

3,126

 

33,013

 

29,887

 

June 30, 2017

 

2,365

 

29,058

 

26,693

 

March 31, 2017

 

2,693

 

29,681

 

26,988

 

December 31, 2016

 

2,431

 

26,291

 

23,860

 

The standards in our risk management policy address our day-to-day operational and contingency liquidity needs. These standards enumerate the specific types of investments to be held to satisfy such liquidity needs and are outlined above.  These standards also establish the methodology to be used in determining our operational and contingency needs.  We continually monitor and project our cash needs, daily debt issuance capacity, and the amount and value of investments available for use in the market for repurchase agreements.  We use this information to determine our liquidity needs and to develop appropriate liquidity plans.

Advance “Roll-Off” and “Roll-Over” Liquidity Guidelines.  The Finance Agency’s Minimum Liquidity Requirement Guidelines expanded the existing liquidity requirements to include additional cash flow requirements under two scenarios:  Advance “Roll-Over” and “Roll-Off” scenarios.  Each FHLBank, including the FHLBNY, must have positive cash balances to be able to maintain positive cash flows for 15 days under the Roll-Off scenario, and for 5 days under the Roll-Over scenario.  The Roll-Off scenario assumes that advances maturing under their contractual terms would mature, and in that scenario we would maintain positive cash flows for a minimum of 15 days on a daily basis.  The Roll-Over scenario assumes that maturing advances borrowed by members with assets below $100 billion would be rolled over, and in that scenario we would maintain positive cash flows for a minimum of 5 days on a daily basis.  We calculate the amount of cash flows under each scenario on a daily basis and have been in compliance with these guidelines.

Other Liquidity Contingencies.  As discussed more fully under the section Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations, we are primarily liable for Consolidated obligations issued on our behalf.  We are also jointly and severally liable with the other FHLBanks for the payment of principal and interest on the Consolidated obligations of all the FHLBanks.  If the principal or interest on any Consolidated obligation issued on our behalf is not paid in full when due, we may not pay dividends, redeem or repurchase shares of stock of any member or non-member stockholder until the Finance Agency approves our Consolidated obligation payment plan or other remedy and until we pay all the interest or principal currently due on all our Consolidated obligations.  The Finance Agency, at its discretion, may require any FHLBank to make principal or interest payments due on any Consolidated obligations.

Finance Agency regulations also state that the FHLBanks must maintain, free from any lien or pledge, the following types of assets in an amount at least equal to the amount of Consolidated obligations outstanding: Cash; Obligations of, or fully guaranteed by, the United States; Secured advances; Mortgages that have any guaranty, insurance, or commitment from the United States or any agency of the United States; and investments described in section 16(a) of the FHLBank Act, including securities that a fiduciary or trust fund may purchase under the laws of the state in which the FHLBank is located.

Cash flows

Cash and due from banks was $127.4 million at December 31, 2017 and $151.8 million at December 31, 2016.  The following discussion highlights the major activities and transactions that affected our cash flows.

Cash flows from operating activities — Operating assets and liabilities support our lending activities to members, and can vary significantly in the normal course of business due to the amount and timing of cash flows, which are affected by member-driven borrowing, our investment strategies, and market conditions.  Management believes cash flows from operations, available cash balances and our ability to generate cash through the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes are sufficient to fund our operating liquidity needs.

Net cash provided by operating activities in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 was $635.8 million and $450.0 million in the same period in the prior year.  By way of comparison, Net income was $479.5 million in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and $401.2 million in the same period in the prior year.

Cash flows provided by investing activities — Investing activities resulted in $15.5 billion in net cash outflows in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, compared to $20.6 billion in net cash outflows in the same period in 2016.  In both periods, cash used in investing activities were driven largely by new advances that exceeded maturing advances.  Acquisition of investments in the Held-to-maturity portfolio exceeded pay-downs by $1.8 billion in 2017.

Cash flows used in financing activities — Our primary source of funding is the issuance of Consolidated obligation debt.  Issuance of capital stock is another source.  Net cash inflows from our funding sources were $14.9 billion in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, compared to net inflows of $20.0 billion in the same period in the prior year.

For more information, see Statements of Cash Flows in the financial statements.

Short-term Borrowings and Short-term Debt

Our primary source of funds is the issuance of FHLBank debt.  Consolidated obligation discount notes are issued with maturities up to one year and provide us with short-term funds.  Discount notes are principally used in funding short-term advances, some long-term advances, as well as money market instruments.  We also issue short-term Consolidated obligation bonds as part of our asset-liability management strategy.  We may also borrow from another FHLBank, generally for a period of one day.  Such borrowings have been insignificant historically.

  Average Five Day  Average Actual    
For the Quarters Ended Requirement  Contingency Liquidity  Excess 
December 31, 2020 $3,448  $24,494  $21,046 
September 30, 2020  4,207   24,714   20,507 
June 30, 2020  4,149   25,978   21,829 
March 31, 2020  4,568   29,883   25,315 
December 31, 2019  4,764   30,966   26,202 

The Liquidity standards in our risk management policy address our day-to-day operational and contingency liquidity needs. These standards enumerate the specific types of investments to be held to satisfy such liquidity needs and are outlined above. These standards also establish the methodology to be used in determining our operational and contingency needs. We continually monitor and project our cash needs, daily debt issuance capacity, and the amount and value of investments available for use in the market for repurchase agreements. We use this information to determine our liquidity needs and to develop appropriate liquidity plans.

The Finance Agency’s Liquidity Advisory Bulletin 2018-07 requires the Bank to maintain between 10 and 30 business days of positive cash flow assuming all advances renew. The Advisory Bulletin also requires us to hold liquidity in a range between 1% and 20% of the notional of our outstanding standby financial letters of credit. In addition, the Advisory Bulletin provides guidance on maintaining appropriate funding gaps for three-month (-10% to -20% of total assets) and one-year (-25% to -35% of total assets) maturity horizons. The FHFA has communicated specific initial liquidity levels to be maintained within these ranges in an accompanying supervisory letter and may provide updated guidance in future supervisory letters. We remain in compliance with the Advisory Bulletin and all Liquidity regulations.

Other Liquidity Contingencies. As discussed more fully under the section Debt Financing Activity and Consolidated Obligations, we are primarily liable for Consolidated Obligations issued on our behalf. We are also jointly and severally liable with the other FHLBanks for the payment of principal and interest on the Consolidated Obligations of all the FHLBanks. If the principal or interest on any Consolidated Obligation issued on our behalf is not paid in full when due, we may not pay dividends, redeem or repurchase shares of stock of any member or non-member stockholder until the Finance Agency approves our Consolidated Obligation payment plan or other remedy and until we pay all the interest or principal currently due on all our Consolidated Obligations. The Finance Agency, at its discretion, may require any FHLBank to make principal or interest payments due on any Consolidated Obligations.


Finance Agency regulations also state that the FHLBanks must maintain, free from any lien or pledge, the following types of assets in an amount at least equal to the amount of Consolidated Obligations outstanding: Cash; Obligations of, or fully guaranteed by, the United States; Secured advances; Mortgages that have any guaranty, insurance, or commitment from the United States or any agency of the United States; and investments described in section 16(a) of the FHLBank Act, including securities that a fiduciary or trust fund may purchase under the laws of the state in which the FHLBank is located.

Cash flows

Cash and due from Banks was $1.9 billion at December 31, 2020 and $0.6 billion at December 31, 2019. Cash and cash equivalents exclude short-term interest-bearing deposits, federal funds sold, and securities purchased under agreements to resell. The following discussion highlights the major activities and transactions that affected our cash flows.

Cash flows provided by/ (used in) operating activities — Operating assets and liabilities support our lending activities to members, and can vary significantly in the normal course of business due to the amount and timing of cash flows, which are affected by member-driven borrowing, our investment strategies, and market conditions. Management believes cash flows from operations, available cash balances and our ability to generate cash through the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes are sufficient to fund our operating liquidity needs.

Net cash used in operating activities in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 were outflows of $97.2 million and inflows of $14.6 million in the prior year. By way of comparison, Net income was $442.4 million in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and $472.6 million in the prior year. Outflows in operating cash flows in 2020 were due to three primary factors. First, changes in fair values on derivatives and hedging activities in the Statements of Cash Flows reported negative adjustments to operating cash flow of $488.4 million in 2020, compared to $249.5 million in 2019; in both years, the negative cash outflows were due to increase in variation margin posted on derivative contracts; variation margin increased with the increase in the notional amounts of derivatives utilized at December 31, 2020. Second, we reported negative adjustments to operating cash flows of $72.8 million and $51.3 million to recognize unrealized valuation gains on U.S. Treasury securities at December 31, 2020 and 2019. Third, we adjust discount note accretion expense in operating cash flows with an offset to financing activities in the Statements of Cash flows on discount notes in the year they mature. The net adjustment to accretion expense was larger in 2020, causing Net premiums and discounts to record negative operating cash flows of $238.7 million in 2020, compared to negative $88.7 million in 2019.

Cash flows provided by/ (used in) investing activities — Investing activities resulted in $26.8 billion in net cash inflows in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020, compared to $16.6 billion in net cash outflows in the same period in 2019. In 2020, Securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold declined; investments in U.S. Treasury securities declined.

Cash flows provided by/ (used in) financing activities — Our primary source of funding is the issuance of Consolidated obligation debt. Issuance of capital stock is another source. Financing activities reported net cash outflows of $25.4 billion in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 compared to net inflows of $17.1 billion in the prior year.

For more information, see Statements of Cash Flows in the financial statements.

Short-term Borrowings and Short-term Debt

Our primary source of funds is the issuance of FHLBank debt. Consolidated obligation discount notes are issued with maturities up to one year and provide us with short-term funds. Discount notes are principally used in funding short-term advances, some long-term advances, as well as money market instruments. We also issue short-term Consolidated obligation bonds as part of our asset-liability management strategy. We may also borrow from another FHLBank, generally for a period of one day. Such borrowings have been historically insignificant.


 

The following table summarizes short-term debt and their key characteristics (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 9.4:9.4Short-term Debt

  Consolidated Obligations-Discount Notes  Consolidated Obligations-Bonds With
Original Maturities of One Year or Less
 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Outstanding at end of the period (a) $57,658,838  $73,959,205  $30,772,940  $48,087,050 
Weighted-average rate at end of the period (b)  0.15%  1.60%  0.12%  1.74%
Average outstanding for the period (a) $74,759,309  $58,317,547  $35,920,800  $46,409,731 
Weighted-average rate for the period  0.51%  2.15%  0.84%  2.25%
Highest outstanding at any month-end (a) $90,249,660  $73,959,205  $52,277,550  $51,728,000 

 

 

Consolidated Obligations-Discount Notes

 

Consolidated Obligations-Bonds With
Original Maturities of One Year or Less

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Outstanding at end of the period (a)

 

$

49,613,671

 

$

49,357,894

 

$

56,494,100

 

$

20,589,540

 

Weighted-average rate at end of the period

 

1.23

%

0.48

%

1.31

%

0.63

%

Average outstanding for the period (a)

 

$

45,895,662

 

$

46,508,363

 

$

39,454,853

 

$

15,519,889

 

Weighted-average rate for the period

 

0.85

%

0.37

%

0.96

%

0.50

%

Highest outstanding at any month-end (a)

 

$

57,330,972

 

$

54,630,600

 

$

56,494,100

 

$

20,589,540

 


(a)Outstanding balances represent the carrying value of discount notes and par value of bonds (one year or less) issued and outstanding at the reported dates.

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements, Guarantees, and Other Commitments (b)In accordance with regulations governing the operations of the FHLBanks, each FHLBank, including the FHLBNY,Weighted-average rate is jointly and severally liable for the FHLBank System’s Consolidated obligations issued under sections 11(a) and 11(c) of the FHLBank Act.  The joint and several liability regulation authorizes the Finance Agency to require any FHLBank to repay all or a portion of the principal or interestcalculated on Consolidated obligations for which another FHLBank is the primary obligor.

In addition, in the ordinary course of business, the FHLBNY engages in financial transactions that, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, are not recorded on the FHLBNY’s balance sheet or may be recorded on the FHLBNY’s balance sheet in amounts that are different from the full contract or notional amount of the transactions.  For example, the Bank routinely enters into commitments to purchase MPF loans from PFIs, and issues standby letters of credit.  These commitments may represent future cash requirements of the Bank, although the standby letters of credit usually expire without being drawn upon.  For more information about contractual obligations and commitments, see financial statements, Note 18. Commitments and Contingencies.

Leverage Limits, Unpledged Asset Requirements, and MBS Limits

Finance Agency regulations require the FHLBanks to maintain, in the aggregate, unpledged qualifying assets equal to the Consolidated obligations outstanding.  Qualifying assets are defined as cash; secured advances; obligations; participations, mortgages or other securities of or issued by the United States or an agency of the United States; and such securities in which fiduciary and trust funds may invest under the laws of the state in which the FHLBank is located.

We met the Finance Agency’s requirement that unpledged assets, as defined under regulations, exceed the total of Consolidated obligationsoutstanding balances at all periods in this report as follows (in thousands):

Table 9.5:Unpledged Assets

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Consolidated Obligations:

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

$

84,784,664

 

Discount Notes

 

49,613,671

 

49,357,894

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total consolidated obligations

 

148,901,719

 

134,142,558

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unpledged assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash

 

127,403

 

151,769

 

Less: Member pass-through reserves at the FRB

 

(84,194

)

(67,670

)

Secured Advances

 

122,447,805

 

109,256,625

 

Investments (a)

 

33,070,018

 

30,684,836

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses

 

2,896,976

 

2,746,559

 

Other loans

 

 

255,000

 

Accrued interest receivable on advances and investments

 

226,981

 

163,379

 

Less: Pledged Assets

 

(244,792

)

(7,036

)

Total unpledged assets

 

158,440,197

 

143,183,462

 

Excess unpledged assets

 

$

9,538,478

 

$

9,040,904

 

period-end.

(a)We pledged to the FDIC $5.7 million and $7.0 million of MBS at December 31, 2017 and 2016.  See financial statements Note 7. Held-to-Maturity Securities. We pledged $239.1 million in U.S. Treasury securities to derivative counterparties to meet our collateral requirements at December 31, 2017.

Purchases of MBS

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements, Guarantees, and Other Commitments In accordance with regulations governing the operations of the FHLBanks, each FHLBank, including the FHLBNY, is jointly and severally liable for the FHLBank System’s Consolidated obligations issued under sections 11(a) and 11(c) of the FHLBank Act. The joint and several liability regulation authorizes the Finance Agency to require any FHLBank to repay all or a portion of the principal or interest on Consolidated obligations for which another FHLBank is the primary obligor.

In addition, in the ordinary course of business, the FHLBNY engages in financial transactions that, in accordance with U.S. GAAP, are not recorded on the FHLBNY’s balance sheet or may be recorded on the FHLBNY’s balance sheet in amounts that are different from the full contract or notional amount of the transactions. For example, the Bank routinely enters into commitments to purchase MPF loans from PFIs, and issues standby letters of credit.

These commitments may represent future cash requirements of the Bank, although the standby letters of credit usually expire without being drawn upon. For more information about contractual obligations and commitments, see financial statements, Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies.

Purchases of MBS. Finance Agency investment regulations limit the purchase of mortgage-backed securities to 300% of capital. We were in compliance with the regulation at all times.

 

Table 9.6: 9.5FHFA MBS Limits

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Actual

 

Limits

 

Actual

 

Limits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mortgage securities investment authority

 

207

%

300

%

202

%

300

%

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Actual  Limits  Actual  Limits 
Mortgage securities investment authority  206%  300%  220%  300%


Table 9.7:9.6Core Mission Achievement

On July 14, 2015, the Finance Agency issued an advisory bulletin establishing

The Finance Agency has established a ratio by which the Finance Agency will assess each FHLBank’s core mission achievement. Core mission achievement is determined using a ratio of primary mission assets, which include advances and acquired member assets (mortgage loans acquired from members), to Consolidated obligations. The ratio will be determined at each year-end and will be calculated using annual average par values.

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Par Values (dollars in thousands) Annual Average  Annual Average 
Advances $107,681,243  $95,615,681 
Mortgage Loans  3,082,252   2,963,520 
Total Primary Mission Assets $110,763,495  $98,579,201 
Total Consolidated Obligations $147,104,411  $135,589,946 
U.S. Treasury obligations qualifying as HQLA under AB 2018-07 (a) $12,619,764  $8,915,081 
         
Core Mission Achievement Ratio  82%  78%
Target Ratio  70%  70%

(a)The annual average par values.

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Par Values (dollars in thousands)

 

Annual Average

 

Annual Average

 

Advances

 

$

109,222,746

 

$

95,603,043

 

Mortgage Loans

 

2,791,156

 

2,584,573

 

Total Primary Mission Assets

 

$

112,013,902

 

$

98,187,616

 

Total Consolidated Obligations

 

$

138,827,114

 

$

119,095,434

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Core Mission Achievement Ratio

 

81

%

82

%

Target Ratio

 

70

%

70

%

Operational Risk Management

Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, systems or human factors, or from external events.  Operational risk is inherent in our business activities and, as with other risk types, is managed through an overall framework designed to balance strong management oversight with well-defined independent risk management.  This framework includes: policies and procedures for managing operational risks; recognized ownershipvalue of the risk byU.S. Treasury Securities that are held as Trading securities is deducted from the business; a compliance group that evaluates compliance with board and regulatory policies, including the evaluation and reporting of operational risk incidents, and an internal audit function, which regularly reports directly to the Audit Committeedenominator of the Bank’s Board of Directors regarding compliance with policies and procedures, including those related to managing operational risks.

Information Security and Business Continuity.  The Bank has an Information Security Department that is responsible forPrimary Core Mission Asset ratio, as allowed under the policy, procedures, reviews, education and management of the information security program.  The Bank also has a Records and Continuity Department that is responsible for the overall Business Continuity ProgramFHFA guidelines.

Operational Risk Management

Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, systems, or human factors, or from external events.  Operational risk is inherent in our business activities and, as with other risk types, is managed through an overall framework designed to balance strong management oversight with well-defined independent risk management.  This framework includes: policies and procedures for managing operational risks; recognized ownership of the risk by the business; a compliance group that evaluates compliance with board and regulatory policies, including the evaluation and reporting of operational risk incidents, and an internal audit function, which regularly reports directly to the Audit Committee of the Bank’s Board of Directors regarding compliance with policies and procedures, including those related to managing operational risks.

Information Security and Business Continuity. The Bank has an Information Security Department that is responsible for the policy, procedures, reviews, education, and management of the information security program. The Bank also has a department that is responsible for the overall business continuity program, which includes training, testing, coordination, and continual updates. Information security and the protection of confidential customer data, and business continuity are priorities for the FHLBNY, and we have implemented processes that will help secure confidential data and continuity of operations. The information security program is reviewed and enhanced periodically to address emerging threats to data integrity and cyber attacks.  The business continuity program includes annual testing of our capabilities. Results of business continuity testing and information security are routinely presented to senior management of the FHLBNY and its Board of Directors.

 

The FHLBNY’s Information Technology group maintains and regularly reviews controls to ensure that technology assets are well managed and secure from unauthorized access and in accordance with approved policies and procedures.

81

 

Results of Operations

The following section provides a comparative discussion of the FHLBNY’s results of operations for the three years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.  For a discussion of the significant accounting estimates used by the FHLBNY that affect the results of operations, see financial statements, Note 1. Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Net IncomeResults of Operations

The following section provides a comparative discussion of the FHLBNY’s results of operations for the three years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018. For a discussion of the critical accounting estimates used by the FHLBNY that affect the results of operations, see financial statements, Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates. 

Net Income

 

Interest income from advances is the principal source of revenue. Other sources of revenue are interest income from investment debt securities, liquidity trading securities, mortgage loans in the MPF portfolio, securities purchased under agreements to resell and federal funds sold. Fair value gains and losses on liquidity trading securities and equity investments also impact Net income. The primary expense is interest paid on Consolidated obligation debt. Other expenses are Compensation and benefits, Operating expenses, our share of operating expenses of the Office of Finance and the FHFA, and affordable housing program assessments on Net income. Other significant factors affecting our Net income include the volume and timing of investments in mortgage-backed securities, prepayments of advances, charges due to debt repurchased, gains and losses from derivatives and hedging activities, and earnings from investing our shareholders’ capital.

 

Summarized below are the principal components of Net income (in thousands):

 

Table 10.1: 10.1Principal Components of Net Income

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Total interest income $1,933,865  $3,780,946  $3,586,484 
Total interest expense  1,180,909   3,113,856   2,789,459 
Net interest income before provision for credit losses  752,956   667,090   797,025 
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses  3,721   (142)  (371)
Net interest income after provision for credit losses  749,235   667,232   797,396 
Total other income (loss)  (50,819)  33,888   (23,871)
Total other expenses  206,851   175,980   150,665 
Income before assessments  491,565   525,140   622,860 
Affordable Housing Program Assessments  49,180   52,552   62,382 
Net income $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 

Net Income 2020 Vs. 2019

Net income — For the FHLBNY, Net income is Net interest income, minus Provision (Reversal) for credit losses, plus Other income (loss), less Other expenses and Assessments set aside for the FHLBNY’s Affordable Housing Program.

Net income was $442.4 million in 2020, a decrease of $30.2 million, or 6.4% compared to 2019. Summarized below are the primary components of our Net income:

Net interest income was $753.0 million in 2020, an increase of $85.9 million, or 12.9% compared to 2019. Net interest spread was 43 basis points for 2020 compared to 35 basis points for 2019. For more information, see Table 10.2 Net Interest Income and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Other income (loss) — Other income (loss) reported a loss of $50.8 million in 2020 compared to a gain of $33.9 million in 2019.

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest income

 

$

2,242,303

 

$

1,360,847

 

$

997,672

 

Total interest expense

 

1,520,779

 

804,437

 

443,515

 

Net interest income before provision for credit losses

 

721,524

 

556,410

 

554,157

 

(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

(287

)

1,966

 

518

 

Net interest income after provision for credit losses

 

721,811

 

554,444

 

553,639

 

Total other (loss) income

 

(58,003

)

6,853

 

24,525

 

Total other expenses

 

130,922

 

115,393

 

117,171

 

Income before assessments

 

532,886

 

445,904

 

460,993

 

Affordable Housing Program Assessments

 

53,417

 

44,752

 

46,182

 

Net income

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

2017 Net Income Compared to 2016

Net Income — For the FHLBNY, Net income is Net interest income, minus credit losses on mortgage loans, plus Other income/(loss), less Other Expenses and Assessments set aside for the FHLBNY’s Affordable Housing Program.

2017 Net income was $479.5 million, an increase of $78.3 million, or 19.5%, compared to the prior year.  Summarized below are the primary components of our Net income:

Net interest income — Net interest income (“NII”) is typically driven by the volume of earning assets, as measured by average balances of earning assets, and the net interest spread earned in the period, and prepayment fees earned when advances are early terminated by our member/borrowers could also be a significant factor.

2017 Net interest income was $721.5 million, an increase of $165.1 million, or 29.7%, from the prior year.  Net interest spread was 43 basis points in 2017, compared to 40 basis points in the prior year.

2017 Net interest income benefited from higher average earning assets, which grew to $148.8 billion, up from $128.4 billion in the prior year.  Average advance balances were $109.2 billion in 2017, compared to $96.2 billion in 2016.  In 2017, LIBOR-indexed assets, primarily ARC advances and floating-rate investments in mortgage-backed securities, benefited from the rising LIBOR.  Overnight and short-term investments in the federal funds and the overnight repurchase agreements benefited from rising yields for money market investments.  While funding costs were also higher in line with the rising rate environment, cost of funding continued to benefit from favorable investor demand for Consolidated obligation shorter-term and floating-rate bonds.

Other Income (Loss) — 2017 Other Income/(loss) reported a loss of $58.0 million, compared to a gain of $6.9 million in the prior year.  The Lehman settlement charge of $70.0 million was recorded in Other Income/(Loss) in the first quarter of the current year period. For more information about the Lehman settlement, see Table 10.11 Other income.

·
Service fees and other were $17.9 million in 2020 compared to $18.2 million in 2019. Service fees and others are primarily correspondent banking fees and fee revenues from financial letters of credit.  Such revenues were $15.8 million in the current year, compared to $13.8 million in the prior year.

·

Financial instruments carried at fair values reported a net valuation lossgain of $4.5$0.1 million in the current year,2020 compared to a net loss of $1.9$4.1 million in the prior year.2019. For more information, see financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17.18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments. Also see Table 10.1110.10 Other Income (Loss) and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

·


Derivative and hedging activities reported a net gaincharge to Other income of $1.9$151.7 million in the current year,2020, compared to a net losscharge of $1.7$40.7 million in the prior year.  For more information, see financial statements, Earnings Impact2019. The charges included net accrued interest expense on standalone swaps of Derivatives$93.7 million and Hedging Activities disclosures$12.5 million in Note 16.  Derivatives2020 and Hedging Activities.2019, respectively. Fair value losses on standalone swaps hedging U.S. Treasury securities were $80.7 million and $33.2 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively. We also recorded net fair value gains of $16.7 million and $3.5 million in 2020 and 2019, respectively, on standalone swaps designated primarily to mitigate basis risks on certain advances and bonds. Also see Table 10.14 Earnings10.12 Other Income (Loss) — Impact of DerivativesDerivative Gains and Hedging ActivitiesLosses and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

·Debt repurchases and transfers — Debt repurchases

U.S. Treasury Securities held for liquidity (classified as trading) reported net gains of $72.8 million in the current year resulted in a loss of $0.1 million charged to earnings,2020 compared to $3.6net gains of $51.3 million in the prior year.

2019.

OtherEquity Investments, Expenses were $130.9held to finance payments to retirees in non-qualified pension plans, reported net gains of $9.8 million in the current year, compared to $115.4 million in the prior year.  Other Expenses2020 that was slightly lower than 2019.

Other expenses were $206.9 million in 2020, compared to $176.0 million in 2019. Other expenses are primarily Operating expenses, Compensation and benefits, and our share of operating expenses of the Office of Finance and the Federal Housing Finance Agency.

 

·
Operating expenses were $40.7$69.8 million in the current year,2020, up from $33.4$62.8 million in the prior year.  Expense increases were primarily due to the cost of implementing technology improvements and to higher expense for the New York office property lease, which was renewed in 2017.

·2019.

Compensation and benefits expenses were $75.6$100.2 million in the current year,2020, up from $69.1$88.2 million in the prior year.

·2019. This was driven by additions of staff to support of our long-term technology enhancement effort.

The expenses allocated for our share of the costs to operate the Office of Finance and the Federal Housing Finance Agency were $14.7$19.4 million in the current year,2020 compared to $12.9$16.8 million in the prior year.

AHP assessments allocated from net income2019.

Other expenses were $53.4$17.5 million in the current year,2020 compared to $44.8$8.3 million in the prior year.  Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.

2016 Net Income Compared to 2015

Net income for the twelve months ended December 31, 2016 was $401.2 million, a decrease of $13.6 million, or 3.3%, compared to the same period in 2015.  Summarized below are the primary components of our Net income:

Net interest income was $556.42019. In 2020, Other expenses included $8.0 million in 2016, an increase of $2.2 million from 2015.  Net interest spread was 40 basis points in 2016, a decrease from 43 basis points in 2015.  In 2015, Net interest income included $117.5 million of prepayment fees on advances terminatedcash grants to assist small business impacted by members, compared to $18.0the COVID-19 pandemic.

Affordable Housing Program Assessments (AHP) allocated from Net income were $49.2 million in 2020, compared to $52.6 million in 2019. Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.

Net Income 2019 Vs. 2018

Net income in 2019 was $472.6 million, a decrease of $87.9 million, or 15.7%, compared to 2018.

Net interest income in 2019 was $667.1 million, a decrease of $129.9 million, or 16.3%. Net interest spread was 35 basis points in 2019, compared to 42 basis points in 2018. For more information, see Table 10.2 Net Interest Income and accompanying discussions in this MD&A.

Other income (loss) — Other income (loss) in 2019 was a gain of $33.9 million, compared to a loss of $23.9 million in 2018.

The primary changes year-over-year were contributed by net realized and unrealized gains of $51.3 million on trading securities (held for liquidity) in 2019, compared to $3.2 million in 2018.

Other expenses were $176.0 million in 2019, compared to $150.7 million in 2018. Operating expenses were $62.8 million in 2019, up from $47.9 million in 2018. Compensation and benefits were $88.2 million in 2019, up from $79.0 million in 2018 due to increase in head count. Other expenses were $8.3 million in 2019 and $8.0 million in 2018.

AHP assessments allocated from Net income were $52.6 million in 2019 and $62.4 million in 2018.


Net Interest Income, Margin and Interest Rate Spreads.

Net interest income is our principal source of Net income. It represents the difference between income on interest-earning assets and expense on interest-bearing liabilities.

Changes in Net interest income are typically driven by changes in the volume of earning assets, as measured by average balances of earning assets, and the impact of market interest rates on earnings assets and funding costs. Interest income and expense accruals on interest rate swaps that qualified under the ASC 815 hedge accounting rules may impact year-over-year changes. Shareholders’ capital stock and retained earnings are also factors that impact net interest income as they provide interest free funding. Earnings on capital typically move directly with changes in short-term market interest rates. In a period when members prepay advances, the prepayment fees, which we receive may cause fluctuations in 2016.  Absent the impact of prepayment fees, Net interest income in 2016 was $538.4 million, compared to $436.7 million in 2015, a year-over-year increase of 23.3%, and net interest spread was 39 basis points in 2016 compared to 33 basis points in 2015.

In 2016, our LIBOR-indexed assets, primarily ARC advances and floating-rate investments in mortgage-backed securities, benefited from the rising LIBOR.  Our overnight investments in the federal funds and the overnight repurchase agreements benefited from rising yields in the overnight markets.  While our funding costs were also higher in line with the rising rate environment, however, on a relative basis our cost of funding in 2016 benefited from favorable investor demand for Consolidated obligation discount notes and floating-rate bonds.  Money market reforms require money funds to hold additional amounts of short-term investments.  Strong money market fund investor demand enabled us to issue discount notes and shorter-term floating-rate bonds at favorable sub-LIBOR spreads or at relatively lower yields than would be possible otherwise.

Other Income (Loss) — Other Income/(loss) reported income of $6.9 million in 2016, compared to $24.5 million in 2015.

·Service fees and others were $13.8 million in 2016, compared to $12.1 million in 2015.

·Financial instruments carried at fair values reported a net valuation loss of $1.9 million in 2016, compared to a net gain of $9.9 million in 2015.

·Derivative and hedging activities reported a net loss of $1.7 million in 2016, compared to a net gain of $12.6 million in 2015.

·Debt repurchases and transfers — Debt repurchases and transfers in 2016 resulted in a loss of $3.6 million charge to earnings, compared to a loss of $9.8 million in 2015.

Other Expenses were $115.4 million in 2016, compared to $117.2 million in 2015:

·                  Operating expenses were $33.4 million in 2016, up from $29.8 million in 2015.

·                  Compensation and benefits expenses were $69.1 million in 2016, down from $73.6 million in 2015.

·                  The expenses allocated for our share of the costs to operate the Office of Finance and the Federal Housing Finance Agency were $12.9 million in 2016, compared to $13.7 million in 2015.

AHP assessments allocated from net income were $44.8 million in 2016, compared to $46.2 million in 2015.

Net Interest Income, Margin and Interest Rate Spreads — 2017, 2016 and 2015

Net interest income is our principal source of Net income.  It represents the difference between income on interest-earning assets and expense on interest-bearing liabilities.

Period-over-period changes in Net interest income are typically driven by changes in the volume of earning assets, as measured by average balances of earning assets, and the impact of market interest rates on earnings assets and funding costs.  Interest income and expense accruals on interest rate swaps that qualified under ASC 815, the hedge accounting rules may impact period-over-period changes.  Shareholders’ capital stock and retained earnings are also factors that impact net interest income as they provide interest free funding.   In a period when members prepay advances, the prepayment fees, which we receive may cause period-over-period fluctuations in income. For more information about factors that impact Interest income and Interest expense, see Table 10.3 Net Interest Adjustments from Hedge Qualifying Interest Rate Swaps and discussions thereto. Also, see Table 10.4 Spread and Yield Analysis, and Table 10.5 Spread and Yield Analysis, and Table 10.6 Rate and Volume Analysis.

 

The following table summarizes Net interest income (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 10.2: 10.2Net Interest Income

     Percentage  Percentage 
  Years ended December 31,  Change  Change 
  2020  2019  2018  2020  2019 
Total interest income (a) $1,933,865  $3,780,946  $3,586,484   (48.85)%  5.42%
Total interest expense (a)  1,180,909   3,113,856   2,789,459   (62.08)  11.63 
Net interest income before provision for credit losses $752,956  $667,090  $797,025   12.87%  (16.30)%

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

Percentage
Change

 

Percentage
Change

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2017

 

2016

 

Total interest income (a)

 

$

2,242,303

 

$

1,360,847

 

$

997,672

 

64.77

%

36.40

%

Total interest expense (a)

 

1,520,779

 

804,437

 

443,515

 

(89.05

)

(81.38

)

Net interest income before provision for credit losses (b) (c)

 

$

721,524

 

$

556,410

 

$

554,157

 

29.67

%

0.41

%


(a)(a)Total Interest Income and Total Interest Expense — See Tables 10.710.6 and 10.910.8 and accompanying discussions.discussions

(b)Net interest income before provision for credit losses.

2017 vs 2016.

2017 Net interest income was $721.5 million, compared to $556.4 million in 2016.  Net interest spread, which is the yield from earning assets minus interest paid to fund earning assets, was 43 basis points in 2017, compared to 40 basis points in 2016.  Net interest margin, a measure of margin efficiency, calculated as Net interest income divided by average earning assets, was 48 basis points in 2017, compared to 43 basis points in 2016.

Several factors contributed to the favorable increase in our interest margins.  Business volume increased period-over-period by $20.4 billion, with $148.8 billion in average earning assets in 2017, compared to $128.4 billion in 2016.  Market yields improved for investments in federal funds and overnight repos, providing positive net margin while allowing us to maintain higher liquidity for our members.  LIBOR-indexed advances and investments have become significant earning assets, and earnings have grown in line with the rising LIBOR.   The favorable funding environment for the issuance of Consolidated obligation discount notes and shorter-term floating-rate CO bonds was a significant contributing factor, as earning spreads widened when the debt was utilized to fund LIBOR-indexed assets, primarily variable-rate ARC advances and floating-rate mortgage-backed securities.  The rising LIBOR also contributed to favorable period-over-period change in interest cash flows exchanged with swap dealers on swaps that qualified under ASC 815 hedging rules.  The FHLBNY typically converts a significant percentage of its fixed-rate advances to LIBOR in an ASC 815 hedge, and impact of a rising LIBOR environment has been to narrow the differential between our fixed payments to derivative counterparties and the LIBOR-indexed cash received in exchange.  In 2017, net interest accruals on interest rate swaps designated under ASC 815 and the amortization effects of basis adjustments, taken together were a net charge to Net interest income (interest margin) of $161.3 million, significantly lower than the charge of $336.1 million in 2016.

2016 vs 2015.

2016 Net interest income was $556.4 million, compared to $554.2 million in 2015.  As a result of the steep rise of LIBOR in 2016, ASC 815 interest accruals under ASC 815 interest rate swaps charged to Net interest income declined to $336.1 million in 2016, from a comparable charge of $706.7 million in 2015.   Prepayment fee earned in 2016 was $18.0 million, significantly lower than $117.5 million earned in 2015.  Earning assets averaged $128.4 billion in 2016, an increase of $6.8 billion from 2015.   Setting aside the impact of prepayment fees, Net interest income was $538.4 million in 2016, compared to $436.7 million in 2015, and Net interest spread was 39 basis points in 2016, compared to 33 basis points in 2015.  Net interest margin, adjusted for prepayment fee, was 42 basis points in 2016, up from 36 basis points in 2015. Net interest margin in 2016 benefited from higher asset yields in a rising interest rate environment and a favorable funding environment for discount notes and floating-rate bonds.

(c)   ��      Net interest income from investing member capital.

We earn interest income from investing our members’ capital to fund interest-earning assets.  Such earnings are sensitive to the changes in short-term interest rates (Rate effects), and changes in the average outstanding capital and non-interest-bearing liabilities (Volume effects).  Typically, we invest capital and net non-interest costing liabilities to fund short-term investment assets that yield money market rates.  Members’ capital is capital stock, which increases or decreases in parallel with the volume of advances borrowed by members, and retained earnings.  Average capital was $7.7 billion in 2017, compared to $7.0 billion in 2016 and $6.4 billion in 2015, and the increase in capital was generally in line with the increase in advances borrowed by members.  In the past several years, opportunities for investing in short-term assets that met our risk/reward preferences had been limited, with a tradeoff between maintaining liquidity at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York or investing at the low prevailing overnight rates at financial institutions.  In the periods in this report, market yields for investments in the federal funds and repo markets have improved and the contribution to interest margin from member capital has also improved.

Impact of Qualifying Hedges on Net Interest Income — 2017, 2016 and 2015

Net Interest Income — 2020 Vs. 2019

Our 2020 results were impacted by the March 2020 rate cuts. The Federal Reserve decreased its benchmark short-term interest rate to a range of 0-0.25%, a decrease of 150 basis points. These decreases were in addition to the three rate cuts implemented during 2019 (225 basis points in total).

Given the relationship between our interest-sensitive assets and liabilities, decreases in short-term interest rates generally result in an overall decrease in our net interest margin, although the magnitude of the impact to our net interest margin depends on the yields on interest-earning assets relative to the cost of interest-bearing liabilities and yields earned on capital. Conversely, any increases in short-term interest rates generally have a positive impact on our net interest margin.

Financial markets in the third and fourth quarter exhibited less volatility after a tumultuous and challenging environment starting in March 2020. The Fed has continued to provide support to the economy and financial markets; interest rates remain very low. Our interest revenues and interest expenses have declined in 2020, relative to last year. The Fed’s acquisition program in the agency-issued mortgage-backed securities market has driven up pricing and limited the opportunities for acquiring investments that would meet our risk/reward targets. Spreads remain very low on our investments in overnight Federal funds markets and repurchase programs, two principal investment vehicles for our balance sheet liquidity programs.

2020 Net interest income, before loan loss provisions, was $753.0 million, an increase of $85.9 million, or 12.9% from the prior year. Primary driver was higher earning assets, specifically advances. Net interest income during the quarters in 2020 were strong, despite the volatility in the financial markets: $152.8 million in the first quarter; $229.7 million in the second quarter; $180.8 million in the third quarter and $189.7 million in the fourth quarter. Fourth quarter 2020 net interest benefitted from $30.2 million in prepayment fees. Absent the fees, net interest income declined due to lower average earning assets, specifically lower advance balances in the quarter due to advance prepayments. Prepayment fees recorded in the fourth quarter offset the full impact of declining net interest income and margin.


Net interest income grew in the middle two quarters largely driven by spreads earned from the increase in advance volume at the onset of COVID-19 in March 2020. Margins also benefitted by the decline in debt expense in 2020. CO debt costing expense and yields declined in part due to a shift to greater use of discount notes to fund short-maturity assets, and in part due to advantageous pricing of CO discount notes. In 2020, CO discount notes funded 47.3% of our earning assets, up from 40.3% in the prior year (calculations are based on average balances). Discount note costing yield was 57 basis points in 2020, down from 221 basis points in the prior year. In the current volatile market, investor demand for FHLBank issued high-quality CO discount notes pushed yields down, resulting in favorable spreads and favorable funding through most of 2020.

Margins widened favorably between yields on assets, specifically overnight, short-term, and floating-rate investments and short-term and floating-rate advances, and the corresponding yields paid on funding those assets. Net interest margin, a measure of margin efficiency, which is calculated as Net interest income divided by average earning assets, was 48 basis points in 2020, compared to 46 basis points in the prior year. Net interest spread in 2020 was 43 basis points, representing the yield from earning assets minus interest paid on costing liabilities. In the prior year, the net interest spread was 35 basis points. Spreads earned in the 2020 quarters were consistently strong, despite the volatility in financial markets: 31 basis points in pre-COVID-19 first quarter; 49 basis points in the second quarter; 43 basis points and 50 basis points in the third and fourth quarters, respectively. Fourth quarter 2020 net interest income benefitted from significant prepayment fees of $30.2 million.

Volume related increases in earning assets and changes in funding mix made a favorable impact of $91.6 million to margin, partly offset by decline of $5.8 million due to yield-related adverse changes. Average interest-earning assets was $157.9 billion in 2020, compared to $144.6 billion in the prior year, the growth driven by significant increase in advances at the outset of COVID-19. However, starting late in the second quarter of 2020, advance balances began to decline, gradually at first, when members did not roll over maturing short-term funds and began to prepay advances, followed by significant prepayments late in the fourth quarter. The decline adversely impacted fourth quarter 2020 net interest income. We ended 2020 with par advances at $90.7 billion, compared to $100.4 billion when we began the year. Average advance balance was $109.1 billion in 2020, up from $95.8 billion average in the prior year.

Stockholders’ capital stock, which is typically deployed to fund short-term interest-earning assets, increased to $8.0 billion in 2020, up from $7.3 billion in the prior year (as measured by average outstanding balance in the period). Increase in Capital stock was in line with increase in advances in 2020 as borrowing members are required to purchase capital stock in proportion to amounts borrowed.

Swap interest settlements, and to a much lesser extent the fair values on swaps designated in ASC 815 hedging relationships, recorded a loss of $298.5 million in 2020. In the prior year, a net favorable contribution of $162.8 million was recorded. In both years, hedging losses and gains were largely driven by net interest settlements and the impact of fair values of hedged assets and liabilities minus the fair values of hedging derivatives was not material. Interest settlements are impacted by the net differential between fixed-rates associated with hedging swaps and the benchmark variable-rates associated with the swap’s floating-leg. The declining benchmark interest rate indices have driven down the benchmark-indexed cash flows received on fair value hedges of advances, such that the net cash flows we received were less than the fixed-rate cash flows paid on the swap contracts. While the declining benchmarks had a favorable impact on benchmark-indexed cash flows paid on swaps hedging debt, the favorable impact was not as significant. Net interest settlements on swaps hedging assets and liabilities under ASC 815 fluctuated as expected in line with changes in the benchmark rates; the hedging transactions achieved our interest rate risk management objectives.

Net Interest Income — 2019 Vs. 2018

2019 Net interest income declined by $129.9 million, or 16.3% from the prior year. The decline in net interest income and margin was due to three primary factors. Lower advance balances in 2019, relative to 2018 negatively impacted net interest income. The funding environment in 2019 was generally less favorable, resulting in a higher cost of funding on a spread basis. Finally, management’s decision to lower advances pricing spreads for 2019 reduced yields and revenues. Additionally, beginning in 2019 we stopped acquiring LIBOR-indexed floating-rate MBS as a policy decision to restrain growth of LIBOR assets. Acquisition of fixed-rate MBS was also constrained due to tight pricing and relatively lower yields. Such constraints had a negative impact on margins, spreads, and revenues. Increased investments in U.S. Treasury securities for liquidity management purposes and overnight repurchase agreements made a positive contribution to net interest income, although margins were quite low.


In summary in 2019, volume-related declines in assets and funding mix made an unfavorable impact of $32.4 million on net interest income. Average interest-earning assets totaled $144.6 billion in 2019, compared to $154.1 billion in 2018. Yield related changes also resulted in an unfavorable impact of $97.5 million on net interest income in 2019. Net interest spread, which is the yield from earning assets minus interest paid to fund earning assets, was 35 basis points in 2019, compared to 42 basis points in 2018. The impact of net interest settlements (interest accruals) on swaps hedging assets and liabilities under ASC 815 were favorable to net interest income, contributing $162.8 million and $144.4 million to interest accruals in 2019 and 2018, respectively.

Impact of Qualifying Hedges on Net Interest Income — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

The following table summarizes the impact of net interest adjustments from hedge qualifying interest-rate swaps (in thousands):

 

Table 10.3: 10.3    Net Interest Adjustments from Hedge Qualifying Interest Rate Swaps

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Interest income $2,303,422  $3,609,475  $3,396,087 
Fair value hedging effects  (401)  863   - 
Amortization of basis  (557)  (56)  88 
Interest rate swap accruals  (368,599)  170,664   190,309 
Reported interest income  1,933,865   3,780,946   3,586,484 
             
Interest expense  1,255,874   3,109,530   2,749,302 
Fair value hedging effects  763   2,001   - 
Amortization of basis  (5,626)  (5,558)  (5,729)
Interest rate swap accruals  (70,102)  7,883   45,886 
Reported interest expense  1,180,909   3,113,856   2,789,459 
Net interest income $752,956  $667,090  $797,025 
Net interest adjustment - interest rate swaps $(294,592) $167,145  $150,240 

86

Spread and Yield Analysis — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Interest Income

 

$

2,388,414

 

$

1,753,320

 

$

1,886,472

 

Net interest adjustment from interest rate swaps

 

(146,111

)

(392,473

)

(888,800

)

Reported interest income

 

2,242,303

 

1,360,847

 

997,672

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

1,505,575

 

860,772

 

625,652

 

Net interest adjustment from interest rate swaps and basis amortization

 

15,204

 

(56,335

)

(182,137

)

Reported interest expense

 

1,520,779

 

804,437

 

443,515

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income

 

$

721,524

 

$

556,410

 

$

554,157

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest adjustment - interest rate swaps

 

$

(161,315

)

$

(336,138

)

$

(706,663

)

See Table 10.14 Earnings Impact of Derivatives and Hedging Activities in this MD&A for discussions and analysis.

GAAP compared to Economic — 2017, 2016 and 2015

Although we believe these non-GAAP financial measures used by management may enhance investor and members’ understanding of our business and performance, these non-GAAP financial measures should not be considered an alternative to GAAP.

The following table contrasts Net interest income, Net income (a) spread and Return on earning assets between GAAP and economic basis (dollar amounts in thousands):

Table 10.4:10.4GAAP Versus Economic Basis — Contrasting Net Interest Income, Net Interest Income Spread and Return on Earning Assets

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

Amount

 

ROA

 

Net Spread

 

Amount

 

ROA

 

Net Spread

 

Amount

 

ROA

 

Net Spread

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GAAP net interest income

 

$

721,524

 

0.48

%

0.43

%

$

556,410

 

0.43

%

0.40

%

$

554,157

 

0.46

%

0.43

%

Interest (expense) income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Swaps not designated in a hedging relationship

 

(2,546

)

 

 

(11,900

)

(0.01

)

(0.01

)

23,724

 

0.02

 

0.02

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Economic net interest income

 

$

718,978

 

0.48

%

0.43

%

$

544,510

 

0.42

%

0.39

%

$

577,881

 

0.48

%

0.45

%


(a)Viewed on an economic basis, interest income or expense accrued on standalone interest rate swaps would be considered as a measure of net interest income.  From an economic perspective, interest payments and receipts are an integral part of the FHLBNY’s business model, which includes the execution of interest rate swap hedges, converting fixed-rate exposures to LIBOR exposures, or creating fixed-rate cash flows from variable flows; the execution of the business model and the strategy should be considered as a relevant measure of our interest margin performance, rather than under GAAP, which considers the impact as a derivative and hedging gain or loss, outside net interest margin.

Standalone interest rate swaps in economic hedges were associated with — (1) Basis swaps, which primarily hedged floating-rate consolidated obligation debt indexed to the 1-month LIBOR in a strategy that converted the debt to the 3-month LIBOR cash flows (in a pay 3-month LIBOR, receive 1-month LIBOR interest rate exchange swap transaction), and (2) Swaps that hedged fixed-rate instruments elected under the FVO and swaps that hedged fixed-rate trading securities held for liquidity objectives.

On an economic basis, interest accruals on such interest rate swaps would have reduced net interest income by $2.5 million in 2017 and by $11.9 million in 2016.  In 2015, interest accruals on such interest rate swaps would have increased net interest income by $23.7 million. Net income would remain unchanged since interest accruals associated with hedges on an economic basis would be reclassified from Derivatives gains and losses to Net interest margin.

Spread and Yield Analysis 2017, 2016 and 2015

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
     Interest        Interest        Interest    
  Average  Income/     Average  Income/     Average  Income/    
(Dollars in thousands) Balance  Expense  Rate (a)  Balance  Expense  Rate (a)  Balance  Expense  Rate (a) 
Earning Assets:                                    
Advances $109,116,805  $1,166,745   1.07% $95,837,983  $2,526,662   2.64% $107,970,634  $2,522,040   2.34%
Interest bearing deposits and others  1,483,314   3,615   0.24   243,800   4,561   1.87   21,240   420   1.98 
Federal funds sold and other overnight funds  13,726,052   63,364   0.46   18,570,561   406,953   2.19   21,125,197   390,619   1.85 
Investments                                    
Trading securities  13,336,034   221,780   1.66   9,155,523   215,583   2.35   3,585,110   74,412   2.08 
Mortgage-backed securities                                    
Fixed  11,235,921   315,731   2.81   10,109,341   310,849   3.07   8,700,768   260,608   3.00 
Floating  4,780,783   55,586   1.16   6,499,680   181,330   2.79   8,616,252   209,447   2.43 
State and local housing finance agency obligations  1,111,139   15,047   1.35   1,148,680   33,620   2.93   1,184,453   31,329   2.65 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio  3,122,825   91,964   2.94   3,008,225   101,223   3.36   2,898,749   97,479   3.36 
Loans to other FHLBanks  2,049   33   1.61   6,904   165   2.39   6,671   130   1.95 
                                     
Total interest-earning assets $157,914,922  $1,933,865   1.22% $144,580,697  $3,780,946   2.62% $154,109,074  $3,586,484   2.33%
                                     
Funded By:                                    
Consolidated obligation bonds                                    
Fixed $35,846,973  $467,820   1.31% $29,764,963  $707,408   2.38% $26,650,358  $556,003   2.09%
Floating  37,250,201   280,094   0.75   47,906,230   1,090,759   2.28   66,878,818   1,252,229   1.87 
Consolidated obligation discount notes  74,759,309   428,864   0.57   58,317,547   1,291,576   2.21   51,656,594   960,833   1.86 
Interest-bearing deposits and other borrowings  1,439,485   3,896   0.27   1,132,147   23,734   2.10   1,035,303   19,430   1.88 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  4,318   235   5.44   5,973   379   6.35   13,962   964   6.90 
                                     
Total interest-bearing liabilities  149,300,286   1,180,909   0.79%  137,126,860   3,113,856   2.27%  146,235,035   2,789,459   1.91%
                                     
Other non-interest-bearing funds  638,162   -       181,382   -       100,509   -     
Capital  7,976,474   -       7,272,455   -       7,773,530   -     
                                     
Total Funding $157,914,922  $1,180,909      $144,580,697  $3,113,856      $154,109,074  $2,789,459     
                                     
Net Interest Income/Spread     $752,956   0.43%     $667,090   0.35%     $797,025   0.42%
                                     
Net Interest Margin                                    
(Net interest income/Earning Assets)          0.48%          0.46%          0.52%

 

Table 10.5:(a)Spread and Yield Analysis

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

Interest

 

 

 

 

 

Interest

 

 

 

 

 

Interest

 

 

 

 

 

Average

 

Income/

 

 

 

Average

 

Income/

 

 

 

Average

 

Income/

 

 

 

(Dollars in thousands)

 

Balance

 

Expense

 

Rate (a)

 

Balance

 

Expense

 

Rate (a)

 

Balance

 

Expense

 

Rate (a)

 

Earning Assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

109,187,643

 

$

1,563,322

 

1.43

%

$

96,200,603

 

$

919,890

 

0.96

%

$

91,401,149

 

$

627,866

 

0.69

%

Interest bearing deposits and others

 

135,970

 

168

 

0.12

 

456,464

 

1,655

 

0.36

 

967,228

 

1,343

 

0.14

 

Federal funds sold and other overnight funds Investments

 

18,705,074

 

188,920

 

1.01

 

13,702,951

 

53,323

 

0.39

 

12,207,096

 

14,650

 

0.12

 

Trading securities

 

231,458

 

3,085

 

1.33

 

6,255

 

56

 

0.90

 

 

 

NM

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

7,961,719

 

237,729

 

2.99

 

7,116,150

 

215,183

 

3.02

 

7,200,967

 

220,710

 

3.07

 

Floating

 

8,627,485

 

136,331

 

1.58

 

7,465,096

 

74,596

 

1.00

 

6,581,471

 

45,659

 

0.69

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

1,110,125

 

18,467

 

1.66

 

837,504

 

9,311

 

1.11

 

825,235

 

6,328

 

0.77

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

2,837,762

 

94,255

 

3.32

 

2,631,349

 

86,800

 

3.30

 

2,361,642

 

81,103

 

3.43

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

3,315

 

26

 

0.79

 

8,005

 

33

 

0.41

 

9,685

 

13

 

0.13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-earning assets

 

$

148,800,551

 

$

2,242,303

 

1.51

%

$

128,424,377

 

$

1,360,847

 

1.06

%

$

121,554,473

 

$

997,672

 

0.82

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Funded By:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

$

32,347,406

 

$

463,181

 

1.43

%

$

41,444,068

 

$

393,391

 

0.95

%

$

58,695,163

(b)

$

318,708

 

0.54

%

Floating

 

61,004,233

 

609,189

 

1.00

 

31,729,864

 

188,509

 

0.59

 

10,472,411

(b)

20,208

 

0.19

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

45,895,662

 

431,722

 

0.94

 

46,508,363

 

216,545

 

0.47

 

43,627,528

 

102,913

 

0.24

 

Interest-bearing deposits and other borrowings

 

1,768,332

 

15,402

 

0.87

 

1,428,394

 

4,375

 

0.31

 

1,204,833

 

866

 

0.07

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

21,523

 

1,285

 

5.97

 

24,370

 

1,617

 

6.64

 

19,255

 

820

 

4.26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-bearing liabilities

 

141,037,156

 

1,520,779

 

1.08

%

121,135,059

 

804,437

 

0.66

%

114,019,190

 

443,515

 

0.39

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other non-interest-bearing funds

 

62,928

 

 

 

 

262,920

 

 

 

 

1,109,258

 

 

 

 

Capital

 

7,700,467

 

 

 

 

7,026,398

 

 

 

 

6,426,025

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Funding

 

$

148,800,551

 

$

1,520,779

 

 

 

$

128,424,377

 

$

804,437

 

 

 

$

121,554,473

 

$

443,515

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Interest Income/Spread

 

 

 

$

721,524

 

0.43

%

 

 

$

556,410

 

0.40

%

 

 

$

554,157

 

0.43

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Interest Margin (Net interest income/Earning Assets)

 

 

 

 

 

0.48

%

 

 

 

 

0.43

%

 

 

 

 

0.46

%


(a)Reported yields with respect to advances and Consolidated obligations may not necessarily equal the coupons on the instruments as derivatives are extensively used to change the yield and optionality characteristics of the underlying hedged items. When we issue fixed-rate debt that is hedged with an interest rate swap, the hedge effectively converts the debt into a simple floating-rate bond. Similarly, we make fixed-rate advances to members and hedge the advances with a pay-fixed and receive-variable interest rate swap that effectively converts the fixed-rate asset to one that floats with prevailing LIBOR rates.the designated benchmark rate (LIBOR, OIS/FF or OIS/SOFR) in the hedging relationship. Average balance sheet information is presented, as it is more representative of activity throughout the periods presented. For most components of the average balances, a daily weighted average balance is calculated for the period. When daily weighted average balance information is not available, a simple monthly average balance is calculated. Average yields are derived by dividing income by the average balances of the related assets, and average costs are derived by dividing expenses by the average balances of the related liabilities.

(b)Previously reported comparative balances have been reclassified to conform to the retrospective adoption of ASU 2015-03 Interest-imputation of interest (Subtopic 835-30) Simplifying the presentation of Debt Issuance Costs.

NM — Not meaningful.

Rate and Volume Analysis — 2017, 2016 and 2015

87

Rate and Volume Analysis — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

The Rate and Volume Analysis presents changes in interest income, interest expense and net interest income that are due to changes in both interest rates and the volume of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, and their impact on interest income and interest expense (in thousands):

 

Table 10.6:10.5Rate and Volume Analysis

 

 

For the years ended

 

 

 

December 31, 2017 vs. December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Increase (Decrease)

 

 

 

Volume

 

Rate

 

Total

 

Interest Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

137,370

 

$

506,062

 

$

643,432

 

Interest bearing deposits and others

 

(766

)

(721

)

(1,487

)

Federal funds sold and other overnight funds

 

25,248

 

110,349

 

135,597

 

Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trading securities

 

2,989

 

40

 

3,029

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

25,279

 

(2,733

)

22,546

 

Floating

 

13,042

 

48,693

 

61,735

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

3,627

 

5,529

 

9,156

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

6,852

 

603

 

7,455

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

(26

)

19

 

(7

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest income

 

213,615

 

667,841

 

881,456

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

(99,585

)

169,375

 

69,790

 

Floating

 

242,055

 

178,625

 

420,680

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

(2,890

)

218,067

 

215,177

 

Deposits and borrowings

 

1,261

 

9,766

 

11,027

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(179

)

(153

)

(332

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest expense

 

140,662

 

575,680

 

716,342

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in Net Interest Income

 

$

72,953

 

$

92,161

 

$

165,114

 

 

 

For the years ended

 

 

 

December 31, 2016 vs. December 31, 2015

 

 

 

Increase (Decrease)

 

 

 

Volume

 

Rate

 

Total

 

Interest Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

34,496

 

$

257,528

 

$

292,024

 

Interest bearing deposits and others

 

(992

)

1,304

 

312

 

Federal funds sold and other overnight funds

 

2,003

 

36,670

 

38,673

 

Investments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Trading securities

 

56

 

 

56

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

(2,583

)

(2,944

)

(5,527

)

Floating

 

6,761

 

22,176

 

28,937

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

95

 

2,888

 

2,983

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

8,991

 

(3,294

)

5,697

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

(3

)

23

 

20

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest income

 

48,824

 

314,351

 

363,175

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

(113,436

)

188,119

 

74,683

 

Floating

 

83,149

 

85,152

 

168,301

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

7,216

 

106,416

 

113,632

 

Deposits and borrowings

 

189

 

3,320

 

3,509

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

256

 

541

 

797

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest expense

 

(22,626

)

383,548

 

360,922

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Changes in Net Interest Income

 

$

71,450

 

$

(69,197

)

$

2,253

 

Interest Income 2017, 2016 and 2015

Interest income from advances, investments in mortgage-backed securities and MPF loans, federal funds and repurchase agreements are our principal sources of income.  Changes in both rate and intermediation volume (average interest-yielding assets) explain the change in the current year period from the prior year period.  Reported interest income is net

  For the years ended 
  December 31, 2020 vs. December 31, 2019 
  Increase (Decrease) 
  Volume  Rate  Total 
Interest Income            
Advances $310,745  $(1,670,662) $(1,359,917)
Interest bearing deposits and others  5,967   (6,913)  (946)
Federal funds sold and other overnight funds  (85,347)  (258,242)  (343,589)
Investments            
Trading securities  80,842   (74,645)  6,197 
Mortgage-backed securities            
Fixed  32,958   (28,076)  4,882 
Floating  (39,229)  (86,515)  (125,744)
State and local housing finance agency obligations  (1,065)  (17,508)  (18,573)
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio  3,744   (13,003)  (9,259)
Loans to other FHLBanks  (90)  (42)  (132)
             
Total interest income  308,525   (2,155,606)  (1,847,081)
             
Interest Expense            
Consolidated obligation bonds            
Fixed  124,223   (363,811)  (239,588)
Floating  (202,110)  (608,555)  (810,665)
Consolidated obligation discount notes  289,773   (1,152,485)  (862,712)
Deposits and borrowings  5,110   (24,948)  (19,838)
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (95)  (49)  (144)
             
Total interest expense  216,901   (2,149,848)  (1,932,947)
             
Changes in Net Interest Income $91,624  $(5,758) $85,866 

  For the years ended 
  December 31, 2019 vs. December 31, 2018 
  Increase (Decrease) 
  Volume  Rate  Total 
Interest Income            
Advances $(300,400) $305,022  $4,622 
Interest bearing deposits and others  4,164   (23)  4,141 
Federal funds sold and other overnight funds  (50,692)  67,026   16,334 
Investments            
Trading securities  129,927   11,244   141,171 
Mortgage-backed securities            
Fixed  43,049   7,192   50,241 
Floating  (56,079)  27,962   (28,117)
State and local housing finance agency obligations  (968)  3,259   2,291 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio  3,685   59   3,744 
Loans to other FHLBanks  5   30   35 
             
Total interest income  (227,309)  421,771   194,462 
             
Interest Expense            
Consolidated obligation bonds            
Fixed  69,107   82,298   151,405 
Floating  (398,805)  237,335   (161,470)
Consolidated obligation discount notes  133,427   197,316   330,743 
Deposits and borrowings  1,912   2,392   4,304 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (513)  (72)  (585)
             
Total interest expense  (194,872)  519,269   324,397 
             
Changes in Net Interest Income $(32,437) $(97,498) $(129,935)


Interest Income — 2020, 2019 and 2018

Interest income from advances is our principal source of interest income. We also earn interest income from investments in mortgage-backed securities, mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, U.S. Treasury securities held for liquidity, and federal funds and repurchase agreements held for liquidity. Changes in both interest rate and intermediation volume (average interest-yielding assets) explain the change in the current year compared to the prior year.

Reported interest income includes the impact of ASC 815 qualifying hedges. Although, the fair value impact of hedging (fair value of hedged items minus the fair value of hedging derivatives) was not significant, a reflection of highly-effective hedging relationships, swap interest settlements (interest accruals) have been significant and have fluctuated in the volatile interest rate environment. Certain fixed-rate advances and certain fixed-rate MBS have been elected as the hedged items under ASC 815 fair value hedges. The hedging relationships have synthetically converted the fixed-rate cash flows associated with interest rate swaps hedging certain fixed-rate advances that were converted to floating-rate, generally indexed primarily to short-term benchmark indices, SOFR LIBOR and Fed funds, although we are transitioning away from LIBOR. The interest settlements (swap accruals) and fair value changes of hedged advances and MBS minus fair values of the hedging swaps are included in reported Interest income.

Reported interest income also includes prepayment fees, primarily fees recorded when advances are prepaid ahead of their contractual maturities.

 

The principal categories of Interest Income are summarized below (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 10.7: 10.6Interest Income — Principal Sources

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

Percentage
Change

 

Percentage
Change

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2017

 

2016

 

Interest Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances (a)

 

$

1,563,322

 

$

919,890

 

$

627,866

 

69.95

%

46.51

%

Interest-bearing deposits

 

168

 

1,655

 

1,343

 

(89.85

)

23.23

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell (b)

 

25,509

 

6,940

 

1,615

 

NM

 

NM

 

Federal funds sold (b)

 

163,411

 

46,383

 

13,035

 

NM

 

NM

 

Trading securities (c)

 

3,085

 

56

 

 

NM

 

NM

 

Mortgage-backed securities (d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

237,729

 

215,183

 

220,710

 

10.48

 

(2.50

)

Floating

 

136,331

 

74,596

 

45,659

 

82.76

 

63.38

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

18,467

 

9,311

 

6,328

 

98.34

 

47.14

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (e)

 

94,255

 

86,800

 

81,103

 

8.59

 

7.02

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

26

 

33

 

13

 

(21.21

)

NM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest income

 

$

2,242,303

 

$

1,360,847

 

$

997,672

 

64.77

%

36.40

%

NM — Not meaningful.

Interest income in 2017 grew to $2.2 billion, yielding 151 basis points, compared to $1.4 billion at a yield of 106 basis points in 2016 and $997.7 million at a yield of 82 basis points in 2015.

The primary factors driving changes period-over-period in Interest income are summarized below:


(a)Interest income from advances The principal source of our revenues is interest income from advances.

2017 vs 2016

Interest income from advances grew to $1.6 billion, yielding 143 basis points in 2017, compared to $919.9 million, at a yield of 96 basis points in 2016.

When members prepay advances ahead of their contractual maturities, we receive prepayment fees.  Net prepayment fees recorded as interest income from advances were $23.8 million in 2017 and $18.0 million in 2016.

The higher interest rate environment in 2017, specifically LIBOR, was the primary driver for the significant increase in interest income.  Another driver, was the higher transaction volume, as measured by average outstanding advances, which grew to $109.2 billion in 2017, compared to $96.2 billion in 2016, an increase of $13.0 billion.

The rising LIBOR contributed to a favorable change in interest cash flows exchanged with swap dealers on swaps that qualified under hedging rules under ASC 815.  The level of cash flows exchanged would have an impact on period-over-period comparisons of interest income.  Net interest accruals from ASC 815 qualifying interest rate swaps are pay fixed-rate in exchange for receive floating-rate cash flows.  Typically, the interest rate exchanges result in a net accrual expense, a charge that reduces interest income from hedged advances (but mitigates interest rate risk arising from fixed-rate cash flows).  That charge declined by $246.4 million period-over-period in line with the rising 3-month LIBOR. For more information, see Table 10.8 Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Interest Earned from Advances.

Variable-rate advances (ARCs), which are typically indexed to LIBOR, re-price at short intervals, benefited from the rising LIBOR.  The average 3-month LIBOR was 126 basis points in 2017, compared to 74 basis points in 2016.  ARCs yielded 143 basis points or$510.8 million in 2017, compared to a yield of 94 basis points, or $303.8 million in 2016.  The average ARC balance grew to $35.8 billion in 2017, up from $32.2 billion in 2016.  The combined impact of higher yields and higher volume explains the increase in ARC interest income in 2017.

Longer-term fixed-rate advances yielded (on a contractual coupon basis) 175 basis points, or $848.6 million in 2017, compared to 179 basis points, or $813.6 million in 2016.  The average balance was $48.6 billion in 2017, up from $45.3 billion in 2016.

All other categories of advances, primarily Short-term fixed-rate advances and Overnight advances yielded 132 basis points in aggregate, or $326.4 million in 2017, compared to an aggregate yield of 97 basis points, or $176.9 million in 2016.  Short-term advances and overnight advances re-price at frequent intervals (when rolled over), and benefited from higher coupons along an upwardly sloping yield curve in 2017.

2016 vs 2015

In 2016, Interest income from advances grew to $919.9 million, yielding 96 basis points, compared to $627.9 million at a yield of 69 basis points in 2015.  Prepayment fee revenue recorded in interest income from advances was $18.0 million in 2016 and $117.5 million in 2015.

Swap interest accruals, an expense, from ASC 815 qualifying interest rate swaps declined year-over-year by $496.3 million, contributing to the increase in interest income from advances due primarily to the increase in LIBOR.

Longer-term fixed-rate advances yielded (on a contractual coupon basis) 179 basis points, or $813.6 million in 2016, compared to 244 basis points, or $1.1 billion in 2015.  Period-over-period yield decline in 2016 was due to significant prepayments of vintage high-coupon advances in the 2015 fourth quarter.

Interest income from variable-rate advances (ARCs) benefited from the rising LIBOR in 2016.  The average 3-month LIBOR was 74 basis points in 2016, compared to 32 basis points in 2015.  ARCs yielded 94 basis points or $303.8 million in 2016, compared to a yield of 51 basis points, or $135.9 million in 2015.  The average ARC advance balance grew to $32.2 billion in 2016, up from $26.5 billion in 2015.  The combined impact of higher yields and higher volume was a strong contributor in 2016.

All other categories of advances, primarily Short-term advances and Overnight advances yielded 97 basis points in aggregate, or $176.9 million in 2016, compared to an aggregate yield of 77 basis points, or $131.2 million in 2015.

(b)Federal funds and Securities purchased under agreements to resell

2017 vs 2016 Interest income from federal funds and repurchase agreements grew to $188.9 million, yielding 101 basis points in 2017, compared to $53.3 million, yielding 39 basis points in 2016.  Primary drivers were higher overnight and short-term rates for interbank money market lending and higher volume of investments, which averaged $18.7 billion in 2017, compared to $13.7 billion in 2016.

2016 vs 2015 Interest income from Federal funds sold and repurchase agreements grew to $53.3 million in 2016, yielding 39 basis points, compared to $14.7 million at a yield of 12 basis points in 2015.  Higher investment volume and higher market yields in 2016 were the primary driver.

(c)Trading securities

2017 vs 2016 — We acquired shorter-term highly liquid U.S. Treasury and GSE securities to enhance our liquidity needs.  Securities are marked-to-market, gains and losses are recorded in Other income, and yield income is recorded in Interest income.  The trading portfolio was established in late 2016.  For more information, see financial statements Note 5. Trading Securities.

(d)Mortgage-backed securities Investment yields and interest income Interest income from investments in mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) were generated by fixed- and floating-rate securities in our held-to-maturity and available-for-sale portfolios.

2017 vs 2016

Interest income was $374.0 million in 2017, compared to $289.8 million in 2016.

·Fixed-rate MBS yielded 299 basis points, or $237.7 million in 2017, compared to a yield of 302 basis points, or $215.2 million in 2016.  Reported yields are a blend of accretable yields on OTTI securities and yields based on amortized cost on all other MBS securities.  In aggregate, yields have declined as high-yielding vintage MBS have continued to pay down.  Increase in interest income was driven by higher investment balances, which averaged $8.0 billion in 2017, up from $7.1 billion in 2016.

·Floating-rate MBS yielded 158 basis points, or $136.3 million in 2017, compared to a yield of 100 basis points, or $74.6 million in 2016.  Contributing factors were higher 1-month LIBOR and higher invested balances.  The floating-rate portfolio re-priced in line with the rising 1- month LIBOR, which is the primary index on the floating-rate securities.  The average 1- month LIBOR was 111 basis points in 2017, compared to 50 basis points in 2016.  Investment volume averaged $8.6 billion in 2017, up from $7.5 billion in 2016.

2016 vs 2015

Interest income from investments in mortgage-backed securities grew to $289.8 million 2016, compared to $266.4 million in 2015.

·Fixed-rate MBS yielded 302 basis points, or $215.2 million in 2016, compared to a yield of 307 basis points, or $220.7 million in 2015.

·Floating-rate MBS yielded 100 basis points, or $74.6 million in 2016, compared to a yield of 69 basis points, or $45.7 million in 2015.  Contributing factors were higher invested balances, which averaged $7.5 billion in 2016 up from $6.6 billion in 2015, and higher 1-month LIBOR. The average 1 - month LIBOR was 50 basis points in 2016 and 20 basis points in 2015.

(e)Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

2017 vs 2016 - Interest income grew to $94.3 million in 2017, compared to $86.8 million in 2016.  Pricing has remained competitive, and the average outstanding portfolio stood at $2.8 billion, a small increase of $206.5 million net of paydowns.  The portfolio yielded 332 basis points in the 2017 period, compared to 330 basis points in 2016.

2016 vs 2015 - Interest income from Mortgage loans grew to $86.8 million in 2016, yielding 330 basis points, compared to $81.1 million at a yield of 343 basis points in 2015.

Impact of hedging on Interest income from advances2017, 2016 and 2015

We have executed interest rate swaps to modify the effective interest rate terms of many of our fixed-rate advance products and typically all of our putable advances, effectively converting a fixed-rate stream of cash flows from fixed-rate advances to a floating-rate stream of cash flows, typically indexed to LIBOR.  The cash flow patterns achieved our interest rate risk management practices of synthetically converting much of our fixed-rate interest exposures to a LIBOR exposure.

  Years ended December 31,  Percentage  Percentage 
           Change  Change 
  2020  2019  2018  2020  2019 
Interest Income                    
Advances $1,166,745  $2,526,662  $2,522,040   (53.82)%  0.18%
Interest-bearing deposits  3,615   4,561   420   (20.74)  985.95 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  28,573   178,565   78,341   (84.00)  127.93 
Federal funds sold  34,791   228,388   312,278   (84.77)  (26.86)
Trading securities  221,780   215,583   74,412   2.87   189.72 
Mortgage-backed securities                    
Fixed  315,731   310,849   260,608   1.57   19.28 
Floating  55,586   181,330   209,447   (69.35)  (13.42)
State and local housing finance agency obligations  15,047   33,620   31,329   (55.24)  7.31 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio  91,964   101,223   97,479   (9.15)  3.84 
Loans to other FHLBanks  33   165   130   (80.00)  26.92 
                     
Total interest income $1,933,865  $3,780,946  $3,586,484   (48.85)%  5.42%

Interest Income — 2020 Vs. 2019

Our interest revenues are generated from an asset mix of long-term assets, such as fixed-rate advances, long-term fixed- and floating-rate investments, long-term 15-year and 30-year mortgage loans, and revenues generated from portfolios of overnight and short-term assets and U.S. Treasury securities held for liquidity.

In response to macroeconomic concerns resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, the Federal Reserve decreased its benchmark short-term interest rate in March 2020 to a range of 0.0% to 0.25%, a decrease of 150 basis points. In subsequent meetings through the fourth quarter of 2020, the Federal Reserve has maintained its target rates as unchanged. These decreases were in addition to the three rate cuts implemented during calendar 2019. Our overnight and short-term advances and assets and floating-rate investments are particularly sensitive to changes in market yields, and such assets have rapidly repriced to lower market yields in each successive 2020 quarter.

Interest income in 2020 was $1.9 billion, a decline of $1.8 billion, or 48.9 % compared to the prior year. To provide context, interest expense declined by 62.1% compared to the prior year.


Interest revenues earned from higher balance sheet earning assets (primarily the increase in volume of advance business) made a small favorable revenue increase of $308.5 million, offset entirely by yield (rate) related revenue decline of $2.2 billion. In successive 2020 quarters, we have reported declining interest revenues: first quarter revenue was $740.1 million; second quarter was $502.3 million; third and fourth quarter revenues were $354.7 million and $336.8 million, respectively.

Yields earned on assets declined sharply in the periods after FOMC rate actions in March 2020. Aggregate yield earned on earning assets in 2020 was 122 basis points, compared to 262 basis points in the prior year. In successive 2020 quarters, earned yields have declined. Interest income yielded 190 basis points in the first quarter of 2020, 116 basis points in the second quarter, and 90 basis points and 93 basis points in the third and fourth quarters, respectively, illustrating the impact to our yields due to the dramatic and rapid decline in rates triggered by Federal Reserve’s accommodative fiscal relief measures.

The more significant revenue categories are discussed below. For information about the effects of changes in rates and business volume, see Table 10.4 Spread and Yield Analysis and Table 10.5 Rate and Volume analysis.

Advance — Interest income from advances declined by 53.8% in 2020, compared to the prior year.

Advance transaction volume, as measured by average balance, was $109.1 billion in 2020, compared to $95.8 billion in the prior year. The pre-pandemic par balance of $93.0 billion at February 2020, surged to $134.4 billion at March 31, 2020, a 44.5% increase within a few weeks. However, soon after, advance balances began to decline, gradually at first, when members did not roll over maturing short-term funds and prepaid advances ahead of maturities, followed by significant prepayments late in the fourth quarter. We ended the year with par advances at $90.7 billion, compared to $100.4 billion at the beginning of the year.

Higher transaction volume in 2020 resulted in a favorable impact of $310.7 million on interest income from advances, relatively small compared to $1.7 billion decline in interest income due to the very low prevailing market yields. In summary, declining market interest rates negatively impacted yields earned from advances, primarily on overnight and short-term advances and variable-rate advances that reset to lower rates. Advances yielded 107 basis points in 2020, down from 264 basis points in the prior year. Yields declined through the quarters in 2020: 182 basis points and 105 basis points in the first and second quarters, respectively; and, 70 basis points and 74 basis points in the third and fourth quarters, respectively. Prepayment fee recorded in Interest income from advances was $45.3 million in 2020, up from $23.7 million in the prior year.

Declining benchmark rates (LIBOR, SOFR and FF-OIS) caused swap interest settlement cash flows to turn negative in 2020, reducing interest income earned on fixed-rate advances net of the hedging effects that synthetically converted the fixed yield to a variable yield. Swap interest settlements on swaps hedging fixed-rate advances recorded a net loss of $360.0 million in 2020, compared to a net positive contribution of $170.5 million in the prior year. In a fair value hedge of advances under ASC 815, we pay to swap counterparties fixed-rate coupons; in exchange, we received the declining floating-rate cash flows, negatively impacting yields, although preserving our hedging objectives of converting fixed cash flows to variable cash flows. The impact on interest income from changes in fair values in the ASC 815 hedging was not material in 2020 and 2019.

Liquidity Investments Money Market Investments and U.S. Treasury Securities We derive interest income from inventorying highly-liquid portfolios of investments to meet liquidity regulatory requirements. Interest income from overnight invested funds, specifically federal funds sold and repurchase agreements, declined due to lower invested balances and sharp declines in market yields in 2020 compared to the prior year. Investments in federal funds and repurchase agreements yielded 46 basis points in aggregate in 2020, compared to 219 basis points in the prior year. Interest income from fixed-rate U.S. Treasury securities was $221.8 million in 2020, up from $215.6 million in the prior year benefiting from higher average invested balances; although yields declined to 166 basis points, compared to 235 basis points in the prior year. The lower yields on the fixed-rate securities reflected lower yields on new acquisitions. The liquidity trading portfolio is comprised primarily of medium-term, highly liquid fixed-rate U.S. Treasury securities that are available to enhance and meet our liquidity objectives; securities are not acquired for speculative purpose.


The earnings impact due to changes in market values of the securities outstanding (unrealized gains and losses) and realized gains and losses on securities sold are recorded in Other income (below the margin) and are noted in Table 10.11 Net Gains (Losses) on Trading Securities Recorded in the Statements of Income, and discussions thereto. Fixed-rate treasury securities are hedged under economic hedges utilizing swap contracts to synthetically convert fixed cash flows to variable cash flows. The interest settlements on the swaps and changes in the fair values of the swap contracts are recorded in Other income (below the margin); our accounting policies require us to record in Other income the cash flows and fair values on hedging that do not qualify under ASC 815 hedging (economic hedges).

Mortgage-backed-securities

Interest income from floating-rate MBS declined by 69.3% year-over-year in line with falling rates and declining inventory. By policy, no floating-rate LIBOR-indexed MBS are being acquired, a decision driven by our goal to reduce our inventory of LIBOR-indexed instruments. Until GSE-issued floating-rate SOFR-indexed MBS become widely traded, we will likely continue to see declining balances of variable-rate MBS.

Interest income from fixed-rate MBS increased a little in 2020 relative to the prior year, benefitting from increase in invested balances, partly offset by decline in interest revenues due to lower aggregate yield, which was 281 basis points in 2020, down from 307 basis points in the prior year. Our acquisitions of fixed-rate MBS have been constrained. The Federal Reserve purchases of Fannie and Freddie securities have driven down yields, so that target acquisitions would not always meet our risk/reward targets. Transaction volume of fixed-rate MBS, as measured by average outstanding balance was $11.2 billion in 2020, compared to $10.1 billion in the prior year.

In 2020, our acquisitions were primarily fixed-rate commercial-mortgage backed securities (CMBS). We utilized the swap market to synthetically create variable-rate cash flows indexed to SOFR and Federal funds applying ASC 815 fair value accounting hedge treatment. The impact to interest income from changes in fair values in the ASC 815 hedging was not material in 2020 and 2019.

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio Interest income from mortgage loans (MPF program) was $92.0 million in 2020, compared to $101.2 million in the prior year. Investment volume has remained almost flat, with paydowns exceeding acquisitions. MPF loans are primarily 15 and 30-year conventional loans. The portfolio averaged $3.1 billion, yielding 294 basis points in 2020, compared to 336 basis points in the prior year. In the declining interest rate environment, we are observing elevated levels of prepayments, causing accelerated amortization of premiums, specifically on 20-year and 30-year high-balance mortgage loans. Net amortization expense was $13.2 million in 2020, compared to net amortization of $6.3 million in the prior year. The Bank’s portfolio is largely at a premium price and amortization is sensitive to changes in prepayment speeds particularly in a volatile interest rate environment. The Bank does not hedge mortgage loans in an ASC 815 hedge or an economic hedge.

As noted in the audited financial statements under Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates, we have implemented a new mortgage program, the Mortgage Asset Program sm (MAP) and plan to roll it out fully in late March 2021. At December 31, 2020, mortgage loans under MAP were $0.3 million. Effective March 31, 2021, we will cease to accept mortgage commitments to purchase loans under the MPF program; the MAP will become our alternative to MPF. The outstanding MPF portfolio will continue to be serviced, managed under its existing contractual and customary agreements and contracts.

Interest Income — 2019 Vs. 2018

Interest income was higher in 2019 by $194.5 million, or 5.4%, in 2019, compared to 2018. In the first six months of 2019, interest income grew 21.8% compared to the same six month period in 2018, despite the effects of lower pricing on advances and declining advance balances, the increase in interest income primarily driven by higher market yields earned in the 2019 periods prior to FOMC rate cuts in July and September 2019. In the last six months of 2019, interest income declined by 8.6%, compared to the same last six months in 2018. FOMC rate cuts in late July and September in 2019 impacted yields on assets, as did the lagged impact of pricing reduction, specifically on short-term advances that repriced to lower coupons.

91

Impact of hedging on Interest income from advances — 2020, 2019 and 2018

Declining interest rates unfavorably impacted interest accrual (swap interest settlements) on swap contracts in ASC 815 hedges of fixed-rate advances in 2020. The fair value hedging impact was not material.

We execute interest rate swaps to modify the effective interest rate terms of many of our fixed-rate advance products and typically all of our putable advances, effectively converting a fixed-rate stream of cash flows from fixed-rate advances to a floating-rate stream of cash flows indexed to a benchmark rate. In the periods in this report, hedging relationships including those in economic hedges achieved desired cash flow patterns and met our interest rate risk management practice of synthetically converting much of our fixed-rate interest exposures to the adopted benchmark.

 

The table below summarizes interest income earned from advances and the impact of interest rate derivatives (in thousands):

 

Table 10.8:10.7Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Interest Income Earned from Advances

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Advance Interest Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advance interest income before adjustment for interest rate swaps

 

$

1,709,433

 

$

1,312,363

 

$

1,516,666

 

Net interest adjustment from interest rate swaps (a)

 

(146,111

)

(392,473

)

(888,800

)

Total Advance interest income reported

 

$

1,563,322

 

$

919,890

 

$

627,866

 


(a)In a Fair value hedge under ASC 815, certain fixed-rate advances are hedged by the execution of interest rate swaps that have created synthetic floaters.  A fair value hedge of an advance is accomplished by the execution of an interest rate swap in which we pay fixed-rate cash flows and receive LIBOR-indexed variable rate cash flows.  The difference between the two cash exchanges determines the net interest adjustments under ASC 815.  Historically, the fixed-rate paid to swap dealers on swaps hedging longer-term advances have been greater than the LIBOR indexed cash flows we receive from swap dealers, resulting in a net interest expense, a charge that reduces interest income from hedged advances, nonetheless assuring the hedging objectives.  That differential, between fixed-rate payments and variable-rate income, has narrowed. The higher LIBOR cash flows we have received in the periods in this report have narrowed the unfavorable expense adjustments.  The cash flows exchanged resulted in $146.1 million in net interest expense charged to advance income in 2017, compared to a net charge of $392.5 million in 2016 and $888.8 million in 2015.

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Advance interest income            
Advance interest income before adjustment for interest rate swaps $1,527,613  $2,355,337  $2,331,643 
Fair value hedging effects  (330)  929   - 
Amortization of basis  (557)  (56)  88 
Interest rate swap accruals  (359,981)  170,452   190,309 
Total advance interest income reported $1,166,745  $2,526,662  $2,522,040 

 

Interest Expense 2017, 2016 and 2015

Our primary source of funding is through the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes in the global debt markets.  Consolidated obligation bonds are medium- and long-term bonds, while discount notes are short-term instruments.  To fund our assets, our management considers our interest rate risk and liquidity requirements in conjunction with consolidated obligation buyers’ preferences and capital market conditions when determining the characteristics of debt to be issued.  Typically, we have used fixed-rate callable and non-callable CO bonds to fund mortgage-related assets and Advances.  CO discount notes are generally issued to fund Advances and investments with shorter interest rate reset characteristics.

Changes in rate and intermediation volume (average interest-costing liabilities), the mix of debt issuances between CO bonds and CO discount notes, and the impact of hedging strategies explain the changes in interest expense.  Reported Interest expense is net of the impact of hedge strategies.  The primary hedging strategy is the Fair value hedge that creates LIBOR-indexed funding.  We also use the Cash Flow hedge strategy that creates long-term fixed-rate funding to lock in future net interest margin.  In a Fair value hedge strategy of a bond or discount note, we generally pay variable-rate LIBOR-indexed cash flows to swap counterparties.  In exchange, we receive fixed-rate cash flows, which typically mirror the fixed-rate coupon payments to investors holding the FHLBank debt.  This exchange effectively converts fixed-rate coupons to floating-rate coupons indexed to the 3-month LIBOR.  The primary cash flow hedge strategy is designed to eliminate the variability of cash flows attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate (3-month LIBOR), hedging long-term issuances of consolidated obligation discount notes and create long-term fixed-rate funding.

Certain floating-rate CO bonds were designated in economic hedges, primarily basis hedges that converted a contractual variable index to a preferred funding variable index, typically the 3-month LIBOR.  Interest rate swaps designated in an economic hedge are not recorded under a qualifying ASC 815 hedge.  Interest accrual is not recorded as an adjustment to debt interest expense, but reported together with the change in fair value of the swap in Other income as part of the impact of derivative and hedging activities in the Statements of income.

Interest Expense

Our primary source of funding is the issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes to investors in the global debt markets issued through the Office of Finance, the FHLBank’s fiscal agent. Consolidated obligation bonds are generally medium- and long-term bonds, while Consolidated obligation discount notes are short-term instruments. To fund our assets, our management considers our interest rate risk and liquidity requirements in conjunction with consolidated obligation buyers’ preferences and capital market conditions when determining the characteristics of debt to be issued. Typically, we have used fixed-rate callable and non-callable CO bonds to fund mortgage-related assets and advances. CO discount notes are generally issued to fund advances and investments with shorter interest rate reset characteristics.

Changes in bond market rates, changes in intermediation volume (average interest-costing liabilities and interest-earning assets), the mix of debt issuances between CO bonds and CO discount notes, and the impact of hedging strategies are the primary factors that drive period-over-period changes in interest expense.

Derivative strategies are used to manage the interest rate risk inherent in fixed-rate debt. We execute our strategies by converting the fixed-rate funding to floating-rate debt using swap contracts indexed to a risk-free benchmark interest rate. Our adopted hedging benchmarks are OIS/SOFR, LIBOR and OIS/FF. We are transitioning away from LIBOR to OIS/SOFR benchmark in line with an industry-wide transition effort. For ASC 815 qualifying hedges of debt, swap interest settlements and fair value gains and losses are recorded in interest expense together with the interest expense accrued on the hedged CO debt.

For more information about our hedging results, see discussions below “Impact of Hedging on Interest Expense on debt in 2020, 2019 and 2018 and Table 10.9 Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Consolidated Obligations Interest Expense.


The principal categories of Interest expense are summarized below (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 10.9:10.8Interest Expenses Principal Categories

  Years ended December 31,  Percentage  Percentage 
           Change  Change 
  2020  2019  2018  2020  2019 
Interest Expense                    
Consolidated obligations bonds                    
Fixed $467,820  $707,408  $556,003   (33.87)%  27.23%
Floating  280,094   1,090,759   1,252,229   (74.32)  (12.89)
Consolidated obligations discount notes  428,864   1,291,576   960,833   (66.80)  34.42 
Deposits  3,768   22,839   17,816   (83.50)  28.19 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  235   379   964   (37.99)  (60.68)
Cash collateral held and other borrowings  128   895   1,614   (85.70)  (44.55)
                     
Total interest expense $1,180,909  $3,113,856  $2,789,459   (62.08)%  11.63%

Interest Expense — 2020 Vs. 2019

Interest expense in 2020 was $1.2 billion, a decline of $1.9 billion or 62.1% compared to the prior year. The decline was in parallel with the significant decline in bond yields in the financial markets. Rate-related funding expense declined by $2.1 billion in line with the dramatic decline in rates in the bond markets triggered primarily by the range of actions undertaken by the FOMC and the U.S. administration. Volume-related funding expense increased by $216.9 million due to funding the higher balance sheet assets in 2020.

Funding the substantial increase in member borrowings beginning in mid-March 2020 was largely accommodated by the issuances of CO discount notes, which have maturities up to a year and are issued as a zero-coupon instrument. Discount notes sell at less than their face amount and are redeemed at par value when they mature. Discount notes supplemented fixed-rate bullet CO bonds, fixed-rate callable CO bonds and floating-rate CO bonds, which were also utilized in our funding strategies. In the first quarter of 2020, discount notes funded 40.5% of earning assets, 51.6% in the second quarter and 53.1% in the third quarter. In the fourth quarter of 2020, the funding ratio was 43.3% as markets stabilized and we re-balanced our funding profile.

Fixed-rate CO bond costing yield was 131 basis points in 2020, compared to 238 basis points in the prior year; costing yield on CO floating-rate notes was 75 basis points in 2020, compared to 228 basis points in the prior year.

Funding expenses also benefitted from favorable pricing of discount notes as investors sought out the high-credit quality and flexibility offered by CO discount notes; favorable investor sentiments and a declining rate environment had a dramatic effect of driving down CO discount note costing, which declined to 57 basis points in 2020, compared to 221 basis points in the prior year.

We made other tactical changes to our asset/liability postures to respond to changing market conditions, including increased execution of interest-rate swaps to protect our spreads and margins. We converted indexes on certain of our variable-rate liabilities, executing basis swaps to optimize the management of such changes. We employed interest rate hedging strategies to also mitigate the risk posed by volatile interest rate market movements. Hedging strategies under ASC 815 have remained effective and are operating as designed, although in preparation for the market transition away from LIBOR, we have increased the use of OIS/SOFR as the alternative hedging benchmarks.

93

Interest Expense — 2019 Vs. 2018

Interest expense in 2019 increased by $324.4 million, or 11.6% from 2018. Interest expense in 2019, relative to 2018 was higher in large part due to the higher market rates in the debt markets in the first half of 2019, before the FOMC action to lower rates in July and September of 2019. After the FOMC actions, costing yields declined with the general decline in CO debt yields. The weighted average costing yields on discount notes was 244 basis points in the first half of 2019. On a full year basis, costing yields in 2019 declined to 221 basis points post FOMC actions. Similar fluctuations were observable for floating-rate debt and for short-term fixed-rate CO bonds issued post Fed rate actions in 2019.

Impact of Hedging on Interest Expense on Debt — 2020, 2019 and 2018

Generally, the longer-term fixed-rate CO bonds and bonds with call options are hedged under ASC 815 fair value hedge, i.e. cash flows are swapped from fixed-rate to benchmark indexed variable-rate cash flows, synthetically converting fixed debt expense to a variable-rate. We also create synthetic long-term fixed-rate funding to fund long-term investments, utilizing a Cash Flow hedging strategy under ASC 815. The strategy converts the variability of forecasted long-term fixed-rate discount notes to variable-rate funding using long-term swaps. For such discount notes, the recorded interest expense is equivalent to long-term fixed-rate coupons. Cash Flow hedging strategies are also discussed in Financial Statements Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Declining interest rates in 2020 favorably impacted net interest settlements on fair value hedges on debt; interest settlements (also referred to as interest accruals) are determined by benchmark-indexed payments to swap counterparties in exchange for receipt of fixed-rate cash from counterparties. When the interest rate environment is low, as was in 2020, cash flows paid would be generally lower than the fixed cash flows received, and the impact of interest settlements has been significant from time to time. Interest settlements or accruals are recorded as a reduction of interest expense on debt (favorable impact) if payments to swap counterparties are less than fixed-rate interest receipts. Fair values are also recorded within interest expense on debt hedges qualifying under ASC 815. The impact of changes in fair values were not been material.

The impact of hedging debt reported a net gain of $70.1 million (reduced interest expense) in 2020, compared to a net loss of $7.9 million and $45.9 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively. The primary driver in 2020 was net interest settlements on the hedging swaps that benefitted from declining payments to swap counterparties in a low interest rate environment. The hedging impact due to fair values of the hedged debt minus the fair values of derivatives was not material, an indication of the highly effective nature of the hedge relationships.

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

Change

 

Change

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

2017

 

2016

 

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligations bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

$

463,181

 

$

393,391

 

$

318,708

 

(17.74

)%

(23.43

)%

Floating

 

609,189

 

188,509

 

20,208

 

NM

 

NM

 

Consolidated obligations discount notes

 

431,722

 

216,545

 

102,913

 

(99.37

)

NM

 

Deposits

 

15,060

 

3,091

 

455

 

NM

 

NM

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

1,285

 

1,617

 

820

 

20.53

 

(97.20

)

Cash collateral held and other borrowings

 

342

 

1,284

 

411

 

73.36

 

NM

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest expense

 

$

1,520,779

 

$

804,437

 

$

443,515

 

(89.05

)%

(81.38

)%

NM — Not meaningful.

Consolidated Obligation debt funding costs:

While interest expense on debt (CO bonds and CO discount Notes) has increased in a rising rate environment, investor demand for FHLBank debt has favorably impacted yields and pricing of CO discount notes and shorter maturity floating-rate CO bonds.  As a result, aggregate funding costs have been lower than otherwise achievable.  We have shifted our funding mix to a greater utilization of floating-rate bonds to fund our growing book of variable-rate, LIBOR-indexed assets.  The tactical funding shift to the use of floating-rate bonds, which continued to be at relatively attractive pricing, has been a significant contributor to the favorable cost of funding in 2017 and 2016.

Generally, the longer-term fixed-rate CO bonds and bonds with call options are hedged under ASC 815, i.e. cash flows are swapped from fixed-rate to LIBOR-indexed variable-rate cash flows.  Historically, swapping fixed-rate short- and medium-term CO bonds to a floating-rate LIBOR indexed cash flows has benefited interest expense by synthetically converting the fixed-rate expense to a sub-LIBOR level.

2017 vs 2016

·Fixed-rate bonds In a rising rate environment, Interest expense on CO bonds has also increased.  A significant percentage of CO bonds are hedged under ASC 815, and reported interest expense includes the interest accruals as a result of swapping out fixed-rate for floating-rate cash flows.  Interest expense was $463.2 million at a funding cost of 143 basis points in 2017, compared to $393.4 million at a funding cost of 95 basis points in 2016.  On an un-swapped basis, interest expense was $478.9 million at a funding cost of 150 basis points in 2017, compared to $484.6 million at a funding cost of 118 basis points in 2016.

In a rising interest rate environment for LIBOR, the historical favorable hedging cash flow differential has narrowed between the fixed-rate cash flows, which we receive in exchange for LIBOR-indexed payments to swap dealers.  The 3-month LIBOR was higher in 2017; on average it was 126 basis points, compared to 74 basis points in 2016.  ASC 815 hedges resulted in a net favorable cash flow accruals of $11.4 million in 2017, in contrast to a favorable cash flow accruals of $88.2 million in 2016.

·Floating-rate bonds Interest expense on floating-rate CO bonds was $609.2 million at a funding cost of 100 basis points in 2017, compared to $188.5 million at a funding cost of 59 basis points in 2016.  The average outstanding balance grew to $61.0 billion in 2017, up from $31.7 billion in 2016.  Variable-rate balance sheet assets have increased, driving up the need for variable-rate funding.  Floating-rate bonds are typically indexed to the LIBOR, and the higher cost was in line with a rising LIBOR.  While interest expense has increased in a rising rate environment, strong investor demand for shorter-term floating-rate CO bonds has had a favorable impact on yields and pricing, making it attractive for us to fund our balance sheet assets with floaters.  The use of floating-rate CO bonds has also allowed us to diversify as a funding alternative to the issuance of discount notes.

·Consolidated obligation discount notes (“CO discount notes” or “discount notes”) — In a rising rate environment, interest expense on CO discount notes has also increased.  Interest expense on discount notes, including the impact of cash flow hedging strategies, was $431.7 million at a funding cost of 94 basis points in 2017, compared to $216.5 million at a cost of 47 basis points in 2016.  Utilization of discount notes in 2017, as measured by average outstanding balances, has declined period-over-period by $612.7 million.  The decline is more evident when measured in terms of percentage of average earning assets funded by discount notes, 30.8% in 2017, compared to 36.2% in 2016.

Cash flow hedging programs under ASC 815 have synthetically converted the 91-day variability of cash flows on $2.3 billion of discount note yields at December 31, 2017 ($1.8 billion at December 31, 2016) to long-term fixed-rate swap yields, and resulted in swap accrual expense of $30.9 million in 2017, compared to $34.9 million in 2016.  However, the hedge strategy assures us of long-term funding at predictable rates.  Absent the impact of cash flow swaps, interest expense would have been a little lower, $400.8 million at a funding cost of 87 basis points in 2017, and $181.6 million at a cost of 39 basis points in 2016.

2016 vs 2015

·Fixed-rate bonds On a swapped basis, interest expense was $393.4 million at a funding cost of 95 basis points in 2016, compared to $318.7 million at a funding cost of 54 basis points in 2015.  Interest expense, absent the impact of swaps, was $484.6 million at a funding cost of 118 basis points in 2016, compared to $537.0 million at a funding cost of 92 basis points in 2015.

·Floating-rate bonds Interest expense on floating-rate CO bond was $188.5 million at a funding cost of 59 basis points in 2016, compared to $20.2 million at a funding cost of 19 basis points in 2015.  The average outstanding balance grew to $31.7 billion in 2016, up from $10.5 billion in 2015.

·Consolidated obligation discount notes (“CO discount notes” or “discount notes”) — Interest expense on discount notes was $216.5 million at a funding cost of 47 basis points in 2016, compared to $102.9 million at a cost of 24 basis points in 2015. The average

outstanding balance of total discount notes grew to $46.5 billion in 2016, up from $43.6 billion in 2015.  Cash flow hedging programs converted the 91-day variability of cash flows on $1.8 billion of discount note yields at December 31, 2016 ($1.6 billion at December 31, 2015) to long-term fixed swap rates, assuring long-term funding at a predictable rate.  On an un-swapped basis, Interest expense on discount notes was a little lower, $181.6 million at a funding cost of 39 basis points in 2016, and $66.8 million at a cost of 15 basis points in 2015.

For more information about factors that impact Interest income and Interest expense, see Table 10.10 Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Consolidated Obligations Interest Expense, and accompanying discussions.

Impact of Hedging on Interest Expense on Debt — 2017, 2016 and 2015

Derivative strategies are primarily used to manage the interest rate risk inherent in fixed-rate debt by converting the fixed-rate funding to floating-rate debt that is indexed to 3-month LIBOR, our preferred funding base.  The strategies are designed to protect future interest margins.  A significant percentage of non-callable fixed-rate debt is swapped to plain vanilla 3-month LIBOR indexed cash flows.  We also issue fixed-rate callable debt that is typically issued with the simultaneous execution of cancellable interest rate swaps to modify the effective interest rate terms and the effective durations of our fixed-rate callable debt.  The cash flow objectives are accomplished by utilizing a Fair value hedging strategy, benefiting us in two principal ways.  First, the issuances of fixed-rate debt and the simultaneous execution of interest rate swaps convert the debt to an adjustable-rate instrument tied to the 3-month LIBOR.  Second, fixed-rate callable bonds issued in conjunction with the execution of interest rate swaps containing a call feature (that mirrors the option embedded in the callable bond), enables us to meet our funding needs at yields not otherwise directly attainable through the issuance of callable debt.  We may also issue floating rate debt indexed to other than the 3-month LIBOR (Prime, federal funds rate and 1-month LIBOR).  Typically, we would then execute interest rate swaps that would convert the cash flows to the 3-month LIBOR, and designate the hedge as an economic hedge.

We have also created synthetic long-term fixed rate funding to fund long-term investments, utilizing a Cash Flow hedging strategy that converted forecasted long-term discount note variable-rate funding to fixed-rate funding by the use of long-term swaps.  For such discount notes, the recorded interest expense is equivalent to long-term fixed rate coupons.  Cash Flow hedging strategies are also discussed under the heading Impact of Cash flow hedging on earnings and AOCI in this MD&A.

The table below summarizes interest expense paid on Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes and the impact of interest rate swaps (in thousands):

 

Table 10.10:10.9Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Consolidated Obligations Interest Expense

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Bonds and discount notes-Interest expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds-Interest expense before adjustment for swaps

 

$

1,088,083

 

$

673,143

 

$

557,215

 

Discount notes-Interest expense before adjustment for swaps

 

400,805

 

181,637

 

66,751

 

Amortization of basis adjustments

 

(4,269

)

(3,076

)

(2,223

)

Net interest adjustment for interest rate swaps (a)

 

19,473

 

(53,259

)

(179,914

)

Total bonds and discount notes-Interest expense

 

$

1,504,092

 

$

798,445

 

$

441,829

 


(a)Fair value hedges under ASC 815 were executed to hedge certain fixed-rate CO bonds.  The hedges employed interest rate swaps, which created synthetic floating-rate cash flows.  Cash flow hedges under ASC 815 were executed to hedge future issuances of designated CO discount notes.  The cash flow hedges employed long-term interest rate swaps, which created synthetic fixed-rate cash flows.  The cash flows exchanged in the two hedging strategies resulted in net unfavorable interest expense accruals of $19.5 million in 2017, compared to a net favorable accrual (reduction of interest expense) of $53.3 million and $179.9 million in 2016 and 2015.

A fair value hedge of Consolidated obligation bonds is accomplished by the execution of interest rate swaps in which we receive fixed-rate cash flows, and pay LIBOR-indexed variable cash flows.  The cash flows exchanged between the receive-leg and pay-leg of the cash determines the net interest adjustments.  Historically, in a fair value hedge, the fixed-rate cash flows received from swap dealers on swaps hedging CO bonds have been greater than the LIBOR indexed cash flows we pay to swap dealers, resulting in a net sub-LIBOR favorable hedging benefit on interest expense on hedged debt.  However, in a rising rate environment for LIBOR, that favorable differential associated with swap cash flows has been narrowing.

A cash flow hedge of CO discount notes is accomplished by the execution of interest rate swaps in which we pay fixed-rate cash flows and receive LIBOR-indexed variable rate cash flows.  The pay fixed-rate cash flows are typically based on long-term swap rates, which have remained significantly higher than the 3-month LIBOR that we receive in exchange.  Although the cash flow exchanged in the hedge results in a net expense, it achieves our hedging objective of a stable and predictable long-term funding expense.

For further information, see Table 10.9 Interest Expenses and accompanying discussions.

Allowance for Credit Losses 2017, 2016 and 2015

·Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio Credit quality continues to be strong, delinquencies low, and allowance for credit losses have remained insignificant.

We recorded a net recovery of $0.3 million in the current year, in contrast to a provision of $2.0 million in 2016.  The allowance in the 2016 period included a catch-up adjustment from the adoption of the loan loss migration methodology in the first quarter of 2016.

We evaluate impaired conventional mortgage loans on an individual (loan-by-loan) basis, and compare the fair values of collateral (net of liquidation costs) to recorded investment values in order to calculate/measure credit losses on impaired loans.  Loans are considered impaired when they are seriously delinquent (typically 90 days or more) or in bankruptcy or foreclosure, and loan loss allowances are computed at that point.  When a loan is seriously delinquent, we believe it is probable that we will be unable to collect all contractual interest and principal in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement.  We also perform a loss migration analysis to collectively measure impairment of loans that have not already been individually evaluated for impairment.  FHA/VA (Insured mortgage loans) guaranteed loans are also evaluated collectively for impairment based on the credit worthiness of the PFI.

The low amounts of provisions for credit allowances are consistent with our historical experience with foreclosures or losses.  Additionally, collateral values of impaired loans have continued to remain steady and have improved in the New York and New Jersey sectors, and the low loan loss reserves were reflective of the stability in home prices in our residential loan markets.  For more information, see financial statements Note 9. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

·Advances Based on the collateral held as security and prior repayment history, no allowance for losses was currently deemed necessary.  Our credit risk from advances was concentrated in commercial banks, savings institutions and insurance companies.  All advances were fully collateralized during their entire term.  In addition, borrowing members pledged their stock in the FHLBNY as additional collateral for advances.

Analysis of Non-Interest Income (Loss) 2017, 2016 and 2015

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Bonds and discount notes - interest expense            
Bonds - interest expense before adjustment for swaps $854,285  $1,799,624  $1,779,595 
Discount notes - interest expense before adjustment for swaps  397,458   1,285,793   949,313 
Fair value hedging effect on CO bonds  1,302   2,220   - 
Fair value hedging effect on discount notes  (539)  (219)  - 
Amortization of basis adjustments on CO bonds  (5,897)  (5,753)  (5,729)
Amortization of basis adjustments on discount notes  271   195   - 
Net interest adjustment for swaps hedging CO bonds  (101,777)  2,076   34,366 
Net interest adjustment for swaps hedging discount notes  31,675   5,807   11,520 
Total bonds and discount notes - interest expense $1,176,778  $3,089,743  $2,769,065 


Allowance for Credit Losses — 2020, 2019 and 2018

The FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326), which became effective for the Bank as of January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance established a single allowance framework for all financial assets carried at amortized cost, including advances, purchased mortgage loans, held-to-maturity securities, other receivables, and certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. We have elected to evaluate expected credit losses on interest receivable separately. For available-for-sale securities where fair value is less than cost, credit-related impairment if any, will be recognized as an allowance for credit losses and adjusted each period for changes in expected credit risk. This framework requires that management’s estimate reflects credit losses over the full remaining expected life and considers expected future changes in macroeconomic conditions. For a description of how expected losses are developed including interest receivable, refer to notes to financial statements:

Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates – Credit Losses under ASU 2016-13.

Note 4. Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell.

Note 7. Available-for-Sale Securities.

Note 8. Held-To-Maturity Securities.

Note 9. Advances.

Note 10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies (for off-balance sheet).

Adoption of ASU 2016-13 on January 1, 2020 did not have a material impact on our financial condition or cash flows. In 2020, we recorded a total provision (as a charge against earnings in the Statements of Income) of $3.7 million under the CECL guidance, primarily against our mortgage-loan portfolio. In the prior year, a de minimis recovery of $0.1 million was recorded based on pre-CECL policies. Rising delinquencies driven by COVID-19 forbearance programs were largely the basis for the increase in provision.

Allowance for credit losses recorded on mortgage-loans in the Statements of Condition was $7.1 million at December 31, 2020, compared to $0.7 million at December 31, 2019. Allowance for credit losses recorded on investments was $1.0 million at December 31, 2020. No allowance was necessary on advances, other assets, and commitments.


Analysis of Non-Interest Income (Loss) — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

The principal components of non-interest income (loss) are summarized below (in thousands):

 

Table 10.11:10.10Other Income (Loss)

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Other income (loss):            
Service fees and other (a) $17,924  $18,224  $18,442 
Instruments held under the fair value option gains (losses) (b)  123   (4,146)  209 
Total OTTI losses  -   -   (398)
Net amount of impairment losses reclassified to (from)            
  Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  -   (640)  257 
Derivative gains (losses) (c)  (151,709)  (40,720)  (40,778)
Trading securities gains (losses) (d)  72,826   51,327   3,216 
Equity investments gains (losses) (e)  9,792   9,843   (4,819)
Litigation settlement  225   -   - 
Total other income (loss) $(50,819) $33,888  $(23,871)

  

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Other income (loss):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service fees and other (a)

 

$

15,841

 

$

13,824

 

$

12,096

 

Instruments held at fair value - Unrealized (losses) gains (b)

 

(4,540

)

(1,854

)

9,872

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total OTTI losses

 

 

(113

)

(394

)

Net amount of impairment losses reclassified (from)/to Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 

(118

)

188

 

Net impairment losses recognized in earnings (c)

 

 

(231

)

(206

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities (d)

 

1,939

 

(1,721

)

12,557

 

Net (losses) gains on trading securities

 

(1,106

)

142

 

 

Net realized gains from sale of available-for-sale securities

 

 

250

 

 

Provision for litigation settlement on derivative contracts (e)

 

(70,000

)

 

 

Losses from extinguishment of debt (f)

 

(137

)

(3,557

)

(9,794

)

Total other (loss) income

 

$

(58,003

)

$

6,853

 

$

24,525

 


(a)Service fees and other, net — Service fees are derived primarily from providing correspondent banking services to members, andprimarily fees earned on standby financial letters of credit issued by the FHLBNY on behalf of members.  Fee income earned on financial letters of credit are typically the largest component of Service fees, and were $12.4 million, $10.4 million and $9.4 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015.credit. Letters of credit are primarilygenerally issued on behalf of members to units of state and local governments to collateralize their deposits at member banks. Fee income earned on financial letters of credit was $19.0 million in 2020, compared to $17.9 million in 2019 and $15.3 million in 2018. Immaterial amounts of fees paid, and other expenses were included in reported revenues.

(b)FVO Instruments held at— Net fair value under the Fair Value Option (“FVO”) — Changesgains and losses represented changes in fair values of Consolidated obligation debt (bonds and discount notes) and Advances elected under the FVO reported net fair value losses of $4.5 million in 2017, compared to net fair value losses of $1.9 million in 2016 and net fair value gains of $9.9 million in 2015.

Fair values vary from period to period based on changes in a wide variety of factors for advances and debt elected under the FVO.  The more significant factors were run off of advances and debt and decline in new transactions elected under the FVO, decline in the remaining duration to maturity, and changes in the term structure of the pricing curve.  For more information, see discussions below and also see financial statements, Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

·FVO Advances — Advances elected under the FVO were primarily adjustable rate advances (ARC advances) indexed to LIBOR, with original maturities of 2 years or less.  Interperiod fluctuations are typically due to instruments maturing in a period and unrealized gains and losses recorded in prior periods reversing to zero at maturity.

Changes in fair values of advances elected under the FVO reported net losses of $5.1 million in 2017, compared to net gains of$12.7 million in 2016 and net losses of $2.3 million in 2015.  In 2017, runoffs were not replaced and previously recorded gains reversed.  Fair value gains in 2016 were due to two factors — The combined impact of a larger book of FVO advances and the steepening of the LIBOR curve, which benefited the valuation of the LIBOR indexed FVO advances.

·FVO Bonds — FVO bonds were fixed-rate debt with original maturities that were generally two years or less.

Changes in fair values of bonds elected under the FVO resulted in a net gain of $0.2 million in 2017, compared to a net loss of$10.2 million in 2016 and a net gain of $8.5 million in 2015.  In 2017, maturing CO bonds elected under the FVO were not replaced, and as bonds matured, unrealized fair values recorded in the prior period reversed.

·FVO Discount notes — Changes in fair values of discount notes elected under the FVO reported net gains of $0.4 million in 2017, compared to net losses of $4.4 million in 2016 and net gains of $3.7 million in 2015.  Inter-period fluctuationsFVO. Fluctuations in fair value are very typical as discount notes mature within a year of issuance.  Discount notes issued in a quarter are likely to mature in subsequent quarters, causing previously recorded unrealized gains and losses to reverse to zero.  Fair values inwere reflective of the current year period have declined largely as a resultshort-term nature of run offs and lower amounts of new discount note transactionsinstruments elected under the FVO.FVO that fluctuated with declining market yields. For more information, see Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments in the audited financial statements in this Form 10-K.

(c)See Table 10.12. Other Income (Loss) — Impact of Derivative Gains and Losses.
(c)(d)Net impairment losses recognized in earnings on held-to-maturity securities — Cash flow analyses in 2017 reported no OTTI.  In 2016 and 2015, OTTI was $0.2 million.

(d)Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivativesTrading securities — Recorded net gains include both unrealized and hedging activitiesrealized gains and losses. See Table 10.1410.11 below for sources of gains and accompanying discussionslosses. U.S. Treasury securities balances were $11.7 billion and $15.3 billion at December 31, 2020 and 2019, respectively. We have invested in short- and medium-term fixed-rate U.S. Treasury securities. The securities are not held for more information.speculative trading, rather held to satisfy liquidity requirements. Fluctuations in valuations are a factor of market demand and market yields of fixed-rate U.S. Treasury securities.

(e)Litigation settlement Fair value gains (losses) on Equity Investments In The grantor trust invests in money market, equity and fixed income and bond funds, and funds are classified as equity investments. Daily net asset values (NAVs) are readily available and investments are redeemable at short notice. NAVs are the first quarterfair values of 2017, we took a charge of $70.0 million and settled the long-standing dispute with Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. (“Lehman”)funds in the Chapter 11 bankruptcy proceedings.grantor trust. Gains and losses are typically unrealized, and primarily represent changes in portfolio valuations. The dispute principally centered around the termination value of multiple derivative transactions involvinggrantor trust is owned by the FHLBNY and Lehman.  On April 11, 2017with the FHLBNY reached an agreementobjective of providing liquidity to settle all claims pendingpay for pension benefits to retirees vested in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York, and on April 18, 2017, we paid $70.0 million to the Lehman bankruptcy estate.  The parties stipulated to the voluntary dismissal of the case in its entirety, with prejudice.retirement plans.

(f)Earnings Impact of Debt repurchased or transferredPar amount of $4.0 million of CO bonds were repurchased or transferred at a loss of $0.1 million in the current year, compared to charges of $3.6 million and $9.8 million in 2016 and 2015.  Debt repurchased or transferred is executed at negotiated market rates.  See Table 10.12 for more information.

The following table summarizes debt repurchase and transfer activities

The following table summarizes unrealized and realized gains (losses) in the trading portfolio (in thousands):

 

Table 10.12:Debt Repurchases and Transfers

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

Carrying Value

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

Carrying Value

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

Carrying Value

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Repurchases of CO Bonds

 

$

4,013

 

$

(137

)

$

200,915

 

$

(3,557

)

$

45,614

 

$

(1,975

)

Transfer of CO Bonds to Other FHLBanks

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

79,963

 

$

(7,819

)

The following table summarizes unrealized and realized gains/(losses) in the trading portfolio at December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):

10.11

Table 10.13:Net Gains (Losses) on Trading Securities Recorded in the Statements of Income (a)

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Net unrealized gains (losses) on trading securities held at period-end $34,527  $49,402  $2,494 
Net realized gains (losses) on trading securities sold/matured during the period  38,299   1,925   722 
Net gains (losses) on trading securities $72,826  $51,327  $3,216 

  

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

Net unrealized (losses) gains on trading securities held at period-end

 

$

(1,069

)

$

142

 

Net unrealized and realized (losses) gains on trading securites sold/matured during the period

 

(37

)

 

Net (losses) gains on trading securities

 

$

(1,106

)

$

142

 


(a)Securities classified as trading are held for liquidity purposesobjectives and carried at fair value.values. We record changes in fair values of the fair value of these investments through Other income as net unrealizedsecurities together with realized gains (losses) on trading securities.in the Statements of Income as Other income. FHFA regulations prohibit trading in or the speculative use of financial instruments.


Other income (loss) — Derivatives and Hedging Activities — 2020, 2019 and 2018

For derivatives that are not designated in a hedging relationship (i.e. in an economic hedge), the derivatives are considered as a “standalone” instrument and fair value changes are recorded in Other income (loss), without the offset of a hedged item. Gains and losses recorded in Other income (loss) on standalone derivatives include net interest accruals.

The table presents fair value changes of derivatives in economic hedges (i.e. not in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge) in Other income (loss):

 

TableEarnings10.12Other Income (Loss) — Impact of DerivativesDerivative Gains and Hedging Activities Losses (in thousands) 2017, 2016 and 2015

  Impact on Other Income (Loss) 
  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments under ASC 815 interest rate swaps         
Advances         $1,255 
Consolidated obligation bonds          (1,758)
Net gains (losses) related to fair value hedges          (503)
Cash flow hedges          (278)
ASC 815 hedging impact         $(781)
             
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments            
Interest rate swaps  (a) $(64,012) $(29,688) $(9,863)
Caps or floors  (6)  (599)  (268)
Mortgage delivery commitments  1,693   709   (145)
Swaps economically hedging instruments designated under FVO (b)  3,945   1,359   (414)
Accrued interest on derivatives in economic hedging relationships (c)  (93,691)  (12,501)  (17,125)
Net gains (losses) related to derivatives not designated as hedging instruments $(152,071) $(40,720) $(27,815)
Price alignment interest paid on variation margin  362   -   (12,182)
Net gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities $(151,709) $(40,720) $(40,778)

Derivative losses and gains in the table above include both realized and unrealized fair value net gains and losses. Also, includes swap interest settlements on derivatives designated as standalone hedging instruments. The derivatives, typically interest-rate swaps, were designated in economic hedges, not eligible under ASC 815 hedge accounting. Such derivatives are marked-to-market and changes in fair values are recorded in Other income (loss) as noted in the table above.

 

We may designate a derivative as either a hedge of (1) the
(a)Represents fair value changes of a recognized fixed-rate asset (Advance) or liability (Consolidated obligation debt), or an unrecognized firm commitment; (2) a forecasted transaction; or (3) the variability of future cash flows of a floating-rate asset or liability (Cash flow hedge).  We may also designate a derivative as an economic hedge, which does not qualify for hedge accounting under the accounting standards.

Derivative fair values are driven largely by the rise and fall of the forward swap curve, which determines forward cash flows, and by changes in the OIS curve, which is the discounting basis.  Hedged advances and debt fair values are also driven largely by the rise and fall of the LIBOR curve, which is the discounting basis of hedged advances and bonds in a fair value hedge.  Other market factors include interest rate spreads and interest rate volatility.  The volume of derivatives and their duration to maturity are factors that are also key drivers of changes in fair values.

For derivatives that are not designated in a hedging relationship (i.e. in an economic hedge), the derivatives are considered as a “standalone” instrument and fair value changes are recorded as net unrealized gains or losses, without the offset of a hedged item.  Net interest accruals on such “standalone” derivative instruments in economic hedges may also have a significant impact on reported derivatives gains and losses.

Generally for the FHLBNY, derivative and hedging gains and losses are primarily from two sources.  Hedge ineffectiveness from hedges that qualify under hedge accounting rules (fair value effects of derivatives, net of the fair value effects of hedged items), and fair value changes of standalone derivatives in an economic hedge (fair value changes of derivatives without the offsetting fair value changes of the hedged items).  Typically, the largest source of gains or losses from derivative and hedging activities arise from derivatives designated as standalone derivatives.  For the FHLBNY, standalone derivatives have typically comprised of swaps in economic hedges of debt elected under the FVO, interest rate caps in economic hedges of capped floating-rate MBS, and basis swaps hedging floating-rate debt indexed to other than the 3-month LIBOR.  For both categories, derivatives that are standalone, and derivatives and hedged items that qualify under hedge accounting rules, fair value gains and losses are unrealized and sum to zero if held to maturity.  Interest accruals on standalone derivatives are considered as hedging gains or losses on standalone hedges, and realized at the periodic accrual settlement dates.  For more information about qualifying Fair Value and Cash Flow hedges of advances and debt, see Derivative Hedging Strategies in Tables 8.1 — 8.4.

The impact of hedging activities on earnings, including the “geography” of the primary components of expenses and income as reported in the Statements of income are summarized below (in thousands):

Table 10.14:Earnings Impact of Derivatives and Hedging Activities — By Financial Instrument Type

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated

 

Consolidated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPF

 

Obligation

 

Obligation

 

Balance

 

Intermediary

 

 

 

 

 

Earnings Impact

 

Advances

 

Investments

 

Loans

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

Sheet

 

Positions

 

Other

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amortization/accretion/interest accruals of hedging activities reported in net interest income (a)

 

$

(146,111

)

$

 

$

(242

)

$

15,714

 

$

(30,918

)

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

(161,557

)

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gains on fair value hedges

 

984

 

 

 

11

 

 

 

 

 

995

 

Gains on cash flow hedges

 

 

 —

 

 —

 

 388

 

 

 

 —

 

 —

 

 —

 

 388

 

Net fair value gains (losses) and interest income on swaps in economic hedges of FVO instruments

 

10

 

 

 

(297

)

(1,109

)

 

 

 

(1,396

)

Net gains (losses) on swaps and caps in other economic hedges

 

191

 

389

 

570

 

8,284

 

(63

)

(4,310

)

141

 

 

5,202

 

Price alignment - cleared swaps settlement to market (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(3,250

)

(3,250

)

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities (b)

 

1,185

 

389

 

570

 

8,386

 

(1,172

)

(4,310

)

141

 

(3,250

)

1,939

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total earnings impact

 

$

(144,926

)

$

389

 

$

328

 

$

24,100

 

$

(32,090

)

$

(4,310

)

$

141

 

$

(3,250

)

$

(159,618

)

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated

 

Consolidated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPF

 

Obligation

 

Obligation

 

Balance

 

Intermediary

 

 

 

 

 

Earnings Impact

 

Advances

 

Investments

 

Loans

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

Sheet

 

Positions

 

Other

 

Total

 

Amortization/accretion/interest accruals of hedging activities reported in net interest income (a)

 

$

(392,473

)

$

 

$

(273

)

$

91,243

 

$

(34,908

)

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

(336,411

)

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gains on fair value hedges

 

1,360

 

 

 

882

 

 

 

 

 

2,242

 

Gains on cash flow hedges

 

 

 

 

58

 

 

 

 

 

 

58

 

Net fair value (losses) gains and interest income on swaps in economic hedges of FVO instruments

 

(3,039

)

 

 

2,252

 

345

 

 

 

 

(442

)

Net gains (losses) on swaps and caps in other economic hedges

 

261

 

34

 

(530

)

(3,428

)

(492

)

281

 

295

 

 

(3,579

)

Price alignment - cleared swaps settlement to market (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized (losses) gains on derivatives and hedging activities (b)

 

(1,418

)

34

 

(530

)

(236

)

(147

)

281

 

295

 

 

(1,721

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total earnings impact

 

$

(393,891

)

$

34

 

$

(803

)

$

91,007

 

$

(35,055

)

$

281

 

$

295

 

$

 

$

(338,132

)

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated

 

Consolidated

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MPF

 

Obligation

 

Obligation

 

Balance

 

Intermediary

 

 

 

 

 

Earnings Impact

 

Advances

 

Investments

 

Loans

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

Sheet

 

Positions

 

Other

 

Total

 

Amortization/accretion/interest accruals of hedging activities reported in net interest income (a)

 

$

(888,800

)

$

 

$

(427

)

$

218,299

 

$

(36,162

)

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

(707,090

)

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Losses) gains on fair value hedges

 

(5,939

)

 

 

8,868

 

 

 

 

 

2,929

 

(Losses) on cash flow hedges

 

 

 

 

(284

)

 

 

 

 

(284

)

Net fair value gains and interest income on swaps in economic hedges of FVO instruments

 

58

 

 

 

7,645

 

5,768

 

 

 

 

13,471

 

Net (losses) gains on swaps and caps in other economic hedges

 

(79

)

 

(137

)

(764

)

 

(2,619

)

40

 

 

(3,559

)

Price alignment - cleared swaps settlement to market (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized (losses) gains on derivatives and hedging activities (b)

 

(5,960

)

 

(137

)

15,465

 

5,768

 

(2,619

)

40

 

 

12,557

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total earnings impact

 

$

(894,760

)

$

 

$

(564

)

$

233,764

 

$

(30,394

)

$

(2,619

)

$

40

 

$

 

$

(694,533

)


(a)The impact of amortization/accretion and interest accruals on hedging activities (Yield adjustments) — Previously recorded hedge valuation basis on advances and debt that are no longer in a hedging relationship are amortized and recorded as a yield adjustment in the Statements of income in the same interest income or expense line as the hedged items.  Interest accrual on a swap in a qualifying hedge relationship is also recorded as a yield adjustment in the Statements of income as an Interest income or Interest expense.  Together, their impact, on net interest margin (Net interest income) was significant.

Net swap accruals and amortization resulted in a net charge (expense) to net interest margin of $161.6 million in 2017, compared to $336.4 million and $707.1 million charged to interest margin in 2016 and 2015.  Swap payments to swap dealers have been greater than cash received, resulting in net swap expense and a charge to interest margin.  The charge to interest margin has declined year-over-year in line with the rising 3-month LIBOR, the index that determines the cash received on swaps hedging fixed-rate advances.  The favorable cash flow change period-over-period on swaps hedging fixed-rate advances was partly offset by increase in LIBOR indexed payments to swap dealers on swaps hedging fixed-rate CO bonds.

Interest accrued represents interest paid or received on swaps that generally hedged and synthetically converted fixed-rate cash flows of Advances and Consolidated obligation debt to floating-rate.  In certain instances, we have converted the variability of forecasted discount note cash flows to fixed-rate cash flows by the execution of cash flow hedges.  While the impact of the interest rate exchanges on periodic

earnings was unfavorable (an expense), the execution of the interest rate swap contracts achieved our interest rate risk management strategies, primarily to mitigate the interest risk arising from fixed-rate cash flows on fixed-rate advances borrowed by our members and the risk arising from the issuances of fixed-rate debt to finance our lending activities.

See Table 10.8 Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Interest Income Earned from Advances and Table 10.10 Impact of Interest Rate Swaps on Consolidated Obligations Interest Expense for a discussion on changes period-over-period.

(b)Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities recorded in Other income, — The primary components were (a) fair value changes of derivatives in qualifying fair value hedges offset by fair value changes of hedged items, (b) the ineffective portion of fair value changes of derivative in cash flow hedging relationships (deminimis), and (c) fair value changes of standalone derivatives that were in economic hedges, and (d) net interest accruals on the standalone derivatives.

Qualifying hedging

Fair value gains and losses on Fair value hedges — Fair value hedges reported relatively small hedge ineffectiveness, a net gain of $1.0 million in 2017, compared to net gains of $2.2 million and $2.9 million in 2016 and 2015.  The immaterial amounts of hedge ineffectiveness were consistent with our hedging strategy of closely matching our derivatives with hedged advances and debt.

Fair value gains and losses on Cash flow hedges — We have two primary cash flow hedging strategies — a rollover cash flow strategy that hedges the variability of long-term issuances of discount notes, and a strategy that mitigates the risk arising from anticipated issuances of debt.  No ineffectiveness has been observed or recorded in the rollover strategy.  Ineffectiveness from hedging anticipated issuances of debt resulted in insignificant amounts of ineffectiveness. A net gain of $0.4 million was recorded in 2017, compared to a gain of less than $0.1 million in 2016 and a loss of $0.3 million in 2015.

Standalone derivative

The primary standalone derivative instruments were interest rate swaps and interest rate caps and floors that were in economic hedges of assets, liabilities or balance sheet risks.  The impact on earnings from standalone derivatives are recorded in Other income as gains or losses from derivatives and hedging activities.  By policy election, interest accruals on standalone swaps are reclassified and also recorded as gains or losses from derivatives and hedging activities on derivatives designated as standalone, and accordingly reported net gains or losses include interest accruals, which are impacted by the volume of swaps designated as standalone and the levels of interest rates. Changes in fair values together with accruals represent changes in “total” market values of standalone swaps.  For more information, see financial statements, Components of net gains and losses on derivatives and hedging activities in Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Standalone derivatives reported a net gain of $3.8 million in 2017, compared to a net loss of $4.0 million in 2016 and a net gain of $9.9 million in 2015.  The primary standalone derivatives wereprimarily: (1) interest rate swaps in economic hedges of floating-rate CO bonds indexed to the 1-month LIBOR, and the CO bond cash flows were synthetically converted to the 3-month LIBOR.  Fluctuations in fair values were primarily driven by the volatility of changes of the basis between the 1-month and the 3-month LIBOR.

(c)Price alignment interest — Represents interest accrued on variation margin on cleared swaps.  Until December 31, 2016, variation margin was accounted as cash collateral.  Beginning January 1, 2017, variation margin exchanged with the CME, a DCO, is considered as a settlement of the fair value of the openU.S. Treasury fixed-rate securities recorded derivative contract.  In November of 2017, variation margin exchanged with the LCH, a DCO, is also considered as a settlement of the fair value of the open derivative contract.  Interest accrued on variation margin is recorded as gains and losses on derivatives and hedging activities.  Prior to January 1, 2017, interest accrued on variation margin was classified within net interest income.

Impact of Cash flow hedging on earnings and AOCI and Derivative gains and losses reclassified from AOCI to income.

The following table summarizes changes in derivative gains and (losses), including reclassifications into earnings from AOCI in the Statements of Condition (in thousands):

Table 10.15:Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (Loss) to Current Period Income from Cash Flow Hedges

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss from cash flow hedges

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning of period

 

$

(47,018

)

$

(91,037

)

$

(86,667

)

Net hedging transactions (a)

 

26,000

 

41,892

 

(7,143

)

Reclassified into earnings

 

1,141

 

2,127

 

2,773

 

End of period (b)

 

$

(19,877

)

$

(47,018

)

$

(91,037

)


(a)Net hedging transactions represented changes in valuations recorded through AOCI.  Valuation changes were a net gain of $26.0 million in 2017, compared to a net gain of $41.9 million in 2016 and a loss of $7.1 million in 2015.

Valuation changes recorded in AOCI were associated with the two cash flow programs described below, but primarily represented changes in fair values of swaps in the discount note cash flow hedging program.  In this program, valuation changes are typically determined by changes in long-term swap rates, and generally, valuation gains will be recorded in line with the steepening of long-term swap rates, and valuations will decline in line with decline in long-term swap rates.

(b)End of period balances represent fair value losses (effective portion) of contracts that were open at period end.  Ineffectiveness, if any associated with the open contracts was deminimis$80.7 million in 2020, compared to losses of $33.2 million and were recorded through earnings.  For more information, see table: Cash Flow hedges — Fair Value changes$1.7 million in AOCI Rollforward Analysis in financial statements Note 16.  Derivatives2019 and Hedging Activities.

81



Table of Contents

The two Cash Flow hedging strategies were:

Hedges of anticipated issuances of Consolidated obligation bonds From time to time, we execute interest rate swaps on the anticipated issuance of debt to “lock-in” a spread between the earning asset that is expected to settle in a future period and the cost of funding.2018, respectively. The swaps are structured to paymitigate the volatility of price changes of the liquidity portfolio of fixed-rate receive LIBOR indexed cash flows.  OpenU.S. Treasury notes. To provide context, the net unrealized gain on securities marked-to-market was $34.8 million at December 31, 2020, $50.0 million and $3.4 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively. For more information, see Note 5. Trading Securities in audited financial statements included in this Form 10-K, (2) Interest rate swaps in economic hedges of advances and debt, primarily basis swaps, which generated net fair value gains of $16.7 million in 2020, compared to net gains of $3.5 million and net losses of $8.2 million in 2019 and 2018, respectively.

(b)Represents fair value changes recorded in Other income on interest rate swaps hedging CO debt elected under the FVO.
(c)Represents impact on Other income due to net interest settlements on standalone swap contractscontracts. Net interest settlements are valued at the end of each reporting periodinterest accruals on swaps in economic hedges and fair values are recorded in the balance sheetOther Income (Loss). The adverse impact has grown in 2020 as a derivative asset or a liability, with an offsetour payments to AOCI.  The effective portion of changesswap counterparties continue to exceed amounts we receive in the fair values of the swaps is recorded in AOCI.  Ineffectiveness, if any, is recorded through earnings.  In this program, the swap is typically terminated upon issuance of the debt instrument.  The termination fair value is recorded in AOCI and reclassified to earnings in the periods in which earnings are affected by the variability of the cash flows of the debt that was issued.  The maximum period of time that we typically hedge our exposure to the variability in future cash flows (for forecasted transactions to issue Consolidated obligation bonds) is between three and six months.

Hedges of discount note issuances In the “rollover” cash flow hedge strategy, fair values of derivatives are recorded as a derivative asset or a liability in the balance sheet, and the effective portion is recorded as an offset to AOCI.  The ineffective portion is recorded in earnings.

The objective of this cash flow strategy is to hedge the long-term issuances of Consolidated obligation discount notes, to eliminate the variability of cash flows attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate (3-month LIBOR), and to create predictable long-term fixed-rate funding.

For more information about cash flow strategies, see financial statements, Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Operating Expenses, Compensation and Benefits, and Other Expenses 2017, 2016 and 2015swap contracts, although the exchanges met our interest rate risk mitigation strategies.

97

Operating Expenses, Compensation and Benefits, and Other Expenses — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

The following table sets forth the major categories of operating expenses (dollars in thousands):

 

Table 10.16:10.13  Operating Expenses, and Compensation and Benefits

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  Percentage of
Total
  2019  Percentage of
Total
  2018  Percentage of
Total
 
Operating Expenses (a)                        
Occupancy $9,510   13.62% $8,305   13.23% $8,211   17.15%
Depreciation and leasehold amortization  10,669   15.29   8,773   13.97   5,492   11.47 
All others (b)  49,627   71.09   45,704   72.80   34,179   71.38 
Total Operating Expenses $69,806   100.00% $62,782   100.00% $47,882   100.00%
Total Compensation and Benefits (c) $100,200      $88,192      $78,950     
Finance Agency and Office of Finance (d) $19,392      $16,752      $15,874     
Other expenses (e) $17,453      $8,254      $7,959     

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

Percentage of
Total

 

2016

 

Percentage of
Total

 

2015

 

Percentage of
Total

 

Operating Expenses (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Occupancy

 

$

5,480

 

13.46

%

$

4,365

 

13.06

%

$

4,352

 

14.60

%

Depreciation and leasehold amortization

 

4,432

 

10.89

 

3,462

 

10.36

 

3,673

 

12.33

 

All others (b)

 

30,799

 

75.65

 

25,602

 

76.58

 

21,774

 

73.07

 

Total Operating Expenses

 

$

40,711

 

100.00

%

$

33,429

 

100.00

%

$

29,799

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Employee compensation

 

$

41,545

 

54.99

%

$

38,463

 

55.66

%

$

33,992

 

46.16

%

Employee benefits

 

34,006

 

45.01

 

30,642

 

44.34

 

39,647

 

53.84

 

Total Compensation and Benefits

 

$

75,551

 

100.00

%

$

69,105

 

100.00

%

$

73,639

 

100.00

%

Finance Agency and Office of Finance (c)

 

$

14,660

 

 

 

$

12,859

 

 

 

$

13,733

 

 

 


(a)Operating expenses included the administrative and overhead costs of operating the FHLBNY, as well as the operating costs of providing advances and managing collateral associated with the advances, managing the investment portfolios, and providing correspondent banking services to members.  Occupancy expense has increased due to the new lease executed in mid-year 2017 for our New York City office.

(b)The category “All others” included temporary workers, computer service agreements, contractual services, professional and legal fees, audit fees, director fees and expenses, insurance, and telecommunications.  Expense increases were associated with computer service agreements and the cost
(c)Compensation expense increased driven by staff additions in support of implementingour long-term technology improvements.enhancement effort.

(c)(d)We are also assessed for our share of the operating expenses for the Finance Agency and the Office of Finance. The FHLBanks and two other GSEs share the entire cost of the Finance Agency. Expenses are allocated by the Finance Agency and the Office of Finance.

Assessments(e) 2017, 2016The category Other expenses included $8.0 million in 2020 that were disbursed to assist small businesses impacted by COVID-19 pandemic; also included the non-service elements of Net periodic pension benefit costs, and 2015derivative clearing fees.

Assessments — 2020, 2019 and 2018

 

For more information about assessments, see Affordable Housing Program and Other Mission Related Programs and Assessments under Part I Item 1 Business in this Form 10-K.

The following table provides rollforward information with respect to changes in Affordable Housing Program and Other Mission Related Programs and Assessments under Part I Item 1 Business in this Form 10-K.

The following table provides rollforward information with respect to changes in AHP liabilities (in thousands):

 

Table 11.1:11.1Affordable Housing Program Liabilities

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Beginning balance

 

$

125,062

 

$

113,352

 

$

113,544

 

Additions from current period’s assessments

 

53,417

 

44,752

 

46,182

 

Net disbursements for grants and programs

 

(46,825

)

(33,042

)

(46,374

)

Ending balance

 

$

131,654

 

$

125,062

 

$

113,352

 

AHP assessments allocated from net income totaled $53.4 million in 2017, compared to $44.8

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Beginning balance $153,894  $161,718  $131,654 
Additions from current period's assessments  49,180   52,552   62,382 
Net disbursements for grants and programs  (54,247)  (60,376)  (32,318)
Ending balance $148,827  $153,894  $161,718 

AHP assessments allocated from net income totaled $49.2 million in 2020, compared to $52.6 million and $62.4 million in 2019 and 2018. Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and the changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.


Item 7A.Quantitative and $46.2 million in 2016 and 2015.  Assessments are calculated as a percentage of Net income, and the changes in allocations were in parallel with changes in Net income.

Item 7A.

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk.

Market Risk.

Market Risk Management.  Market risk or interest rate risk (“IRR”) is the risk of change to market value or future earnings due to a change in the interest rate environment.  IRR arises from the Banks operation due to maturity mismatches between interest rate sensitive cash-flows of assets and liabilities.  As the maturity mismatch increases so does the level of IRR.  The Bank has opted to retain a modest level of IRR which allows for the preservation of capital value while generating steady and predictable income.  Accordingly, 90% of the balance sheet consists of predominantly short-term and LIBOR-based assets and liabilities.  A conservative and limited maturity gap profile of asset and liability positions protect our capital from changes in value arising from interest and rate volatility environment.

The desired risk profile is primarily affected by the use of interest rate exchange agreements (“Swaps”).  All the LIBOR-based advances and long-term advances are swapped to 1- or 3-month LIBOR.  Advances with adjustable rates are tailored to reset to a LIBOR index while long-term consolidated obligations are swapped to 1- or 3-month LIBOR.  These features create a relatively steady income that changes in concert with prevailing interest rate changes to maintain a spread to short-term rates.

Although the Bank maintains a conservative IRR profile, income variability does arise from structural aspects in our portfolio.  These include: embedded prepayment rights, basis risk on asset and liability positions, yield curve risk, and liquidity and funding needs.  These varied risks are controlled by monitoring IRR measures including re-pricing gaps, duration of equity (“DOE”), value at risk (“VaR”), net interest income (“NII”) at risk, key rate durations (“KRD”) and forecasted dividend rates.

Risk Measurements.. Market risk or interest rate risk (IRR) is the risk of change to market value or future earnings due to a change in the interest rate environment. IRR arises from the Banks operation due to maturity mismatches between interest rate sensitive cash-flows of assets and liabilities. As the maturity mismatch increases so does the level of IRR. The Bank has opted to retain a modest level of IRR which allows for the preservation of capital value while generating steady and predictable income. Accordingly, the balance sheet consists of predominantly short-term instruments and assets and liabilities synthetically swapped to floating-rate indices. A conservative and limited maturity gap profile of asset and liability positions protect our capital from changes in value arising from a volatile interest rate environment.

The desired risk profile is primarily affected by the use of interest rate exchange agreements (Swaps) which the Bank uses to match asset and liability index exposure. Historically the index concentration was 1- or 3-month LIBOR driven; however as the Bank strategizes to address LIBOR cessation, the SOFR and OIS indices are increasingly being utilized. Index matching allows for a relatively steady income that changes in concert with prevailing interest rate changes to maintain a spread to short-term rates.

Although the Bank maintains a conservative IRR profile, income variability does arise from structural aspects in our portfolio. These include: embedded prepayment rights, basis risk on asset and liability positions, yield curve risk, liquidity and funding risks. These varied risks are controlled by monitoring IRR measures including re-pricing gaps, duration of equity (DOE), value at risk (VaR), net interest income (NII) at risk, key rate durations (KRD) and forecasted dividend rate sensitivities.

Risk Measurements. Our Risk Management Policy assigns comprehensive risk limits which we calculate on a regular basis. The below limits were established in 2019 based on an anticipated market condition for 2020 which did not take into account the COVID-19 pandemic and the resulting low interest rates. Management believes that the reported metrics below in the near term are less meaningful because the model establishes a hard floor for the rate at near zero, and the model therefore does not fully capture the resulting downward shocks in rates. The Bank is including these metrics as of December 31, 2020 for completeness and comparative purposes. The Bank has updated modeling and implemented scenario changes to take account of the existing low rate environment and potential for negative rates in 2021. The current risk limits are as follows:

 

·
The option-adjusted DOE is limited to a range of +2.0+3.0 years to -3.5-5 years in the rates unchanged case, and to a range of +/-5.0 years in the +/-200bps shock cases.

·

The one-year cumulative re-pricing gap is limited to 10 percent of total assets.

·

The sensitivity of expected net interest income over a one-year period is limited to a -15 percent change under both the +/-200bps shocks+200bps shock compared to the rates in the unchanged case.

·  The sensitivity of expected net interest income over a one-year period is limited to a -40 percent change under the -100bps shock compared to the rates in the unchanged case.  This limit was revised in late 2019 for 2020 and made consistent with expected market conditions for the year.  This metric gauges the Bank’s sensitivity of earnings to changes in the level of rates along the yield curve.  The model results will reflect the impact of net interest income compression when the Bank’s floating rate advances and related debt both decline towards zero.

The potential decline in the market value of equity (MVE) is limited to a 10 percent change under the +/-200bps shocks.

·

KRD exposure at any of nine term points (3-month, 1-year, 2-year, 3-year, 5-year, 7-year, 10-year, 15-year, and 30-year) is limited to between +/-12-20 months through the 3-year term point and a cumulative limit of +/-30 months from the 5-year through 30-year term points.

Our portfolio, including derivatives, is tracked and the overall mismatch between assets and liabilities is summarized by using a DOE measure.  Our last five quarterly DOE results are shown in years in the table below (duepoints specific to the on-going low interest rate environment, there was no down 200bps measurement performed between the fourth quarterinvestment portfolio. Both of 2016 and the fourth quarter of 2017 however, the Bank has performed a down 100bps measurement beginning the fourth quarter of 2017):

 

 

Base Case DOE

 

-200bps DOE

 

-100bps DOE

 

+200bps DOE

 

December 31, 2017

 

-0.37

 

N/A

 

-0.95

 

0.36

 

September 30, 2017

 

-0.38

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

0.54

 

June 30, 2017

 

-0.24

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

0.53

 

March 31, 2017

 

0.06

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

0.75

 

December 31, 2016

 

0.10

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

0.77

 

The DOE has remainedthese quarterly observations are well within policytheir limits.


Our portfolio, including derivatives, is tracked and the overall mismatch net of derivatives between assets and liabilities is summarized by using a DOE measure. The base case DOE takes into account the current low rate level. Our last five quarterly DOE results are shown in years in the table below:

  Base Case DOE  -200bps DOE  -100bps DOE  +200bps DOE 
December 31, 2020  -0.47   1.12   0.31   0.24 
September 30, 2020  -0.64   1.03   0.49   0.03 
June 30, 2020  -1.86   0.24   -0.08   0.49 
March 31, 2020  -3.18   -0.12   -0.91   -0.17 
December 31, 2019  -0.87   0.12   -2.11   0.37 

The DOE has remained within policy limits. The -100/200bps scenarios impose a near zero rate condition and produced results that Bank management does not consider meaningful given the current low rate market environment.

Duration indicates any cumulative re-pricing/maturity imbalance in the portfolio’s financial assets and liabilities. A positive DOE indicates that, on average, the liabilities will re-price or mature sooner than the assets, while a negative DOE indicates that, on average, the assets will re-price or mature earlier than the liabilities. DOE captures sensitivity of MVE. We measure DOE using software that generates a full revaluation incorporating optionality within our portfolio using well-known and tested financial pricing theoretical models. The DOE calculation also incorporates non-interest bearing financial asset and liabilities.

We do not solely rely on the DOE measure as a mismatch measure between assets and liabilities. We analyze open key rate duration exposure across maturity buckets while also performing a more traditional gap measure that subtracts re-pricing/maturing liabilities from re-pricing/maturing assets over time. We observe the differences over various horizons, and liabilities.  A positive DOE indicates that, on average, the liabilities will re-price or mature sooner than the assets, while a negative DOE indicates that, on average, the assets will re-price or mature earlier than the liabilities.  We measure DOE using software that incorporates optionality within our portfolio using well-known and tested financial pricing theoretical models.

We do not solely rely on the DOE measure as a mismatch measure between assets and liabilities.  We analyze open key rate duration exposure across maturity buckets while also performing a more traditional gap measure that subtracts re-pricing/maturing liabilities from re-pricing/maturing assets over time.  We observe the differences over various horizons, but have set a 10 percent of assets limit on asset on cumulative re-pricings at the one-year point. This quarterly observation of the one-year cumulative re-pricing gap is provided in the table below and all values are below 10 percent of assets, well within the limit:

 

One Year

One Year
Re-pricing Gap

Re-pricing Gap

December 31, 2017

$

 7.592 Billion

September 30, 2017

$

 6.496 Billion

June 30, 2017

$

 6.372 Billion

March 31, 2017

$

 5.507 Billion

December 31, 2016

$

 5.631 Billion

Our review of potential interest rate risk issues also includes the effect of changes in interest rates on expected net income.  We project asset and liability volumes and spreads over a one-year horizon and then simulate expected income and expenses from those volumes and other inputs.  The effects of changes in interest rates are measured to test whether the portfolio has too much exposure in its net interest income over the coming 12-month period.  To measure the effect, the change to the spread in the shocks is calculated and compared against the base case and subjected to a -15 percent limit.  The quarterly sensitivity of our expected net interest income under both +/-200bps shocks over the next 12 months is provided in the table below (due to the ongoing low interest rate environment, the down 200bps measurement was not performed between the fourth quarter of 2016 and the fourth quarter of 2017 however, the Bank has performed a down 100bps measurement beginning the fourth quarter of 2017):

 

 

Sensitivity in

 

Sensitivity in

 

Sensitivity in

 

 

 

the -200bps

 

the -100bps

 

the +200bps

 

 

 

Shock

 

Shock

 

Shock

 

December 31, 2017

 

N/A

 

-3.14

%

7.02

%

September 30, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

3.19

%

June 30, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

5.28

%

March 31, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

3.92

%

December 31, 2016

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

4.78

%

Aside from net interest income, the other significant impact on changes in the interest rate environment is the potential impact on the value of the portfolio.  These calculated and quoted market values are estimated based upon their financial attributes (including optionality) and then re-estimated under the assumption that interest rates suddenly rise or fall by 200bps.  The worst effect, whether it is the up or the down shock, is compared to the internal limit of 10 percent.  The quarterly potential maximum decline in the market value of equity under these 200bps shocks is provided below (due to the ongoing low interest rate environment, the down 200bps measurement was not performed between the fourth quarter of 2016 and the fourth quarter of 2017 however, the Bank has performed a down 100bps measurement beginning the fourth quarter of 2017):

 

 

-200bps Change

 

-100bps Change

 

+200bps Change

 

 

 

in MVE

 

in MVE

 

in MVE

 

December 31, 2017

 

N/A

 

-0.81

%

-0.20

%

September 30, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

-0.39

%

June 30, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

-0.48

%

March 31, 2017

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

-0.98

%

December 31, 2016

 

N/A

 

N/A

 

-1.01

%

As noted, the potential declines under these shocks are within our limits of a maximum 10 percent.

The following tables display the portfolio’s maturity/re-pricing gaps as of December 31, 2017 and 2020

$5.792 Billion
September 30, 2020$5.826 Billion
June 30, 2020$5.589 Billion
March 31, 2020$6.299 Billion
December 31, 20162019$5.936 Billion


Our review of potential interest rate risk issues also includes the effect of changes in interest rates on expected net income. We project asset and liability volumes and spreads over a one-year horizon and then simulate expected income and expenses from those volumes and other inputs. The effects of changes in interest rates are generated to measure the Bank’s net interest income sensitivity over the coming 12-month period. To measure the effect, a parallel shift of +200bps is calculated and compared against the base case and subjected to a -15 percent limit. The sensitivity of expected net interest income over a one-year period is limited to a -40 percent change under the -100bps shock compared to the rates in the unchanged case. This limit was technically breached at March 31, 2020 due to significant dislocation of rates and spreads as of the end of March 2020. The sensitivity analysis assumes that rates/spreads as of the end of March 2020 are held unchanged for the remainder of the year, and, as a consequence, the model generates significantly higher net interest income for the Bank. When spread relationships were normalized in subsequent quarters, the limit was within threshold. The existing measure is subject to significant model limitations due to the assumption of floored rate levels against an already low rate environment. The Bank has updated its 2021 modelling framework to account for the existing low rate environment and potential negative rates.

  Sensitivity in
the -200bps
Shock
  Sensitivity in
the -100bps
Shock
  Sensitivity in
the +200bps
Shock
 
December 31, 2020  N/A   -5.52%  7.65%
September 30, 2020  N/A   -4.36%  3.27%
June 30, 2020  N/A   -23.83%  -1.62%
March 31, 2020  N/A   -47.79%  12.14%
December 31, 2019  -32.91%  -5.55%  6.96%

Aside from net interest income, the other significant impact on changes in the interest rate environment is the potential impact on the value of the portfolio. These calculated and quoted market values are estimated based upon their financial attributes (including optionality) and then re-estimated under the assumption that interest rates suddenly rise or fall by 200bps. The worst effect, whether it is the up or the down shock, is compared to the internal limit of 10 percent. Management believes that the reported metrics below in the near term are less meaningful because the model establishes a hard floor for the rate at near zero, and the model therefore does not fully capture the resulting downward shocks in rates. The Bank developed an improved, repeatable and more complete monthly process to report the non-interest-bearing component of the Bank’s MVE starting December 2020. The Bank concludes there is an immaterial impact to historical MVE sensitivity measures as reported in the Bank’s, Item 3 of the10Q for the periods March 2020, June 2020 and September 2020 and Item 7A of the Bank’s 10K for the period ending December 2019. The Bank is including these metrics as of December 31, 2020 for completeness and comparative purposes, and currently investigating model and scenario changes to take account of the existing low rate environment and potential for negative rates. The quarterly potential maximum decline in the MVE under these 200bps shocks is provided below:

  -200bps Change
in MVE
  -100bps Change
in MVE
  +200bps Change
in MVE
 
December 31, 2020  0.78%  0.21%  1.00%
September 30, 2020  1.95%  1.27%  1.24%
June 30, 2020  2.47%  1.76%  2.05%
March 31, 2020  2.89%  1.32%  3.60%
December 31, 2019  -1.93%  -1.60%  0.19%

As noted, the potential declines under these shocks are within our limits of a maximum 10 percent.

With regard to KRD interest rate exposure limits, the Bank remained in compliance with these limits in 2020.


The following tables display the portfolio’s maturity/re-pricing gaps as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 (in millions):

  Interest Rate Sensitivity 
  December 31, 2020 
     More Than  More Than  More Than    
  Six Months  Six Months to  One Year to  Three Years to  More Than 
  or Less  One Year  Three Years  Five Years  Five Years 
Interest-earning assets:                    
Non-MBS investments $15,119  $447  $733  $309  $905 
MBS investments  4,854   608   1,749   1,670   6,068 
Swaps hedging MBS  1,134   -   -   -   (1,134)
Adjustable-rate loans and advances  17,054   -   -   -   - 
Net investments, adjustable rate loans and advances  38,161   1,055   2,482   1,979   5,839 
                     
Liquidity trading portfolio  6,538   3,464   1,653   -   - 
Swaps hedging investments  5,105   (3,450)  (1,655)  -   - 
Net liquidity trading portfolio  11,643   14   (2)  -   - 
                     
Fixed-rate loans and advances  36,333   4,537   13,634   8,019   11,163 
Swaps hedging fixed-rate advances  34,252   (4,140)  (11,505)  (7,477)  (11,130)
Net fixed-rate loans and advances  70,585   397   2,129   542   33 
                     
Total interest-earning assets $120,389  $1,466  $4,609  $2,521  $5,872 
                     
Interest-bearing liabilities:                    
Deposits $1,683  $-  $-  $-  $- 
                     
Discount notes  57,656   -   -   -   - 
Swapped hedging discount notes  (1,806)  113   85   241   1,367 
Net discount notes  55,850   113   85   241   1,367 
                     
 Consolidated Obligation Bonds                    
FHLBank bonds  37,400   11,964   12,361   2,265   5,212 
Swaps hedging bonds  19,719   (10,666)  (7,775)  (603)  (675)
Net FHLBank bonds  57,119   1,298   4,586   1,662   4,537 
                     
Total interest-bearing liabilities $114,652  $1,411  $4,671  $1,903  $5,904 
Post hedge gaps (a):                    
Periodic gap $5,737  $55  $(62) $618  $(32)
Cumulative gaps $5,737  $5,792  $5,730  $6,348  $6,316 


  Interest Rate Sensitivity 
  December 31, 2019 
     More Than  More Than  More Than    
  Six Months  Six Months to  One Year to  Three Years to  More Than 
  or Less  One Year  Three Years  Five Years  Five Years 
Interest-earning assets:                    
Non-MBS investments $25,527  $234  $646  $472  $1,639 
MBS investments  5,781   943   2,167   1,657   6,142 
Swaps hedging MBS  532   -   -   -   (532)
Adjustable-rate loans and advances  16,368   -   -   -   - 
Net investments, adjustable rate loans and advances  48,208   1,177   2,813   2,129   7,249 
                     
Liquidity trading portfolio  2,446   3,708   9,109   2   - 
Swaps hedging investments  12,780   (3,710)  (9,070)  -   - 
Net liquidity trading portfolio  15,226   (2)  39   2   - 
                     
Fixed-rate loans and advances  49,892   4,502   14,493   5,557   9,584 
Swaps hedging fixed-rate advances  31,083   (4,008)  (12,966)  (4,566)  (9,543)
Net fixed-rate loans and advances  80,975   494   1,527   991   41 
                     
Total interest-earning assets $144,409  $1,669  $4,379  $3,122  $7,290 
                     
Interest-bearing liabilities:                    
Deposits $1,155  $5  $-  $-  $- 
                     
Discount notes  73,942   -   -   -   - 
Swapped hedging discount notes  (2,664)  525   531   90   1,518 
Net discount notes  71,278   525   531   90   1,518 
                     
 Consolidated Obligation Bonds                    
FHLBank bonds  57,598   6,463   6,518   2,424   5,320 
Swaps hedging bonds  8,601   (5,483)  (2,305)  (88)  (725)
Net FHLBank bonds  66,199   980   4,213   2,336   4,595 
                     
Total interest-bearing liabilities $138,632  $1,510  $4,744  $2,426  $6,113 
Post hedge gaps (a):                    
Periodic gap $5,777  $159  $(365) $696  $1,177 
Cumulative gaps $5,777  $5,936  $5,571  $6,267  $7,444 

 

 

 

Interest Rate Sensitivity

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

More Than

 

More Than

 

More Than

 

 

 

 

 

Six Months

 

Six Months to

 

One Year to

 

Three Years to

 

More Than

 

 

 

or Less

 

One Year

 

Three Years

 

Five Years

 

Five Years

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-earning assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-MBS investments

 

$

14,238

 

$

159

 

$

545

 

$

442

 

$

1,771

 

MBS investments

 

9,291

 

855

 

2,059

 

1,979

 

3,055

 

Adjustable-rate loans and advances

 

37,120

 

 

 

 

 

Net unswapped

 

60,649

 

1,014

 

2,604

 

2,421

 

4,826

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liquidity trading portfolio

 

239

 

1,256

 

147

 

 

 

Swaps hedging investments

 

1,408

 

(1,261

)

(147

)

 

 

Net liquidity trading portfolio

 

1,647

 

(5

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate loans and advances

 

43,147

 

11,835

 

21,227

 

7,438

 

1,940

 

Swaps hedging advances

 

39,629

 

(10,719

)

(19,886

)

(7,127

)

(1,897

)

Net fixed-rate loans and advances

 

82,776

 

1,116

 

1,341

 

311

 

43

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-earning assets

 

$

145,072

 

$

2,125

 

$

3,945

 

$

2,732

 

$

4,869

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

$

1,166

 

$

12

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Discount notes

 

49,424

 

189

 

 

 

 

Swapped discount notes

 

(2,349

)

 

525

 

531

 

1,293

 

Net discount notes

 

47,075

 

189

 

525

 

531

 

1,293

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FHLBank bonds

 

65,519

 

18,199

 

9,250

 

2,545

 

3,509

 

Swaps hedging bonds

 

24,199

 

(16,754

)

(6,057

)

(638

)

(750

)

Net FHLBank bonds

 

89,718

 

1,445

 

3,193

 

1,907

 

2,759

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-bearing liabilities

 

$

137,959

 

$

1,646

 

$

3,718

 

$

2,438

 

$

4,052

 

Post hedge gaps (a):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Periodic gap

 

$

7,113

 

$

479

 

$

227

 

$

294

 

$

817

 

Cumulative gaps

 

$

7,113

 

$

7,592

 

$

7,819

 

$

8,113

 

$

8,930

 

 

 

Interest Rate Sensitivity

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

More Than

 

More Than

 

More Than

 

 

 

 

 

Six Months

 

Six Months to

 

One Year to

 

Three Years to

 

More Than

 

 

 

or Less

 

One Year

 

Three Years

 

Five Years

 

Five Years

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-earning assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-MBS investments

 

$

15,227

 

$

126

 

$

439

 

$

371

 

$

1,797

 

MBS investments

 

8,581

 

339

 

2,287

 

2,334

 

2,129

 

Adjustable-rate loans and advances

 

42,781

 

 

 

 

 

Net unswapped

 

66,589

 

465

 

2,726

 

2,705

 

3,926

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liquidity trading portfolio

 

 

131

 

 

 

 

Swaps hedging investments

 

131

 

(131

)

 

 

 

Net liquidity trading portfolio

 

131

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate loans and advances

 

24,780

 

5,321

 

24,977

 

8,220

 

3,162

 

Swaps hedging advances

 

38,704

 

(4,419

)

(23,309

)

(7,876

)

(3,100

)

Net fixed-rate loans and advances

 

63,484

 

902

 

1,668

 

344

 

62

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

255

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-earning assets

 

$

130,459

 

$

1,367

 

$

4,394

 

$

3,049

 

$

3,988

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

$

1,569

 

$

4

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Discount notes

 

49,034

 

324

 

 

 

 

Swapped discount notes

 

(1,839

)

 

 

971

 

868

 

Net discount notes

 

47,195

 

324

 

 

971

 

868

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated Obligation Bonds

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FHLBank bonds

 

53,906

 

11,352

 

13,791

 

2,115

 

3,198

 

Swaps hedging bonds

 

21,045

 

(9,200

)

(10,787

)

(293

)

(765

)

Net FHLBank bonds

 

74,951

 

2,152

 

3,004

 

1,822

 

2,433

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest-bearing liabilities

 

$

123,715

 

$

2,480

 

$

3,004

 

$

2,793

 

$

3,301

 

Post hedge gaps (a):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Periodic gap

 

$

6,744

 

$

(1,113

)

$

1,390

 

$

256

 

$

687

 

Cumulative gaps

 

$

6,744

 

$

5,631

 

$

7,021

 

$

7,277

 

$

7,964

 


(a)(a)Re-pricing gaps are estimated at the scheduled rate reset dates for floating rate instruments, and at maturity for fixed rate instruments.  For callable instruments, the re-pricing period is estimated by the earlier of the estimated call date under the current interest rate environment or the instrument’s contractual maturity.


Item 8.

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

PAGE

 

Financial Statements

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

87

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

88

Statements of Condition as of December 31, 2017 and 2016

89

Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

90

Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

91

Statements of Capital for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

92

Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015

93

Notes to Financial Statements

95

Supplementary Data

Supplementary financial data for each full quarter within the two years ended December 31, 2017 are included in Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

PAGE
Financial Statements

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

105

The management of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (the “Bank”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting.  The Bank’s internal control over financial reporting is designed by, or under the supervision of, the Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.  The Bank’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017.  In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013).  Based on its assessment, management of the Bank determined that as of December 31, 2017, the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the Bank’s independent registered public accounting firm that audited the accompanying Financial Statements has also issued an audit report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting.  Their report appears on the following page.

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

106

To the Board

Statements of Directors and Shareholders of the

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the accompanying statements of condition of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (the “FHLBank”)Condition as of December 31, 20172020 and 2016, and the related statements of income, comprehensive income, capital and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”).  We also have audited the FHLBank’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the FHLBank as of December 31, 2017 and 2016, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2017 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.  Also in our opinion, the FHLBank maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2017, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the COSO.

Basis for Opinions

The FHLBank’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting.  Our responsibility is to express opinions on the FHLBank’s financial statements and on the FHLBank’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.  We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (“PCAOB”) and are required to be independent with respect to the FHLBank in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB.  Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audits of the financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks.  Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.  Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk.  Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.

Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles.  A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements.  Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

New York, New York

March 22, 2018

We have served as the FHLBank’s auditor since 1990.

2019
109

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Condition — (In Thousands, Except Par Value of Capital Stock)

As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and due from banks (Note 3)

 

$

127,403

 

$

151,769

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell (Note 4)

 

2,700,000

 

7,150,000

 

Federal funds sold (Note 4)

 

10,326,000

 

6,683,000

 

Trading securities (Note 5)
(Includes $239,064 pledged as collateral at December 31, 2017)

 

1,641,568

 

131,151

 

Available-for-sale securities, net of unrealized gains
of $10,178 at December 31, 2017 and $4,224 at December 31, 2016 (Note 6)

 

577,269

 

697,812

 

Held-to-maturity securities (Note 7)
(Includes $5,728 pledged as collateral at December 31, 2017 and $7,036 at December 31, 2016)

 

17,824,533

 

16,022,293

 

Advances (Note 8) (Includes $2,205,624 at December 31, 2017 and $9,873,157 at December 31, 2016 at fair value under the fair value option)

 

122,447,805

 

109,256,625

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses of $992 at December 31, 2017 and $1,554 at December 31, 2016 (Note 9)

 

2,896,976

 

2,746,559

 

Loans to other FHLBanks (Note 19)

 

 

255,000

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

226,981

 

163,379

 

Premises, software, and equipment

 

29,697

 

12,621

 

Derivative assets (Note 16)

 

112,742

 

328,875

 

Other assets

 

7,398

 

7,198

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total assets

 

$

158,918,372

 

$

143,606,282

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities and capital

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits (Note 10)

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing demand

 

$

1,142,056

 

$

1,183,468

 

Non-interest-bearing demand

 

17,999

 

22,281

 

Term

 

36,000

 

35,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total deposits

 

1,196,055

 

1,240,749

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligations, net (Note 11)

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds (Includes $1,131,074 at December 31, 2017
and $2,052,513 at December 31, 2016 at fair value under the fair value option)

 

99,288,048

 

84,784,664

 

Discount notes (Includes $2,312,621 at December 31, 2017
and $12,228,412 at December 31, 2016 at fair value under the fair value option)

 

49,613,671

 

49,357,894

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total consolidated obligations

 

148,901,719

 

134,142,558

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock (Note 13)

 

19,945

 

31,435

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued interest payable

 

162,176

 

130,178

 

Affordable Housing Program (Note 12)

 

131,654

 

125,062

 

Derivative liabilities (Note 16)

 

61,607

 

144,985

 

Other liabilities

 

204,178

 

167,234

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total liabilities

 

150,677,334

 

135,982,201

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 13, 16 and 18)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Capital (Note 13)

 

 

 

 

 

Capital stock ($100 par value), putable, issued and outstanding shares:
67,500 at December 31, 2017 and 63,077 at December 31, 2016

 

6,750,005

 

6,307,766

 

Retained earnings

 

 

 

 

 

Unrestricted

 

1,067,097

 

1,028,674

 

Restricted (Note 13)

 

479,185

 

383,291

 

Total retained earnings

 

1,546,282

 

1,411,965

 

Total accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

(55,249

)

(95,650

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total capital

 

8,241,038

 

7,624,081

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total liabilities and capital

 

$

158,918,372

 

$

143,606,282

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Income — (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)

for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Interest income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances, net (Note 8)

 

$

1,563,322

 

$

919,890

 

$

627,866

 

Interest-bearing deposits

 

168

 

1,655

 

1,343

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell (Note 4)

 

25,509

 

6,940

 

1,615

 

Federal funds sold (Note 4)

 

163,411

 

46,383

 

13,035

 

Trading securities (Note 5)

 

3,085

 

56

 

 

Available-for-sale securities (Note 6)

 

9,936

 

8,662

 

8,411

 

Held-to-maturity securities (Note 7)

 

382,591

 

290,428

 

264,286

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (Note 9)

 

94,255

 

86,800

 

81,103

 

Loans to other FHLBanks (Note 19)

 

26

 

33

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest income

 

2,242,303

 

1,360,847

 

997,672

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds (Note 11)

 

1,072,370

 

581,900

 

338,916

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes (Note 11)

 

431,722

 

216,545

 

102,913

 

Deposits (Note 10)

 

15,060

 

3,091

 

455

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock (Note 13)

 

1,285

 

1,617

 

820

 

Cash collateral held and other borrowings

 

342

 

1,284

 

411

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total interest expense

 

1,520,779

 

804,437

 

443,515

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income before provision for credit losses

 

721,524

 

556,410

 

554,157

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

(287

)

1,966

 

518

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income after provision for credit losses

 

721,811

 

554,444

 

553,639

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other income (loss)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service fees and other

 

15,841

 

13,824

 

12,096

 

Instruments held at fair value - Unrealized (losses) gains (Note 17)

 

(4,540

)

(1,854

)

9,872

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total OTTI losses

 

 

(113

)

(394

)

Net amount of impairment losses reclassified (from)/to
Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

 

(118

)

188

 

Net impairment losses recognized in earnings

 

 

(231

)

(206

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net realized and unrealized gains (losses)
on derivatives and hedging activities (Note 16)

 

1,939

 

(1,721

)

12,557

 

Net (losses) gains on trading securities

 

(1,106

)

142

 

 

Net realized gains from sale of available-for-sale securities (Note 6)

 

 

250

 

 

Provision for litigation settlement on derivative contracts

 

(70,000

)

 

 

Losses from extinguishment of debt

 

(137

)

(3,557

)

(9,794

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total other (loss) income

 

(58,003

)

6,853

 

24,525

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other expenses

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating

 

40,711

 

33,429

 

29,799

 

Compensation and benefits

 

75,551

 

69,105

 

73,639

 

Finance Agency and Office of Finance

 

14,660

 

12,859

 

13,733

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total other expenses

 

130,922

 

115,393

 

117,171

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Income before assessments

 

532,886

 

445,904

 

460,993

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Affordable Housing Program Assessments (Note 12)

 

53,417

 

44,752

 

46,182

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic earnings per share (Note 14)

 

$

7.66

 

$

7.02

 

$

7.83

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash dividends paid per share

 

$

5.54

 

$

4.73

 

$

4.22

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

2018
110

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Comprehensive Income — (In Thousands)

for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Net Income

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

Other Comprehensive income (loss)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net change in unrealized gains/(losses) on available-for-sale securities

 

5,954

 

(5,059

)

(6,091

)

Net change in non-credit portion of other-than-temporary impairment losses on held-to-maturity securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-credit portion of other-than-temporary impairment losses

 

 

(105

)

(227

)

Reclassification of non-credit portion included in net income

 

 

223

 

39

 

Accretion of non-credit portion of OTTI

 

15,431

 

6,461

 

7,658

 

Total net change in non-credit portion of other-than-temporary impairment losses on held-to-maturity securities

 

15,431

 

6,579

 

7,470

 

Net change in unrealized gains/losses relating to hedging activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unrealized gains/(losses)

 

26,000

 

41,892

 

(7,143

)

Reclassification of losses included in net income

 

1,141

 

2,127

 

2,773

 

Total net change in unrealized gains/(losses) relating to hedging activities

 

27,141

 

44,019

 

(4,370

)

Net change in pension and postretirement benefits

 

(8,125

)

(5,502

)

4,290

 

Total other comprehensive income/(loss)

 

40,401

 

40,037

 

1,299

 

Total comprehensive income

 

$

519,870

 

$

441,189

 

$

416,110

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

2018
111

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Capital — (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)

for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated

 

 

 

 

 

Capital Stock (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

Class B

 

Retained Earnings

 

Comprehensive

 

Total

 

 

 

Shares

 

Par Value

 

Unrestricted

 

Restricted

 

Total

 

Income (Loss)

 

Capital

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2014

 

55,801

 

$

5,580,073

 

$

862,672

 

$

220,099

 

$

1,082,771

 

$

(136,986

)

$

6,525,858

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of capital stock

 

41,733

 

4,173,298

 

 

 

 

 

4,173,298

 

Repurchase/redemption of capital stock

 

(41,595

)

(4,159,427

)

 

 

 

 

(4,159,427

)

Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(89

)

(8,914

)

 

 

 

 

(8,914

)

Cash dividends ($4.22 per share) on capital stock

 

 

 

(227,443

)

 

(227,443

)

 

(227,443

)

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

331,849

 

82,962

 

414,811

 

1,299

 

416,110

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2015

 

55,850

 

$

5,585,030

 

$

967,078

 

$

303,061

 

$

1,270,139

 

$

(135,687

)

$

6,719,482

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of capital stock

 

47,779

 

4,777,938

 

 

 

 

 

4,777,938

 

Repurchase/redemption of capital stock

 

(40,023

)

(4,002,300

)

 

 

 

 

(4,002,300

)

Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(529

)

(52,902

)

 

 

 

 

(52,902

)

Cash dividends ($4.73 per share) on capital stock

 

 

 

(259,326

)

 

(259,326

)

 

(259,326

)

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

320,922

 

80,230

 

401,152

 

40,037

 

441,189

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2016

 

63,077

 

$

6,307,766

 

$

1,028,674

 

$

383,291

 

$

1,411,965

 

$

(95,650

)

$

7,624,081

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of capital stock

 

64,508

 

6,450,844

 

 

 

 

 

6,450,844

 

Repurchase/redemption of capital stock

 

(60,055

)

(6,005,596

)

 

 

 

 

(6,005,596

)

Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(30

)

(3,009

)

 

 

 

 

(3,009

)

Cash dividends ($5.54 per share) on capital stock

 

 

 

(345,152

)

 

(345,152

)

 

(345,152

)

Comprehensive income

 

 

 

383,575

 

95,894

 

479,469

 

40,401

 

519,870

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, December 31, 2017

 

67,500

 

$

6,750,005

 

$

1,067,097

 

$

479,185

 

$

1,546,282

 

$

(55,249

)

$

8,241,038

 


(a)Putable stock

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.

2018
112

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Cash Flows — (In Thousands)

for the Years Ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018

113
Notes to Financial Statements115

Supplementary Data

Supplementary financial data for each full quarter within the two years ended December 31, 2020 are included in Item 6. Selected Financial Data.

104

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

The management of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (the “Bank”) is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. The Bank’s internal control over financial reporting is designed by, or under the supervision of, the Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external reporting purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.  The Bank’s management assessed the effectiveness of the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020. In making this assessment, it used the criteria set forth by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework (2013).  Based on its assessment, management of the Bank determined that as of December 31, 2020, the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting was effective based on those criteria.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP, the Bank’s independent registered public accounting firm that audited the accompanying Financial Statements has also issued an audit report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Their report appears on the following page.

105

Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Opinions on the Financial Statements and Internal Control over Financial Reporting

We have audited the accompanying statements of condition of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (the “Company”) as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, and the related statements of income, of comprehensive income, of capital and of cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020, including the related notes (collectively referred to as the “financial statements”). We also have audited the Company's internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Company as of December 31, 2020 and 2019, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2020 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, the Company maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2020, based on criteria established in Internal Control - Integrated Framework (2013) issued by the COSO.

Basis for Opinions

The Company's management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express opinions on the Company’s financial statements and on the Company's internal control over financial reporting based on our audits. We are a public accounting firm registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) (PCAOB) and are required to be independent with respect to the Company in accordance with the U.S. federal securities laws and the applicable rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the PCAOB.

We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the PCAOB. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audits to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement, whether due to error or fraud, and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects.

Our audits of the financial statements included performing procedures to assess the risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to error or fraud, and performing procedures that respond to those risks. Such procedures included examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. Our audits also included evaluating the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, and testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk. Our audits also included performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.


Definition and Limitations of Internal Control over Financial Reporting

A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (i) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (ii) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (iii) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.

Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

Critical Audit Matters

The critical audit matter communicated below is a matter arising from the current period audit of the financial statements that was communicated or required to be communicated to the audit committee and that (i) relates to accounts or disclosures that are material to the financial statements and (ii) involved our especially challenging, subjective, or complex judgments. The communication of critical audit matters does not alter in any way our opinion on the financial statements, taken as a whole, and we are not, by communicating the critical audit matter below, providing a separate opinion on the critical audit matter or on the accounts or disclosures to which it relates.

Valuation of Interest-Rate Derivatives and Hedged Items

As described in Notes 17 and 18 to the financial statements, the Company uses derivatives to manage its interest rate exposure. The total notional amount of derivatives as of December 31, 2020 was $128 billion, of which 55% were designated as hedging instruments, and the fair value of derivative assets and liabilities as of December 31, 2020 was $37 million and $71 million, respectively. The fair values of interest-rate derivatives and hedged items are primarily estimated using a discounted cash-flow model. The discounted cash-flow model uses market observable inputs such as interest rate curves, volatility, and, if applicable, prepayment assumptions.

The principal considerations for our determination that performing procedures relating to the valuation of interest-rate derivatives and hedged items is a critical audit matter are the significant audit effort in evaluating the interest rate curves, volatility, and, if applicable, prepayment assumptions used to fair value these derivatives and hedged items, and the audit effort involved the use of professionals with specialized skill and knowledge.


Addressing the matter involved performing procedures and evaluating audit evidence in connection with forming our overall opinion on the financial statements. These procedures included testing the effectiveness of controls relating to the valuation of interest-rate derivatives and hedged items, including controls over the model, data and assumptions. These procedures also included, among others, the involvement of professionals with specialized skill and knowledge to assist in developing an independent range of prices for a sample of interest-rate derivatives and hedged items and comparison of management’s estimate to the independently developed ranges. Developing the independent range of prices involved testing the completeness and accuracy of data provided by management and independently developing the interest rate curves, volatility, and, if applicable, prepayment assumptions.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

New York, New York

March 19, 2021

We have served as the Company’s auditor since 1990.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
Statements of Condition — (In Thousands, Except Par Value of Capital Stock)
As of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Assets        
Cash and due from banks (Note 3) $1,896,155  $603,241 
Interest-bearing deposits (Note 4)  685,000   - 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell (Note 4)  4,650,000   14,985,000 
Federal funds sold (Note 4)  6,280,000   8,640,000 
Trading securities (Note 5) (Includes $630,372 pledged as collateral at December 31, 2020 and $251,177 at December 31, 2019)     11,742,965       15,318,809  
Equity Investments (Note 6)  80,369   60,047 
Available-for-sale securities, net of unrealized gains (losses) of $280,626 at December 31, 2020 and $97,868 at December 31, 2019 (Note 7)     3,435,945       2,653,418  
Held-to-maturity securities, net of allowance for credit losses of $980 at December  31, 2020 (Note 8) (Includes $2,680 pledged as collateral at December 31, 2020 and $3,719 at December 31, 2019)     12,873,646       15,234,482  

Advances (Note 9) (Includes $0 at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 at fair value under the fair value option)

     92,067,104       100,695,241  
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses of $7,073 at December 31, 2020 and $653 at December 31, 2019 (Note 10)     2,899,712       3,173,352  
Loans to other FHLBanks (Note 20)  -   - 
Accrued interest receivable  189,454   312,559 
Premises, software, and equipment  77,628   63,426 
Operating lease right-of-use assets (Note 19)  70,733   75,464 
Derivative assets (Note 17)  36,669   237,947 
Other assets  11,003   9,036 
         
Total assets $136,996,383  $162,062,022 
         
Liabilities and capital        
         
Liabilities        
Deposits (Note 11)        
Interest-bearing demand $1,677,526  $1,144,519 
Non-interest-bearing demand  70,437   34,890 
Term  5,000   15,000 
         
Total deposits  1,752,963   1,194,409 
         
Consolidated obligations, net (Note 12)        
Bonds (Includes $16,580,464 at December 31, 2020 and $12,134,043 at December 31, 2019 at fair value under the fair value option)  69,716,298   78,763,309 
Discount notes (Includes $7,133,755 at December 31, 2020 and $2,186,603 at December 31, 2019 at fair value under the fair value option)  57,658,838   73,959,205 
         
Total consolidated obligations  127,375,136   152,722,514 
         
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock (Note 14)  2,991   5,129 
         
Accrued interest payable  117,982   156,889 
Affordable Housing Program (Note 13)  148,827   153,894 
Derivative liabilities (Note 17)  70,760   32,411 
Other liabilities  186,550   175,516 
Operating lease liabilities (Note 19)  84,475   89,365 
         
Total liabilities  129,739,684   154,530,127 
         
Commitments and Contingencies (Notes 14, 17 and 19)        
         
Capital (Note 14)        
Capital stock ($100 par value), putable, issued and outstanding shares: 53,669 at December 31, 2020 and 57,787 at December 31, 2019     5,366,830       5,778,666  
Retained earnings        
Unrestricted  1,135,341   1,115,236 
Restricted (Note 14)  774,275   685,798 
Total retained earnings  1,909,616   1,801,034 
Total accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  (19,747)  (47,805)
         
Total capital  7,256,699   7,531,895 
         
Total liabilities and capital $136,996,383  $162,062,022 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements. 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
Statements of Income — (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Interest income            
Advances, net (Note 9) $1,166,745  $2,526,662  $2,522,040 
Interest-bearing deposits (Note 4)  3,615   4,561   420 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell (Note 4)  28,573   178,565   78,341 
Federal funds sold (Note 4)  34,791   228,388   312,278 
Trading securities (Note 5)  221,780   215,583   74,412 
Available-for-sale securities (Note 7)  61,580   68,053   12,161 
Held-to-maturity securities (Note 8)  324,784   457,746   489,223 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (Note 10)  91,964   101,223   97,479 
Loans to other FHLBanks (Note 20)  33   165   130 
             
Total interest income  1,933,865   3,780,946   3,586,484 
             
Interest expense            
Consolidated obligation bonds (Note 12)  747,914   1,798,167   1,808,232 
Consolidated obligation discount notes (Note 12)  428,864   1,291,576   960,833 
Deposits (Note 11)  3,768   22,839   17,816 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock (Note 14)  235   379   964 
Cash collateral held and other borrowings  128   895   1,614 
             
Total interest expense  1,180,909   3,113,856   2,789,459 
             
Net interest income before provision for credit losses  752,956   667,090   797,025 
             
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses  3,721   (142)  (371)
             
Net interest income after provision for credit losses  749,235   667,232   797,396 
             
Other income (loss)            
Service fees and other  17,924   18,224   18,442 
Instruments held under the fair value option gains (losses) (Note 18)  123   (4,146)  209 
Total OTTI losses  -   -   (398)
Net amount of impairment losses reclassified to (from)            
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)  -   (640)  257 
Derivative gains (losses) (Note 17)  (151,709)  (40,720)  (40,778)
Trading securities gains (losses) (Note 5)  72,826   51,327   3,216 
Equity investments gains (losses) (Note 6)  9,792   9,843   (4,819)
Litigation settlement  225   -   - 
             
Total other income (loss)  (50,819)  33,888   (23,871)
             
Other expenses            
Operating  69,806   62,782   47,882 
Compensation and benefits  100,200   88,192   78,950 
Finance Agency and Office of Finance  19,392   16,752   15,874 
Other expenses  17,453   8,254   7,959 
Total other expenses  206,851   175,980   150,665 
             
Income before assessments  491,565   525,140   622,860 
             
Affordable Housing Program Assessments (Note 13)  49,180   52,552   62,382 
             
Net income $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 
             
             
Basic earnings per share (Note 15) $7.22  $8.52  $9.09 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
Statements of Comprehensive Income — (In Thousands)
Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Net Income $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 
Other Comprehensive income (loss)            
Net change in unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale securities  182,758   93,834   (1,220)
Net change in non-credit accretion portion of held-to-maturity securities                   
Non-credit portion of other-than-temporary impairment gains (losses)  -   -   (257)
Reclassification of non-credit portion included in net income  -   640   - 
Accretion of non-credit portion  1,983   2,850   3,999 
Total net change in non-credit portion of other-than-temporary impairment losses on held-to-maturity securities      1,983         3,490         3,742   
Net change due to hedging activities            
Cash flow hedges (a)  (112,688)  (111,275)  36,636 
Fair value hedges (b)  (32,459)  (11,593)  - 
Total net change due to hedging activities  (145,147)  (122,868)  36,636 
Net change in pension and postretirement benefits  (11,536)  (9,002)  7,756 
Total other comprehensive income (loss)  28,058   (34,546)  46,914 
Total comprehensive income (loss) $470,443  $438,042  $607,392 

(a)Represents changes in the fair values of derivatives in cash flow hedging programs, primarily from open contracts in the hedging of rolling issuance of CO discount notes, and any open contracts in cash flow hedges of anticipatory issuance of CO bonds. Also includes unamortized gains and losses related to closed cash flow hedges that will be amortized in future periods from AOCI to Interest expense. For more information, see table “Cash flow hedge gains and losses” in Note 17. Derivatives and Hedging Activities.
(b)Represents cumulative hedge valuation basis adjustments on fair value hedges of AFS securities under the partial-term hedging provisions of ASU 2017-12. The amount represents the change in the unrealized fair values of the hedged securities due to changes in the benchmark rate component elected in the hedging strategy. Changes in the benchmark rate will be recorded through AOCI with an offset to earnings until the hedged securities mature or are sold.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York
Statements of Capital — (In Thousands, Except Per Share Data)
Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018

                 Accumulated    
  Capital Stock (a)           Other    
  Class B  Retained Earnings  Comprehensive  Total 
  Shares  Par Value  Unrestricted  Restricted  Total  Income (Loss)  Capital 
Balance, December 31, 2017  67,500  $6,750,005  $1,067,097  $479,185  $1,546,282  $(55,249) $8,241,038 
Adjustments to opening balances (b)  -   -   4,924   -   4,924   (4,924)  - 
Proceeds from issuance of capital stock  79,779   7,977,851   -   -   -   -   7,977,851 
Repurchase/redemption of capital stock  (86,533)  (8,653,301)  -   -   -   -   (8,653,301)
Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (88)  (8,756)  -   -   -   -   (8,756)
Cash dividends ($6.66 per share) on capital stock  -   -   (417,602)  -   (417,602)  -   (417,602)
Comprehensive income (loss)  -   -   448,382   112,096   560,478   46,914   607,392 
                             
Balance, December 31, 2018  60,658  $6,065,799  $1,102,801  $591,281  $1,694,082  $(13,259) $7,746,622 
                             
Proceeds from issuance of capital stock  82,801   8,280,054   -   -   -   -   8,280,054 
Repurchase/redemption of capital stock  (85,630)  (8,563,003)  -   -   -   -   (8,563,003)
Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (42)  (4,184)  -   -   -   -   (4,184)
Cash dividends ($6.49 per share) on capital stock  -   -   (365,636)  -   (365,636)  -   (365,636)
Comprehensive income (loss)  -   -   378,071   94,517   472,588   (34,546)  438,042 
                             
Balance, December 31, 2019  57,787  $5,778,666  $1,115,236  $685,798  $1,801,034  $(47,805) $7,531,895 
                             
Cumulative effect adjustment  (b)  -   -   (3,773)  -   (3,773)  -   (3,773)
Recovery of prior capital distribution  (c)  -   -   18,204   -   18,204   -   18,204 
Proceeds from issuance of capital stock  56,408   5,640,764   -   -   -   -   5,640,764 
Repurchase/redemption of capital stock  (60,499)  (6,049,857)  -   -   -   -   (6,049,857)
Shares reclassified to mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (27)  (2,743)  -   -   -   -   (2,743)
Cash dividends ($5.74 per share) on capital stock  -   -   (348,234)  -   (348,234)  -   (348,234)
Comprehensive income (loss)  -   -   353,908   88,477   442,385   28,058   470,443 
                             
Balance, December 31, 2020  53,669  $5,366,830  $1,135,341  $774,275  $1,909,616  $(19,747) $7,256,699 

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Operating activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net Income

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Depreciation and amortization:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net premiums and discounts on consolidated obligations, investments, mortgage loans and other adjustments

 

(13,886

)

29,625

 

30,766

 

Concessions on consolidated obligations

 

4,110

 

6,112

 

5,500

 

Premises, software, and equipment

 

4,432

 

3,461

 

3,673

 

(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

(287

)

1,966

 

518

 

Net realized gains from sale of available-for-sale securities

 

 

(250

)

 

Credit impairment losses on held-to-maturity securities

 

 

231

 

206

 

Change in net fair value adjustments on derivatives and hedging activities

 

144,391

 

5,523

 

221,836

 

Net realized and unrealized losses (gains) on trading securities

 

1,106

 

(142

)

 

Change in fair value adjustments on financial instruments held at fair value

 

4,603

 

4,360

 

(9,092

)

Losses from extinguishment of debt

 

137

 

3,557

 

9,794

 

Net change in:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

(64,139

)

(17,328

)

27,954

 

Derivative assets due to accrued interest

 

(40,654

)

(30,069

)

1,709

 

Derivative liabilities due to accrued interest

 

50,354

 

5,526

 

(31,540

)

Other assets

 

(1,809

)

938

 

(555

)

Affordable Housing Program liability

 

6,592

 

11,710

 

(192

)

Accrued interest payable

 

31,998

 

21,603

 

(13,330

)

Other liabilities

 

29,385

 

2,049

 

19,976

 

Total adjustments

 

156,333

 

48,872

 

267,223

 

Net cash provided by operating activities

 

635,802

 

450,024

 

682,034

 

Investing activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net change in:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing deposits

 

235,061

 

114,562

 

758,060

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell

 

4,450,000

 

(3,150,000

)

(3,200,000

)

Federal funds sold

 

(3,643,000

)

562,000

 

2,773,000

 

Deposits with other FHLBanks

 

(67

)

(170

)

150

 

Premises, software, and equipment

 

(21,508

)

(6,618

)

(2,469

)

Trading securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purchased

 

(1,881,028

)

(131,013

)

 

Repayments

 

270,930

 

 

 

Proceeds from sales

 

100,164

 

 

 

Available-for-sale securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purchased

 

(2,075

)

(8,100

)

(16,862

)

Repayments

 

129,872

 

179,119

 

255,990

 

Proceeds from sales

 

1,788

 

118,308

 

1,689

 

Held-to-maturity securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Long-term securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Purchased

 

(4,478,887

)

(4,057,667

)

(2,184,502

)

Repayments

 

2,686,796

 

1,968,561

 

1,402,820

 

Advances:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Principal collected

 

1,060,666,397

 

771,152,466

 

863,850,455

 

Made

 

(1,074,132,845

)

(786,856,049

)

(860,169,813

)

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Principal collected

 

268,375

 

330,666

 

270,620

 

Purchased

 

(425,106

)

(564,083

)

(674,968

)

Proceeds from sales of REO

 

4,135

 

3,249

 

2,768

 

Net change in loans to other FHLBanks

 

255,000

 

(255,000

)

 

Net cash (used in) provided by investing activities

 

(15,515,998

)

(20,599,769

)

3,066,938

 

The accompanying notes are
(a)Putable stock. Cash dividends paid — Dividends per share and aggregate dividends were paid on a single class of shares of capital stock. For more information, see Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.
(b)Charge to retained earnings was a cumulative effect adjustment to the opening balance upon adoption of ASU 2016 – 13, representing the difference between credit loss calculations based on the incurred loss methodology and the Currently Expected Credit Losses (CECL) framework.
(c)Credit to retained earnings represents the FHLBNY’s share of cash distribution received when Financing Corporation (FICO), an entity established by Congress in 1987 was dissolved and surplus funds distributed to the 11 FHLBanks. For more information, see Distribution received from Financing Corporation in Note 14. Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Cash Flows — (In Thousands)

Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Operating activities            
Net Income $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by operating activities:            
Depreciation and amortization:            
Net premiums and discounts on consolidated obligations, investments, mortgage loans and other adjustments (a)  (238,735)  (88,742)  87,628 
Concessions on consolidated obligations  4,399   3,223   2,586 
Premises, software, and equipment  10,669   8,773   5,492 
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses  3,721   (142)  (371)
Credit impairment losses on held-to-maturity securities  -   640   141 
Change in net fair value adjustments on derivatives and hedging activities (b)  (488,369)  (249,537)  33,840 
Net realized and unrealized (gains) losses on trading securities  (72,826)  (51,327)  (3,216)
Change in fair value on Equity Investments  (6,481)  (7,866)  4,819 
Change in fair value adjustments on financial instruments held at fair value  (123)  4,146   (209)
Net change in:            
Accrued interest receivable  123,351   (38,012)  (49,850)
Derivative assets due to accrued interest  247,471   (223)  (150,869)
Derivative liabilities due to accrued interest  (99,649)  12,436   93,482 
Other assets  (2,228)  (883)  (1,429)
Affordable Housing Program liability  (5,067)  (7,824)  30,064 
Accrued interest payable  (38,907)  (66,681)  61,394 
Other liabilities (a)  23,225   24,057   7,828 
Total adjustments  (539,549)  (457,962)  121,330 
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities $(97,164) $14,626  $681,808 
Investing activities            
Net change in:            
Interest-bearing deposits $(1,104,928) $(278,148) $(53,440)
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  10,335,000   (10,890,000)  (1,395,000)
Federal funds sold  2,360,000   (1,000,000)  2,686,000 
Deposits with other FHLBanks  (6)  46   255 
Premises, software, and equipment  (24,870)  (20,627)  (27,366)
Trading securities:            
Purchased  (3,833,164)  (13,258,945)  (5,550,105)
Repayments  3,150,747   2,489,363   1,216,237 
Proceeds from sales  4,292,913   1,199,179   349,383 
Equity Investments:            
Purchased  (16,379)  (6,055)  (3,846)
Proceeds from sales  2,538   2,054   1,825 
Available-for-sale securities:            
Purchased  (674,519)  (621,869)  - 
Repayments  67,924   76,499   105,551 
Held-to-maturity securities:            
Long-term securities            
Purchased  (301,052)  (2,382,169)  (3,520,254)
Repayments  2,647,288   3,015,579   3,858,408 
Advances:            
Principal collected  538,451,834   1,125,987,329   1,107,754,440 
Made  (528,796,915)  (1,120,949,550)  (1,090,480,856)
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio:            
Principal collected  785,100   313,813   264,643 
Purchased  (529,956)  (566,416)  (301,694)
Proceeds from sales of REO  712   2,666   2,799 
Net change in loans to other FHLBanks  -   250,000   (250,000)
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities $26,812,267  $(16,637,251) $14,656,980 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Statements of Cash Flows — (In Thousands)

Years Ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Financing activities            
Net change in:            
Deposits and other borrowings $627,679  $62,195  $(123,357)
Partial recovery of prior capital distribution to Financing Corporation  18,204   -   - 
Derivative contracts with financing element  (5,948)  (16,542)  (8,457)
Consolidated obligation bonds:            
Proceeds from issuance  69,673,063   99,473,389   111,130,060 
Payments for maturing and early retirement  (79,761,238)  (105,040,533)  (126,220,249)
Payments on bonds (transferred to) or assumed from other FHLBanks (c)  1,005,990   -   - 
Consolidated obligation discount notes:            
Proceeds from issuance  952,058,230   1,272,192,911   1,177,557,595 
Payments for maturing  (968,275,961)  (1,248,877,475)  (1,176,600,469)
Capital stock:            
Proceeds from issuance of capital stock  5,640,764   8,280,054   7,977,851 
Payments for repurchase/redemption of capital stock  (6,049,857)  (8,563,003)  (8,653,301)
Redemption of mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (4,881)  (4,900)  (22,856)
Cash dividends paid (d)  (348,234)  (365,636)  (417,602)
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities $(25,422,189) $17,140,460  $(15,380,785)
Net increase (decrease) in cash and due from banks  1,292,914   517,835   (41,997)
Cash and due from banks at beginning of the period (e)  603,241   85,406   127,403 
Cash and due from banks at end of the period (e) $1,896,155  $603,241  $85,406 
             
Supplemental disclosures:            
Interest paid $964,205  $1,905,145  $1,714,564 
Interest paid for Discount Notes (f) $482,595  $1,268,051  $878,103 
Affordable Housing Program payments (g) $54,247  $60,376  $32,318 
Transfers of mortgage loans to real estate owned $135  $773  $1,090 
Net amount of impairment losses reclassified to (from) Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss)     $  -        $(640  )     $257   
Capital stock subject to mandatory redemption reclassified
from equity
   $2,743        $4,184        $8,756   
Securities traded but not settled $-  $-  $149,874 
Transfers of HTM securities to AFS that are not other-than-temporarily impaired (h) $-  $1,597,207  $- 

Notes to Supplemental Disclosure:

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York(a)

We adjust discount note accretion expense within operating cash flows with an offset to financing activities in the Statements of Cash Flows — (In Thousands)

Years Endedflows on discount notes in the year they mature. The net adjustment to accretion expense was larger in 2020, causing Net premiums and discounts to record negative operating cash flows of $238.7 million in 2020, compared to negative $88.7 million in 2019. In 2019, the adoption of ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) resulted in the recognition of non-cash right-of-use operating assets of $71.6 million and lease liabilities of $83.9 million. For cash flow information on operating leases outstanding at December 31, 2017, 20162020 and 20152019, including additions, see Operating Lease Commitments in Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies.

(b)

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Financing activities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net change in:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits and other borrowings

 

$

(13,268

)

$

(64,763

)

$

(452,761

)

Derivative contracts with financing element

 

(18,464

)

(49,357

)

(221,185

)

Consolidated obligation bonds:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance

 

93,274,082

 

59,498,806

 

50,339,433

 

Payments for maturing and early retirement

 

(78,726,129

)

(42,363,772

)

(56,065,181

)

Payments on bonds (transferred to) or assumed from other FHLBanks (a)

 

 

 

(52,853

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance

 

1,191,518,054

 

441,811,057

 

207,882,927

 

Payments for maturing

 

(1,191,264,042

)

(439,333,285

)

(211,088,626

)

Capital stock:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proceeds from issuance of capital stock

 

6,450,844

 

4,777,938

 

4,173,298

 

Payments for repurchase/redemption of capital stock

 

(6,005,596

)

(4,002,300

)

(4,159,427

)

Redemption of mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(14,499

)

(40,966

)

(8,615

)

Cash dividends paid (b)

 

(345,152

)

(259,326

)

(227,443

)

Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities

 

14,855,830

 

19,974,032

 

(9,880,433

)

Net (decrease) in cash and due from banks

 

(24,366

)

(175,713

)

(6,131,461

)

Cash and due from banks at beginning of the period (c)

 

151,769

 

327,482

 

6,458,943

 

Cash and due from banks at end of the period (c)

 

$

127,403

 

$

151,769

 

$

327,482

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Supplemental disclosures:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest paid

 

$

1,064,684

 

$

615,149

 

$

443,458

 

Affordable Housing Program payments (d)

 

$

46,825

 

$

33,042

 

$

46,374

 

Transfers of mortgage loans to real estate owned

 

$

1,071

 

$

1,089

 

$

2,348

 

Net amount of impairment losses reclassified (from)/to Accumulated other comprehensive loss

 

$

 

$

(118

)

$

188

 

Capital stock subject to mandatory redemption reclassified from equity

 

$

3,009

 

$

52,902

 

$

8,914

 


Negative adjustments to operating cash flows of $488.4 million and $249.5 million for twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 and a positive adjustment of $33.8 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2018, represented fair value adjustments on derivatives and hedging activities and the increase was due to higher variation margin posted to derivative counterparties.
(a)(c)For information about bonds (transferred to) or assumed from FHLBanks and other related party transactions, see Note 19.20. Related Party Transactions.

(b)(d)Does not include payments to holders of mandatorily redeemable capital stock. Such payments are considered as interest expense and reported within Operatingoperating cash flows.

(c)(e)Cash and due from banks did not include any restricted cash or cash equivalents.  IncludesBanks includes pass-thru reserves at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York; also includes an unrestricted compensating balance arrangement.  For more information, seeYork. See Note 33. Cash and Due from Banks.Banks for further information. Interest-bearing deposits are considered investments and are not included in cash or cash equivalent.

(f)Interest paid for Discount Notes, is the portion of the cash payments at settlement of zero-coupon Consolidated obligation discount notes.
(d)(g)AHP payments = (beginning accrual - ending accrual) + AHP assessment for the period; payments represent funds released to the Affordable Housing Program.

The accompanying notes are an integral part

(h)As of these financial statements.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Background

The Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“FHLBNY” or “the Bank”) is a federally chartered corporation, and is one of 11 district Federal Home Loan Banks (“FHLBanks”).  The FHLBanks are U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (“GSEs”), organized under the authority of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932, as amended (“FHLBank Act”).  Each FHLBank is a cooperative owned by member institutions located within a defined geographic district.  The FHLBNY’s defined geographic district is New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Tax Status.  The FHLBanks, includingJanuary 1, 2019, the FHLBNY are exemptelected (as permitted under ASU 2017-12) and transferred $1.6 billion (amortized cost basis) of fixed-rate MBS from ordinary federal, state, and local taxation except for real property taxes.

Assessments.  Affordable Housing Program (“AHP”)HTM classification to AFS classification.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these financial statements.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Background

The Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (FHLBNY or the Bank) is a federally chartered corporation, and is one of 11 district Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks). The FHLBanks are U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs), organized under the authority of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932, as amended (FHLBank Act). Each FHLBank is a cooperative owned by member institutions located within a defined geographic district. The FHLBNY’s defined geographic district is New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Tax Status. The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, are exempt from ordinary federal, state, and local taxation except for real property taxes.

Assessments. Affordable Housing Program (AHP) Assessments — Each FHLBank, including the FHLBNY, provides subsidies in the form of direct grants and below-market interest rate advances to members, who use the funds to assist in the purchase, construction or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low- and moderate-income households. Annually, the 11 FHLBanks must allocate the greater of $100 million or 10% of their regulatory defined net income for the Affordable Housing Program.

 

Note 1.SignificantCritical Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying financial statements of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York have been prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States (GAAP) and with the instructions provided by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The FHLBNY has identified certain accounting policies that it believes are critical because they require management to make subjective judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because of the likelihood that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or by using different assumptions. The most significant of these critical policies include derivatives and hedging relationships, estimating the fair values of assets and liabilities, estimating the allowance for credit losses on the advance, mortgage loan portfolios and our portfolios of investment securities.

 

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying financial statements of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York have been prepared in accordance with Generally Accepted Accounting Principles in the United States (“GAAP”) and with the instructions provided by the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”).

The FHLBNY has identified certain accounting policies that it believes are significant because they require management to make subjective judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because of the likelihood that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or by using different assumptions.  These policies include estimating the allowance for credit losses on the advance and mortgage loan portfolios, evaluating the impairment of the FHLBNY’s securities portfolios, and estimating fair values of certain assets and liabilities.

Financial Instruments with Legal Right of Offset

 

The FHLBNY has derivative instruments, and from time to time, securities purchased under agreements to resell that are subject to enforceable master netting arrangements.  The FHLBNY has elected to offset its derivative asset and liability positions, as well as cash collateral received or pledged, when it has the legal right of offset under these master agreements.  The FHLBNY did not have any offsetting liabilities related to its securities purchased under agreements to resell for the periods presented.

 

The net exposure for these financial instruments can change on a daily basis; therefore, there may be a delay between the time this exposure change is identified and additional collateral is requested, and the time when this collateral is received or pledged.  Likewise, there may be a delay for excess collateral to be returned.  For derivative instruments, any excess cash collateral received or pledged is recognized as a derivative liability or as a derivative asset based on the terms of the individual master agreement between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparty.  Additional information regarding these agreements is provided in Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities. For securities purchased under agreements to resell, the FHLBNY did not have any unsecured amounts based on the fair value of the related collateral held at the end of the periods presented.  Additional information about the FHLBNY’s investments in securities purchased under agreements to resell is disclosed in Note 4. Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

The accounting standards on fair value measurements and disclosures discuss how entities should measure fair value based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable.  Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability between market participants at the measurement date.  This definition is based on an exit price rather than transaction or entry price.

The FHLBNY complied with the accounting guidance on fair value measurements and disclosures and has established a hierarchy for inputs used in measuring fair value that maximizes the use of observable inputs and minimizes the use of unobservable inputs by requiring that the most observable inputs be used when available. Observable inputs are inputs that market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and would be based on market data obtained from independent sources.  Unobservable inputs are inputs that reflect our assumptions about the parameters market participants would use in pricing the asset or liability, and would be based on the best information available in the circumstances.  Our pricing models are subject to periodic validations, and we periodically review and refine, as appropriate, our assumptions and valuation methodologies to reflect market indications as closely as possible.  We have the appropriate personnel, technology, and policies and procedures in place to value financial instruments in a reasonable and consistent manner and in accordance with established accounting policies.

Valuation Techniques — Three valuation techniques are prescribed under the fair value measurement standards — Market approach, Income approach and Cost approach.  Valuation techniques for which sufficient data is available and that are appropriate under the circumstances should be used.

In determining fair value, the FHLBNY uses various valuation methods, including both the market and income approaches.

Market approach — This technique uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities.
Income approach — This technique uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts (for example, cash flows or earnings) to a single present amount (discounted), based on assumptions used by market participants. When the income approach is used, the fair value measurement reflects current market expectations about those future amounts.  The present value technique used to measure fair value depends on the facts and circumstances specific to the asset or liability being measured and the availability of data.
Cost approach — This approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (often referred to as current replacement cost).

The FHLBNY has complied with the accounting standards under Fair Value Measurement that defines fair value, establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value, and requires disclosure about fair value measurement on assets and liabilities recorded at fair value on the balance sheet.

For more information about the fair value hierarchy, and the hierarchy levels of the FHLBNY’s financial instruments, see Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

On a recurring basis, fair values were measured and recorded in the Statements of Condition for derivatives, available-for-sale securities (AFS or AFS securities), securities designated as trading, equity investments, and financial instruments elected under the Fair Value Option (FVO).

On a non-recurring basis, credit impaired (formerly OTTI) held-to-maturity securities were measured and recorded at their fair values in the Statements of Condition. When credit impaired mortgage loans held-for-portfolio were partially charged off, the loans were written down to their collateral values on a non-recurring basis.

Fair values of derivative positions The FHLBNY is an end-user of over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives to hedge assets, liabilities, and certain firm commitments to mitigate fair value risks.  Valuations of derivative assets and liabilities reflect the value of the instrument including the value associated with counterparty risk.  Derivative values also take into account the FHLBNY’s own credit standing.  The computed fair values of the FHLBNY’s OTC derivatives take into consideration the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements that allow the FHLBNY to settle positive and negative positions and


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

offset cash collateral with the same counterparty on a net basis.  The agreements include collateral thresholds that reflect the net credit differential between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparties. On a contract-by-contract basis, the collateral and netting arrangements sufficiently mitigated the impact of the credit differential between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparties to an immaterial level such that an adjustment for nonperformance risk was not deemed necessary.

Fair values of investments classified as AFS securities The FHLBNY’s investments classified as AFS are primarily GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities (MBS), which are recorded at fair values. The MBS fair values are estimated by management using specialized pricing services that employ pricing models or quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics. The FHLBNY has established that the pricing vendors use methods that generally employ, but are not limited to, benchmark yields, recent trades, dealer estimates, valuation models, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings, and/or matrix pricing.

For more information about methodologies used by the FHLBNY to validate vendor pricing, and fair value “Levels” associated with assets and liabilities recorded on the FHLBNY’s Statements of Condition at December 31, 2020 and 2019, see financial statements, Note 18.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

Derivatives and Hedging Activities

The FHLBNY hedges the risk of changes in benchmark interest rates under the provisions of ASC 815. In years prior to 2020, the benchmark rate has been primarily LIBOR; LIBOR rates are derived from an average of submissions by panel banks. The underlying market that LIBOR seeks to reflect has become increasingly less active. A significant numbers of the FHLBNY derivatives are indexed to LIBOR. The Alternative Reference Rates Committee (ARRC) in the U.S. has settled on the establishment of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) as its recommended alternative to U.S. dollar LIBOR. The United Kingdom's Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which oversees LIBOR, has announced that the FCA would no longer persuade or compel member panel banks to make LIBOR quote submissions for U.S. dollar LIBOR setting of 1-month and 3-month, two key LIBOR settings, so that submissions will permanently cease after June 30, 2023.

The FASB has issued Accounting Standard Updates to facilate the transition to SOFR. See Note 2. FASB Standards Issued But Not Yet Adopted. We are continuing to review expedients offered under the updates for opportunities to streamline the transition to SOFR without impacting ASC 815 accounting. In October 2020, we elected to adopt SOFR as the appropriate index to discount interest rate swaps cleared by the two major central swap clearing organizations as a start to an orderly transition to SOFR.

Generally, we enter into derivatives primarily to manage our exposure to changes in interest rates. Through the use of derivatives, we may adjust the effective maturity, repricing frequency, or option characteristics of financial instruments to achieve our risk management objectives. The accounting guidance related to derivatives and hedging activities is complex and contains prescriptive documentation requirements. At the inception of each hedge transaction, we formally document the hedge relationship, its risk management objective, and strategy for undertaking the hedge.

In compliance with accounting standards, primarily ASC 815, the accounting for derivatives requires us to make the following assumptions and estimates:  (i) assessing whether the hedging relationship qualifies for hedge accounting, (ii) assessing whether an embedded derivative should be bifurcated, (iii) calculating the effectiveness of the hedging relationship, (iv) evaluating exposure associated with counterparty credit risk, and (v) estimating the fair value of the derivatives.  Our assumptions and judgments include subjective estimates based on information available as of the date of the financial statements and could be materially different based on different assumptions, calculations, and estimates.

To qualify as an accounting hedge under the hedge accounting rules (versus an economic hedge where hedge accounting is not sought), a derivative must be highly effective in offsetting the risk designated as being hedged. The hedge relationship must be formally documented at inception, detailing the particular risk management objective and strategy for the hedge, which includes the item and risk that is being hedged and the derivative that is being used, as well as how effectiveness will be assessed and measured.  The effectiveness of these hedging relationships is evaluated on a retrospective and prospective basis, typically using quantitative measures of correlation. For hedges that are highly effective, changes in the fair values of the hedging instrument and the offsetting changes in the fair values of the hedged item are recorded in current earnings.  If a hedge relationship is found to be not highly effective, it will no longer qualify as an accounting hedge and hedge accounting would be prospectively withdrawn. When hedge accounting is discontinued, the offsetting changes of fair values of the hedged item are also discontinued.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The FHLBNY records derivatives on trade date, and hedge accounting commences on trade date, at which time subsequent changes to the derivative’s fair value are recorded along with the offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged. On settlement date, the basis adjustments to the hedged item’s carrying amount are combined with the principal amounts and the basis becomes part of the total carrying amount of the hedged item. The FHLBNY has defined its market settlement conventions for hedged items to be five business days or less for advances and thirty calendar days or less, using a next business day convention, for Consolidated obligations bonds and discount notes. These market settlement conventions are the shortest period possible for each type of advance and Consolidated obligations from the time the instruments are committed to the time they settle.

The FHLBNY reports derivative assets and derivative liabilities in its Statements of Condition after giving effect to legally enforceable master netting, or when an agreement is not available as with OTC cleared derivatives, enforceability is based on a legal analysis or legal opinion. Reported Derivative assets and liabilities include interest receivable and payable on derivative contracts and the fair values of the derivative contracts. The Bank records cash collateral received and posted in the Statements of Condition as an adjustment to Derivative assets and liabilities in the following manner Cash collateral posted by the FHLBNY is reported as a deduction to Derivative liabilities; cash collateral received from derivative counterparties is reported as a deduction to Derivative assets. Cash posted by the FHLBNY in excess of margin requirements is recorded as a receivable in Derivative assets. Variation margin exchanged with Derivative Clearing Organizations on cleared derivatives is treated as a settlement of the derivative itself, a reduction of the fair value of the derivative, and not as collateral.

When derivative counterparties pledge marketable securities, they typically retain title and the securities are treated as non-cash collateral. When the FHLBNY pledges securities to counterparties, we also retain title to the securities and treat the securities as collateral. Securities pledged or received are not netted against the derivative exposures on the Statements of Condition.

The FHLBNY routinely issues debt to investors and makes advances to members. In certain such instruments, the FHLBNY may embed a derivative. Typically, such derivatives are call and put options to early terminate the instruments at par on pre-determined dates. The FHLBNY may also embed interest rate caps and floors, or step-up or step-down interest rate features within the instruments. The FHLBNY also routinely structures interest rate swaps to hedge the FHLBank debt and advances, and the FHLBNY may also embed derivative instruments, such as those identified in the previous discussion, in the swaps. When such instruments are conceived, designed and structured, our control procedures require the identification and evaluation of embedded derivatives, as defined under accounting standards for derivatives and hedging activities. This evaluation will consider whether the economic characteristics of the embedded derivative are clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the remaining component of the advance or debt (the host contract) and whether a separate, non-embedded instrument with the same terms as the embedded instrument would meet the definition of a derivative instrument.

Typically, we execute derivatives under three hedging strategies — by designating them as a fair value or cash flow hedge of an underlying financial instrument or a forecasted transaction that qualifies for hedge accounting treatment; by acting as an intermediary; or by designating the derivative as an asset-liability management hedge (i.e. an “economic hedge”). Derivative contracts hedging the risks associated with changes in fair value are referred to as fair value hedges, while contracts hedging the variability of expected future cash flows are cash flow hedges. Other than to elect the amendments under ASU 2017-12, which expanded the strategies that qualify for hedge accounting and simplified the application of hedge accounting, no other changes were made to hedge accounting strategies.

Fair Value Hedges.

Hedging of Benchmark interest Rate Risk — The FHLBNY’s fair value hedges are primarily hedges of fixed-rate Consolidated obligation bonds and fixed-rate advances, and beginning in 2019 we have executed fair value hedges of available-for-sale securities. For qualifying fair value hedges of interest rate risk, the changes in the fair value of the derivative and the changes in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk, either total cash flows or

benchmark only cash flows, are presented within Interest income or Interest expense based on whether the hedged item is an asset or a liability. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-12, changes to the fair value of the derivative and the qualifying hedged item were presented in Other income (loss), a line item below the Net interest income line in the Statements of income.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The two principal fair value hedging activities are summarized below:

Consolidated Obligations — The FHLBNY may manage the risk arising from changing market prices and volatility of a Consolidated obligation debt by matching the cash inflows on the derivative with the cash outflow on the Consolidated obligation debt and may include early termination features or options. In general, whenever we issue a longer-term fixed-rate debt, or a fixed-rate debt with call or put or other embedded options, we will simultaneously execute a derivative transaction, generally an interest rate swap, with terms that offset the terms of the fixed-rate debt, or terms of the debt with embedded put or call options or other options. When a fixed-rate debt is hedged, the combination of the fixed-rate debt and the derivative transaction effectively creates a variable rate liability, indexed to a benchmark interest rate.

Advances — We offer a wide array of advances structures to meet members’ funding needs. These advances may have maturities up to 30 years with fixed or adjustable rates and may include early termination features or options. We may use derivatives to adjust the repricing and/or options characteristics of advances to more closely match the characteristics of its funding liabilities. In general, whenever a member executes a longer term fixed-rate advance, or a fixed-rate advance with call or put or other embedded options, we will simultaneously execute a derivative transaction, generally an interest rate swap, with terms that offset the terms of the fixed-rate advance, or terms of the advance with embedded put or call options or other options. When a fixed-rate advance is hedged, the combination of the fixed-rate advance and the derivative transaction effectively creates a variable rate asset, indexed to a benchmark interest rate.

In the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and 2019, the FHLBNY executed interest rate hedges employing strategies under the new guidance for “partial-term hedges” and “benchmark rate component hedging”. The two strategies are among several hedging strategies permitted under the recently adopted ASU 2017-12.

The partial-term hedging strategy makes it possible to hedge selected fixed-rate payments in a fair value hedge of interest rate risk. While U.S. GAAP has long permitted entities to designate one or more contractual cash flows in a financial instrument, the hedge strategy could result in hedge ineffectiveness. This is because the fair value of the hedging instrument and the hedged item would react differently to changes in interest rates because the principal repayment of the debt occurs on a different date than the swap’s maturity. ASU 2017-12 addressed this issue by allowing entities to calculate the change in the fair value of the hedged item in a partial-term hedge of a fixed-rate financial instrument using an assumed term that begins when the first hedged cash flow begins to accrue and ends when the last hedged cash flow is due and payable. Similar to other fair value hedges, where the hedged item is an asset, the fair value of the hedged item attributable to interest rate risk is recorded in P&L and presented in Interest income from investments along with the change in the fair value of the hedging instrument. The new strategy has been utilized by the FHLBNY for hedging certain AFS designated mortgage-backed securities.

Benchmark rate component hedging is permitted under the ASU, which addressed the issue that measuring changes in the fair value of the hedged item using the total coupon cash flows misrepresents the true effectiveness of these hedging relationships. Additionally, these hedging relationships are not meant to manage credit risk, and that using the total contractual cash flows to determine the change in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to the change in the benchmark interest rate creates an earnings mismatch that reflects the portion of the financial instrument that the entity does not intend to hedge. The new guidance addresses these issues by allowing entities to use either (1) the full contractual coupon cash flows or (2) the benchmark rate component of the contractual coupon cash flows to calculate the change in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to changes in the benchmark interest rate in a fair value hedge of interest rate risk. We have used the concept selectively.

Discontinuation of Hedge Accounting. When hedge accounting is discontinued because the FHLBNY determines that the derivative no longer qualifies as an effective Fair value hedge of an existing hedged item, the FHLBNY continues to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value, ceases to adjust the hedged asset or liability for changes in fair value, and amortizes the cumulative basis adjustment on the hedged item into earnings over the remaining life of the hedged item (for callable as well as non-callable previously hedged debt and advances) using the level-yield methodology. When the hedged item is a firm commitment, and hedge accounting is discontinued because the hedged item no longer meets the definition of a firm commitment, the FHLBNY would continue to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value, removing from the balance sheet any asset or liability that was recorded to recognize the firm commitment and recording it as a gain or loss in current period earnings.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

When hedge accounting is discontinued because the FHLBNY determines that the derivative no longer qualifies as an effective Cash flow hedge of an existing hedged item, the FHLBNY continues to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value; fair value marks previously recorded as basis adjustment in AOCI are reclassified to earnings when earnings are affected by the existing hedge item, which is the original forecasted transaction. Fair value changes on derivatives that are no longer in a hedge relationship are charged directly to earnings. Under limited circumstances, when the FHLBNY discontinues cash flow hedge accounting because it is no longer probable that the forecasted transaction will occur in the originally expected period plus the following two months, but it is probable the transaction will still occur in the future, the gain or loss on the derivative remains in AOCI and is recognized into earnings when the forecasted transaction affects earnings. However, if it is probable that a forecasted transaction will not occur by the end of the originally specified time period or within two months after that, the gains and losses that were included in AOCI are recognized immediately in earnings.

The FHLBNY treats modifications of hedged items (e.g. reduction in par amounts, change in maturity date, and change in strike rates) that are other than minor as a termination of a hedge relationship, and previously recorded hedge basis adjustments of the hedged items are amortized over the life of the hedged item.

Credit Losses under ASU 2016-13 Recently Adopted Accounting Guidance

The FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326), which became effective for the Bank as of January 1, 2020. The adoption of this guidance established a single allowance framework for all financial assets carried at amortized cost, including advances, loans, held-to-maturity securities, other receivables and certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. We have elected to evaluate expected credit losses on interest receivable separately. For available-for-sale securities where fair value is less than cost, credit-related impairment, if any, will be recognized in an allowance for credit losses and adjusted each period for changes in expected credit risk. This framework requires that management’s estimate reflects credit losses over the full remaining expected life and considers expected future changes in macroeconomic conditions.

For a description of how expected losses are developed including interest receivable, refer to notes to financial statements:

Note 4.Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell.

Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures

Accounting Standards Codification Topic 820, Fair Value Measurements, discusses how entities should measure fair value based on whether the inputs to those valuation techniques are observable or unobservable.  Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability between market participants at the measurement date.  This definition is based on an exit price rather than transaction or entry price.

Valuation Techniques — Three valuation techniques are prescribed under the fair value measurement standards — Market approach, Income approach and Cost approach.  Valuation techniques for which sufficient data is available and that are appropriate under the circumstances should be used.

In determining fair value, the FHLBNY uses various valuation methods, including both the market and income approaches.

·                  Market approach — This technique uses prices and other relevant information generated by market transactions involving identical or comparable assets or liabilities.

·                  Income approach — This technique uses valuation techniques to convert future amounts (for example, cash flows or earnings) to a single present amount (discounted), based on assumptions used by market participants.  When the income approach is used, the fair value measurement reflects current market

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

expectations about those future amounts.  The present value technique used to measure fair value depends on the facts and circumstances specific to the asset or liability being measured and the availability of data.

·                  Cost approach — This approach is based on the amount that currently would be required to replace the service capacity of an asset (often referred to as current replacement cost).

The FHLBNY has complied with the accounting standards under Fair Value Measurement that defines fair value, establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value, and requires disclosure about fair value measurement.

For more information about the fair value hierarchy, and the hierarchy levels of the FHLBNY’s financial instruments, see

Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

On a recurring basis, fair values were measured and recorded in the Statements of Condition for derivatives, available-for-sale securities (“AFS securities”), securities designated as trading, and financial instruments elected under the Fair Value Option (“FVO”).

On a non-recurring basis, credit impaired (OTTI) held-to-maturity securities were measured and recorded at their fair values in the Statements of Condition.  When credit impaired mortgage loans held-for-portfolio were partially charged off, the loans were written down to their collateral values on a non-recurring basis.

Fair values of derivative positions — The FHLBNY is an end-user of over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives to hedge assets, liabilities, and certain firm commitments to mitigate fair value risks.  Valuations of derivative assets and liabilities reflect the value of the instrument including the value associated with counterparty risk.  Derivative values also take into account the FHLBNY’s own credit standing.  The computed fair values of the FHLBNY’s OTC derivatives take into consideration the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements that allow the FHLBNY to settle positive and negative positions and offset cash collateral with the same counterparty on a net basis.  The agreements include collateral thresholds that reflect the net credit differential between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparties.  On a contract-by-contract basis, the collateral and netting arrangements sufficiently mitigated the impact of the credit differential between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparties to an immaterial level such that an adjustment for nonperformance risk was not deemed necessary.

Fair values of investments classified as AFS securities — The FHLBNY’s investments classified as AFS are primarily mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”) that are GSE issued variable-rate collateralized mortgage obligations and are recorded at fair values.  The MBS fair values are estimated by management using specialized pricing services that employ pricing models or quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics.  The FHLBNY has established that the pricing vendors use methods that generally employ, but are not limited to, benchmark yields, recent trades, dealer estimates, valuation models, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings, and/or matrix pricing.

Fair values of Other assets and liabilities — For more information about methodologies used by the FHLBNY to validate vendor pricing, and fair value “Levels” associated with assets and liabilities recorded on the FHLBNY’s Statements of Condition at December 31, 2017 and 2016, see financial statements, 7.

Available-for-Sale Securities.
Note 17.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

Classification of Investment Securities

The FHLBNY classifies investment securities as held-to-maturity and available-for-sale at the date of the acquisition.  Investments are primarily GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities.  Purchases and sales of securities are recorded on a trade date basis.  Prepayments are estimated for purposes of amortizing premiums and accreting discounts on investment securities in accordance with accounting standards for investments in debt and equity securities, which requires premiums and discounts to be recognized in income at a constant effective yield over the life of the instrument.  Because actual prepayments often deviate from the estimates, the effective yield is recalculated periodically to reflect actual prepayments to date.  Adjustments of the effective yields for mortgage-backed securities are recorded on a retrospective basis, as if the new estimated life of the security had been known at its original acquisition date.

The Bank’s management approved a trading portfolio in December 2016 to enhance the FHLBNY’s liquidity position.  The trading portfolio is invested in U.S. Treasury securities and GSE-issued bonds.  The securities are held for liquidity purposes and carried at fair value with changes in the fair value of these investments recorded in other income.  The Bank does not participate in speculative trading practices and holds these investments indefinitely as the FHLBNY periodically evaluates its liquidity needs.

8.

Held-to-Maturity Securities — The FHLBNY classifies investments for which it has both the ability and intent to hold to maturity as held-to-maturity investments.  Such investments are recorded at amortized cost basis, which includes adjustments made to the cost of an investment for accretion and amortization of discounts and premiums, collection of cash and, if hedged, the fair value hedge accounting adjustments.  If a held-to-maturity security is determined to be credit impaired or other-than-temporarily impaired (“OTTI”), the amortized cost basis of the security is adjusted for credit losses.  Amortized cost basis of a held-to-maturity OTTI security is further adjusted for impairment related to all other factors (also referred as the non-credit component of OTTI) and recognized in AOCI; the adjusted amortized cost basis is the carrying value of the OTTI security as reported in the Statements of Condition.  Carrying value for a held-to-maturity security that is not OTTI is its amortized cost basis.  Interest earned on such securities is included in Interest income.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

In accordance with accounting standards for investments in debt and equity securities, sales of debt securities that meet either of the following two conditions may be considered as maturities for purposes of the classification of securities: (1) the sale occurs near enough to its maturity date (or call date if exercise of the call is probable) such that interest rate risk is substantially eliminated as a pricing factor and the changes in market interest rates would not have a significant effect on the security’s fair value, or (2) the sale of a security occurs after the FHLBNY has already collected a substantial portion (at least 85%) of the principal outstanding at acquisition.

Available-for-Sale Securities — The FHLBNY classifies investments that it may sell before maturity as AFS and carries them at fair value.  Until AFS securities are sold, changes in fair values are recorded in AOCI as Net unrealized gain or (loss) on AFS securities.  The FHLBNY computes gains and losses on sales of investment securities using the specific identification method and includes these gains and losses in Other income (loss).

Trading Securities — Securities classified as trading are held for liquidity purposes and carried at fair value.  We record changes in the fair value of these investments through Other income as net realized and unrealized gains or losses on trading securities.  The Finance Agency prohibits speculative trading practices but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio.  We periodically evaluate our liquidity needs and may dispose these investments as deemed prudent by liquidity and market conditions.

Other-Than-Temporary Impairment (“OTTI”)  Accounting and Governance Policies, and Impairment Analysis

The Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) guidance on the recognition and presentation of OTTI is primarily intended to provide greater clarity to investors about the credit and non-credit component of an OTTI event and to more effectively communicate when an OTTI event has occurred.  The guidance is incorporated in the FHLBNY’s investment policies, and is summarized below.

The FHLBNY evaluates its investments for impairment quarterly, and determines if unrealized losses are temporary based in part on the creditworthiness of the issuers, and in part on the underlying collateral within the structure of the security and the cash flows expected to be collected on the security.  A security is considered impaired if its fair value is less than its amortized cost basis.

To assess whether the amortized cost basis of the FHLBNY’s private-label MBS will be recovered in future periods, the FHLBNY performs OTTI analysis by cash flow testing its entire portfolio of private-label MBS, all of which were classified as held-to-maturity.  The FHLBNY evaluates its individual securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, government agencies, or state and local housing agencies by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the guarantees underlying the securities.  Additional testing is performed on housing agency bonds by a review of fair values of bonds that are in unrealized loss position to assess whether fair values are in line with pricing curves with similar credit parameters.

If a decision to sell the impaired investment has not been made, but management concludes that it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell such a security before recovery of the amortized cost basis of the security, an OTTI is also considered to have occurred.

For the FHLBNY’s PLMBS, even if management does not intend to sell an impaired PLMBS, management determines whether an OTTI has occurred by comparing the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected to the amortized cost basis of the security.  If the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected is less than the security’s amortized cost, an OTTI exists, irrespective of whether management will be required to sell such a security.  The FHLBNY’s methodology to calculate the present value of expected cash flows is to discount the expected cash flows (principal and interest) of a fixed-rate security that is being evaluated for OTTI, by using the effective interest rate of the security as of the date it was acquired.  For a variable-rate security that is evaluated for OTTI, the expected cash flows are computed using a forward-rate curve and discounted using the forward rates.

If the FHLBNY determines that OTTI has occurred, it accounts for the investment security as if it had been purchased on the measurement date of the other-than-temporary impairment.  The investment security is written down to fair value, which becomes its new amortized cost basis.  The new amortized cost basis is not adjusted for subsequent recoveries in fair value.

For securities designated as AFS, subsequent unrealized changes to the fair values (other than OTTI) are recorded in AOCI.  For securities designated as HTM or held-to-maturity, the amount of OTTI recorded in AOCI for the non-credit component of OTTI is amortized prospectively over the remaining life of the securities based on the timing and amounts of estimated future cash flows.  Amortization out of AOCI is offset by an increase in the carrying value of securities until the securities are repaid or are sold or additional OTTI is recognized in earnings.

If subsequent evaluation indicates a significant increase in cash flows greater than previously expected to be collected or if actual cash flows are significantly greater than previously expected, the increases are accounted for as a prospective adjustment to the accretable yield through interest income.  In subsequent periods, if the fair value of the investment security has further declined below its then-current carrying value and there has been a decrease in the estimated cash flows the FHLBNY expects to collect, the FHLBNY will deem the security as OTTI.  Accretion to interest income will be discontinued and will resume if improvements in cash flows are subsequently observed.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

OTTI FHLBank System Governance Committee — The OTTI Governance Committee (“OTTI Committee”) of the FHLBanks has the responsibility for reviewing and approving key modeling assumptions, inputs, and methodologies to be used by the FHLBanks to generate the cash flow projections used in analyzing credit losses and determining OTTI for PLMBS, also referred to as the “Common platform”.  The goal is to promote consistency among all FHLBanks in the process for determining OTTI for PLMBS.  The OTTI Committee charter provides a formal process by which the FHLBanks can provide input on and approve the assumptions.  FHLBanks that hold the same PLMBS are required to consult with one another to make sure that any decision that a commonly held PLMBS is OTTI, including the determination of fair value and the credit loss component of the unrealized loss, is consistent among those FHLBanks.

Consistent with guidelines provided by the OTTI Committee, the FHLBNY has contracted with the FHLBanks of San Francisco and Chicago to provide cash flows using the Common platform for about 50% of its PLMBS that had appropriate loan-level performance data that the Common platform could utilize to generate cash flows.  Cash flows generated in the Common platform is the primary source for OTTI assumption parameters for those securities.  For the remaining 50% of the FHLBNY’s PLMBS portfolio, expected cash flows are generated using historical loan performance parameters, as described below.

Cash Flow Analysis Derived from the FHLBNY’s Own Assumptions  Assessment for OTTI employed by the FHLBNY’s own techniques and assumptions are determined primarily using historical performance data.  These are then benchmarked by comparing to performance parameters from the “Market consensus” measures, and for 50% of PLMBS to the assumptions and parameters provided through the Common platform, which is the primary source for OTTI assumption parameters for about 50% of our portfolio of PLMBS.  The FHLBNY performs a review of the cash flows generated by the Common platform.

For bonds that are not evaluated under the Common platform, we calculate the historical average of each bond’s prepayments, defaults, and loss severities, and considers other factors such as delinquencies and foreclosures, primarily based on performance statistics extracted from reports from trustees, loan servicers and other sources.  Many of the FHLBNY’s PLMBS are insured by monoline insurers, and the FHLBNY makes an assessment of the monoline’s ability to fulfill its guarantee obligations to cover future cash flow shortfalls.  The analysis also considers various characteristics of each security including, but not limited to, the following: the credit rating and related outlook or status; the creditworthiness of the issuers of the debt securities; the underlying type of collateral; the year of securitization or vintage, the duration and level of the unrealized loss, credit enhancements, if any; and other collateral-related characteristics such as FICO® credit scores, and delinquency rates.  The relative importance of this information varies based on the facts and circumstances surrounding each security as well as the economic environment at the time of assessment.

Under the FHLBNY’s internal processes, each bond’s performance parameters, primarily prepayments, defaults and loss severities, and bond insurance financial guarantee predictors, as calculated by the FHLBNY’s internal approach are then input into the specialized bond cash flow model that allocates the projected collateral level losses to the various security classes in the securitization structure in accordance with its prescribed cash flow and loss allocation rules.  In a securitization in which the credit enhancements for the senior securities are derived from the presence of subordinate securities, losses are generally allocated first to the subordinate securities until their principal balance is reduced to zero.

Cash Flows derived by the FHLBanks OTTI Committee — The Common platform considers borrower characteristics and the particular attributes of the loans underlying a security, in conjunction with assumptions about future changes in home prices and interest rates, to project prepayments, defaults and loss severities.

·                  the remaining payment terms for the security;

·                  reliance on monoline insurers to fulfill guarantees;

·                  prepayment speeds based on underlying loan-level borrower and loan characteristics;

·                  default rates based on underlying loan-level borrower and loan characteristics;

·                  loss severity on the collateral supporting each FHLBank’s security based on underlying loan-level borrower and loan characteristics;

·                  expected housing price changes; and

·                  interest-rate assumptions.

Future loan performance parameters, such as projected prepayments, defaults and loss severities, and others, are then input into a second model that allocates the projected loan level cash flows and losses to the various security classes in the securitization structure in accordance with its prescribed cash flow and loss allocation rules.  In a securitization in which the credit enhancement for the senior securities is derived from the presence of subordinate securities, losses are generally allocated first to the subordinate securities until their principal balance is reduced to zero.

GSE-Issued Securities — The FHLBNY evaluates its individual securities issued by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or government agency, collectively GSE or Agency securities, by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the GSE’s guarantees of the securities.  Based on the FHLBNY’s analysis, GSE securities are performing in accordance with their contractual agreements.  The Housing Act contains provisions allowing the U.S. Treasury to provide support to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  In September 2008, the U.S. Treasury and the Finance Agency placed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac into conservatorship in an attempt to stabilize their financial conditions and their ability to support the secondary mortgage market.  The FHLBNY believes that it will recover its investments in GSE and agency issued securities given the current levels of collateral and credit enhancements and guarantees that exist to protect the investments.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell

Federal Funds Sold.  Federal funds sold are recorded at cost on settlement date and interest is accrued using contractual rates.

Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell.  As part of FHLBNY’s banking activities with counterparties, the FHLBNY may enter into secured financing transactions that mature overnight, and can be extended only at the discretion of the FHLBNY.  These transactions involve the lending of cash, against which securities are taken as collateral.  The FHLBNY does not have the right to repledge the securities received.  Securities purchased under agreements to resell generally do not constitute a transfer of the underlying securities.  The FHLBNY treats securities purchased under agreements to resell as collateralized financings because the counterparty retains control of the securities.  Interest from such securities is included in Interest income.  The FHLBNY did not have any offsetting liabilities related to its securities purchased under agreements to resell for the periods presented.

Advances

Accounting for Securities.

Note 9.Advances. The FHLBNY reports advances at amortized cost, net of unearned commitment fees, discounts and premiums (discounts are generally associated with advances for the Affordable Housing Program).  If the advance is hedged in a benchmark hedge, its carrying value will include hedging valuation adjustments, which will typically be the result of changes in the LIBOR index.  If an advance is accounted under the Fair Value Option, the carrying value of the advances elected will be its fair value.

The FHLBNY records interest on advances to income as earned, and amortizes the premium and accretes the discounts on a contractual basis to interest income using a level-yield methodology.  Typically, advances are issued at par.

Impairment Analysis of Advances.  An advance will be considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the FHLBNY will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the advance agreement.  The FHLBNY has established asset classification and reserve policies.  All adversely classified assets of the FHLBNY will have a reserve established for probable losses.  Following the requirements of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932 (“FHLBank Act”), as amended, the FHLBNY obtains sufficient collateral on advances to protect it from losses.  The FHLBank Act limits eligible collateral to certain investment securities, residential mortgage loans, cash or deposits with the FHLBNY, and other eligible real estate related assets.  Borrowing members pledge their capital stock of the FHLBNY as additional collateral for advances.

The FHLBNY has not incurred any credit losses on advances since its inception.  Based upon the financial condition of its borrowers, the collateral held as security on the advances and repayment history, management of the FHLBNY believes that an allowance for credit losses on advances is unnecessary.

Advance Modifications.  From time to time, the FHLBNY will enter into an agreement with a member to modify the terms of an existing advance.  The FHLBNY evaluates whether the modified advance meets the accounting criteria under ASC 310-20 to qualify as a modification of an existing advance or as a new advance in accordance with provisions under creditor’s accounting for a modification or exchange of debt instruments.  The evaluation includes analysis of (i) whether the effective yield on the new advance is at least equal to the effective yield for a comparable advance to a similar member that is not refinancing or restructuring, and (ii) whether the modification of the original advance is more than minor.  If the FHLBNY determines that the modification is more than minor, the transaction is treated as an advance termination and the subsequent funding of a new advance, with gains or losses recognized in earnings for the period.  If the advance is in a hedging relationship, and the modification is more than minor, the FHLBNY will consider the hedge relationship as terminated and previously recorded hedge basis adjustments are amortized over the life of the hedged advance through interest income as a yield adjustment.  If the modification of the hedged item and the derivative instrument is considered minor, and if the hedge relationship is de-designated and contemporaneously re-designated, the FHLBNY would not require amortization of previously recorded hedge basis adjustments, although the assumption of no ineffectiveness is removed if the hedge was previously designated as a short-cut hedge.

The FHLBNY performs a “test of a modification” under the guidance provided in ASC 310-20-35-11 each time a new advance is borrowed within a short-period of time, typically 5 business days after a prepayment.  If a prepayment fee is received on an advance that is determined to be a modification of the original advance, the fee would be deferred, recorded in the basis of the modified advance, and amortized over the life of the modified advance using the level-yield method.  This amortization would be recorded as a component of interest income from advances.

Prepayment Fees on Advances.  Generally, advances are prepaid by members at their fair values.  The FHLBNY also charges the member a prepayment fee to make the FHLBNY financially indifferent to the early termination of the advance.

For a prepaid advance that had been hedged under a qualifying fair value hedge, the FHLBNY would terminate the hedging relationship.  Typically, the FHLBNY would terminate the interest rate swap, and would record the fair value exchanged with the swap counterparty as its settlement value.  Prepayment fees received from the prepaying member to make the FHLBNY financially indifferent is recognized in earnings as interest income from advances.

For prepaid advances that are not hedged or that are economically hedged, the FHLBNY would also charge the member the fair value of the advance, in addition to a prepayment fee that would make the FHLBNY financially indifferent to the early termination.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Beginning with the fourth quarter of 2015, the FHLBNY offers a rebate, which is typically a portion of the prepayment fee charged to a member to make the FHLBNY financially indifferent.  The rebate is contingent upon the prepaying member borrowing new advances within a 30-day period following prepayment, satisfying conditions to qualify for the rebate, and complying with the then prevailing terms and conditions for borrowing new advances.

At the time a prepayment fee is received, a portion of the fee that is deemed to be potentially rebatable is not recognized in earnings, and is deferred as a liability as the FHLBNY considers the rebate opportunity for the member a contingency for the FHLBNY.  Until no likelihood exists, such that the member has a potential claim to a rebate within the 30-day rebate period, the potential rebatable amount will be considered to be contingently payable.  That amount will be deferred, based on the supposition that the rebatable portion of the prepayment fee may not be recognized as a revenue in its entirety because it may be subject to a claim payable to a third party, the borrowing member.

Amounts would be recorded once the contingency has been resolved, i.e. when any future potential claims to rebatable funds have expired (30-day rebate period has expired) or has been otherwise settled and resolved (member enters into new qualifying advances within the 30-day period).  Only after the member has no further claims on the funds, and the FHLBNY has no obligations to rebate funds, the deferred amounts may only then be released to earnings.  The actual rebate would depend on the amount and the maturity duration of the new advance.

Note 10.Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio

Credit Enhancement ObligationsHeld-for-Portfolio.

Note 19.Commitments and Loss Layers.  The FHLBNY and the PFI share the credit risks of the uninsured MPF loans by structuring potential credit losses into layers.  Collectability of the loans is first supported by liens on the real estate securing the loan.  For conventional mortgage loans, additional loss protection is provided by private mortgage insurance required for MPF loans with a loan-to-value ratio of more than 80% at origination, which is paid for by the borrower.  Credit losses are absorbed by the FHLBNY to the extent of the First Loss Account (“FLA”) for which the maximum exposure is estimated to be $33.3 million at December 31, 2017 and $30.9 million at December 31, 2016.  The aggregate amount of FLA is memorialized and tracked but is neither recorded nor reported as a loan loss reserve in the FHLBNY’s financial statements.  If “second losses” beyond this layer are incurred, they are absorbed through a credit enhancement provided by the PFI.  The credit enhancement held by PFIs ensures that the lender retains a credit stake in the loans it sells to the FHLBNY, or for the MPF 100 product that the PFI originates as an agent for the FHLBNY.  For assuming the second loss credit risk, PFIs receive monthly credit enhancement fees from the FHLBNY.  For most MPF products, the credit enhancement fee is accrued and paid monthly after the FHLBNY has accrued 12 months of credit enhancement fees.

For new loans acquired after May 2017, the amount of the credit enhancement is computed with the use of a Standard & Poor’s model to determine the amount of credit enhancement necessary to bring a pool of uninsured loans to a “Single A” credit risk.  Prior to May 2017, the credit enhancement was calculated to a “Double A” credit risk.  The credit enhancement becomes an obligation of the PFI.

Delivery commitment fees are charged to a PFI for extending the scheduled delivery period of the loans.  Pair-off fees may be assessed and charged to a PFI when the settlement of the delivery commitment (1) fails to occur, or (2) the principal amount of the loans purchased by the FHLBNY under a delivery commitment is not equal to the contract amount beyond established limits.

Accounting for Mortgage Loans.  The FHLBNY has the intent and ability to hold these mortgage loans for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff, and classifies mortgage loans as held-for-portfolio.  Loans are reported at their principal amount outstanding, net of premiums and discounts, which is the fair value of the mortgage loan on settlement date.  The FHLBNY defers premiums and discounts, and uses the contractual method to amortize premiums and accrete discounts on mortgage loans.  The contractual method recognizes the income effects of premiums and discounts in a manner that is reflective of the actual behavior of the mortgage loans during the period in which the behavior occurs while also reflecting the contractual terms of the assets without regard to changes in estimated prepayments based upon assumptions about future borrower behavior.

Mortgage loans are written down to their fair values either at foreclosure or to their collateral values when collectability is doubtful, typically when delinquent 180 days or greater and the loan is not well collateralized.  Mortgage loans are held-for-portfolio, and when a loan is partially charged off, the remaining loan balance is typically written down and recorded at its collateral value on a non-recurring basis (see Note 17. Fair Values of Financial Instruments)Contingencies (for off-balance sheet).

The FHLBNY records credit enhancement fees as a reduction to mortgage loan interest income.  Other non-origination fees, such as delivery commitment extension fees and pair-off fees, are considered as derivative income and recorded over the life of the commitment; all such fees were insignificant for all periods reported.

Non-Accrual Mortgage Loans.  The FHLBNY places a mortgage loan on non-accrual status when the collection of the contractual principal or interest is seriously delinquent, which for the FHLBNY is typically 90 days or more past due.  When a mortgage loan is placed on non-accrual status, accrued but uncollected interest is reversed against interest income.  A loan on non-accrual status may be restored to accrual when (1) principal and interest is no longer delinquent, (2) the FHLBNY expects to collect the remaining interest and principal, and (3) the collection is not under legal proceedings.  For mortgage loans on non-accrual status, impairment calculations would consider if the collection of the remaining principal and interest due is determined to be doubtful, and any cash received would be applied first to principal until the remaining principal amount due is collected, and then as a recovery of any charge-offs.  Any remaining cash flows would be recorded as interest income.  If the FHLBNY determines that the loan

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

servicer on a non-accrual loan has paid the accrued interest receivable as an advance, which is likely to be subject to recovery by the borrower, the FHLBNY would consider the cash received as a liability until the impaired loan returns to a performing status.  The cumulative amounts of cash received and recorded as a liability was $3.9 million at December 31, 2017 and $4.4 million at December 31, 2016.

Allowance for Credit Losses on Mortgage Loans.  The FHLBNY reviews its portfolio to identify the losses inherent within the portfolio and to determine the likelihood of collection of the principal and interest.  A valuation allowance for credit loss is separately established for each identified loan (individually evaluated) in order to provide for probable losses inherent in loans that are either classified under regulatory criteria (Special Mention, Sub-standard, Doubtful, or Loss) or seriously delinquent.  The FHLBNY deems that foreclosure is probable when its mortgage loans become seriously delinquent.  For the purposes of impairment, the FHLBNY deems loans that are in bankruptcy as impaired, regardless of their delinquency status.  Loans discharged from bankruptcy are considered as Troubled Debt Restructurings (“TDRs”), and an impairment analysis is performed if the loan is seriously delinquent.

Mortgage loans that are not seriously delinquent or are performing are assessed for impairment on a collective basis under the accounting standards for evaluating “large groups of smaller-balance homogenous loans”.  In determining our collective reserve, we base our impairment analysis by performing a “loss emergence analysis” that applies historical default rates and historical probability of default.

Credit losses calculated on a collective basis are aggregated with credit losses calculated on an individual basis.  The aggregate allowance for credit losses on mortgage loans was $1.0 million at December 31, 2017 and $1.6 million at December 31, 2016.

Impairment Methodology and Portfolio Segmentation and Disaggregation Except for VA and FHA insured mortgage loans, all MPF loans are measured for impairment and analyzed for credit losses.  Measurement of credit losses is based on current information and events and when it is probable that the FHLBNY will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement.  Credit losses are measured for impairment based on the fair value of the underlying property less estimated selling costs.  It is assumed that repayment is expected to be provided solely by the sale of the underlying property, that is, there is no other available and reliable source of repayment.  To the extent that the net fair value of the property (collateral) is less than the recorded investment in the loan, a loan loss allowance is recorded.  FHA and VA are insured loans, and are excluded from the loan-by-loan analysis.  FHA and VA insured mortgage loans have minimal inherent credit risk; risk generally arises mainly from the servicers defaulting on their obligations.  FHA and VA insured mortgage loans, if adversely classified, would have reserves established only in the event of a default of a PFI, and reserves would be based on aging, collateral value and estimated costs to recover any uninsured portion of the MPF loan.

Aside from separating conventional mortgage loans from FHA and VA insured loans, the FHLBNY has determined that no further disaggregation or portfolio segmentation is needed as the credit risk is measured at the individual loan level.

Charge-Off Policy Prior to the first quarter of 2015, the FHLBNY recorded a charge-off on a conventional loan generally at the foreclosure of a loan.

Beginning January 1, 2015, the FHLBNY adopted the guidance provided by the FHFA and accelerated the charge- off analysis when a loan is on non-accrual status for 180 days or more and the loan is not well collateralized.  The charge-off is calculated as the amount of the shortfall of the fair value of the underlying collateral, less estimated selling costs, compared to the recorded investment in the loan.

Real Estate Owned (“REO”) — REO includes assets that have been received in satisfaction of mortgage loans through foreclosure.  REO is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value less estimated selling costs of the REO.  At the date of transfer, from mortgage loan to REO, the FHLBNY recognizes a charge-off to allowance for credit losses if the fair value of the REO is less than the recorded investment in the loan.  Any subsequent realized gains, realized or unrealized losses and carrying costs are included in Other income (non-interest) in the Statements of Income.  REO is recorded in Other assets in the Statements of Condition.

Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock

Generally, the FHLBNY’s capital stock is redeemable at the option of both the member and the FHLBNY, subject to certain conditions.  The FHLBNY’s capital stock accounted for under the guidance for financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.  Dividends paid on capital stock classified as mandatorily redeemable stock are accrued at an estimated dividend rate and reported as interest expense in the Statements of Income.

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock at December 31, 2017 and 2016 represented capital stocks held by former members.

Accounting Considerations under the Capital Plan 

Applications of the incurred loss methodology to develop credit loss provisions prior to the adoption of ASU 2016-13 are also described in the notes to financial statements.

Classification of Investment Securities

The FHLBNY classifies a debt security at the date of acquisition as trading, held-to-maturity or available-for-sale. Investments designated as held-to-maturity and available-for-sale are primarily GSE-issued mortgage-backed securities, and a small portfolio of bonds issued by housing finance agencies. Investments designated as trading are primarily U.S. Treasury securities. Purchases and sales of securities are recorded on a trade date basis. Prepayments are estimated for purposes of amortizing premiums and accreting discounts on investment securities in accordance with accounting standards for investments in debt securities, which requires premiums and discounts to be recognized in income at a constant effective yield over the life of the instrument. Because actual prepayments often deviate from the estimates, the effective yield is recalculated periodically to reflect actual prepayments to date. Adjustments of the effective yields for mortgage-backed securities are recorded on a retrospective basis, as if the new estimated life of the security had been known at its original acquisition date.

The Bank’s trading portfolio is to enhance the FHLBNY’s liquidity position, and is invested typically in U.S. Treasury securities and GSE-issued bonds. The securities are carried at fair value with changes in the fair value of these investments recorded in Other income. The Bank does not participate in speculative trading practices and holds these investments indefinitely as the FHLBNY periodically evaluates its liquidity needs.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Held-to-Maturity Securities — The FHLBNY classifies debt securities for which it has both the ability and intent to hold to maturity as held-to-maturity investments.  Such investments are recorded at amortized cost basis, which includes adjustments made to the cost of an investment for accretion and amortization of discounts and premiums, collection of cash and, if hedged, the fair value hedge accounting adjustments. If a held-to-maturity security is determined to be credit impaired or other-than-temporarily impaired (formerly OTTI), the amortized cost basis of the security is adjusted for credit losses. Amortized cost basis of a held-to-maturity OTTI security is further adjusted for impairment related to all other factors (also referred as the non-credit component of OTTI) and recognized in AOCI; the adjusted amortized cost basis is the carrying value of the OTTI security as reported in the Statements of Condition. Carrying value of a held-to-maturity security that is not OTTI is its amortized cost basis. Interest earned on such securities is included in Interest income.

In accordance with accounting standards for investments in debt securities, sales of debt securities that meet either of the following two conditions may be considered as maturities for purposes of the classification of securities: (1) the sale occurs near enough to its maturity date (or call date if exercise of the call is probable) such that interest rate risk is substantially eliminated as a pricing factor and the changes in market interest rates would not have a significant effect on the security’s fair value, or (2) the sale of a security occurs after the FHLBNY has already collected a substantial portion (at least 85%) of the principal outstanding at acquisition. As permitted by the new hedge accounting guidance under ASU 2017-12, effective January 1, 2019 the FHLBNY made a one-time election and transferred $1.6 billion (amortized cost basis) of unimpaired fixed-rate GSE-issued commercial mortgage-backed securities from HTM to AFS.

Available-for-Sale Securities — The FHLBNY classifies debt securities that it may sell before maturity as AFS and carries them at fair value.  Until AFS securities are sold, changes in fair values are recorded in AOCI as Net unrealized gain or (loss) on AFS securities.  The FHLBNY computes gains and losses on sales of debt securities using the specific identification method and includes these gains and losses in Other income (loss).

Trading Securities — Debt securities classified as trading are held for liquidity purposes and carried at fair value.  We record changes in the fair value of these investments through Other income as net realized and unrealized gains or losses on trading securities.  The Finance Agency prohibits speculative trading practices but allows permitted securities to be deemed held for liquidity if invested in a trading portfolio.  We periodically evaluate our liquidity needs and may dispose these investments as deemed prudent by liquidity and market conditions.

Equity Securities — Adoption at January 1, 2018 of ASU No. 2016-01, Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, as an amendment to Financial Instruments — Overall (Subtopic 825-10) provided guidance on the measurement and classification of equity investments. Effective with the adoption of the ASU, the FHLBNY measures its equity investments at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, thus eliminating eligibility for the available-for-sale category. Prior to the adoption of the ASU, the FHLBNY classified its equity investments as AFS. The FHLBNY’s equity investments comprise of mutual fund assets in grantor trust owned by the FHLBNY. The intent of the grantor trust is to set aside cash to meet current and future payments for supplemental unfunded retirement plans. Prior period financial statements were not required to be restated under the transition provisions of this ASU.

Federal Funds Sold.  Federal funds sold are recorded at cost on settlement date and interest is accrued using contractual rates.

Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell.  As part of the FHLBNY’s banking activities with counterparties, the FHLBNY may enter into secured financing transactions that mature overnight, and can be extended only at the discretion of the FHLBNY.  These transactions involve the lending of cash, against which securities are taken as collateral.  The FHLBNY does not have the right to repledge the securities received. Securities purchased under agreements to resell generally do not constitute a transfer of the underlying securities. The FHLBNY treats securities purchased under agreements to resell as collateralized financings because the counterparty retains control of the securities. Interest from such securities is included in Interest income. The FHLBNY did not have any offsetting liabilities related to its securities purchased under agreements to resell for the periods presented.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Advances

Accounting for Advances.  The FHLBNY reports advances at amortized cost, net of any discounts and premiums (discounts are generally associated with advances for the Affordable Housing Program).  If the advance is hedged in an ASC 815 qualifying hedge, its carrying value will include hedging valuation adjustments, which will typically be the result of changes in designated benchmark index.  If an advance is accounted under the Fair Value Option, the carrying value of the advances elected will be its full fair value.

The FHLBNY records interest on advances to income as earned, and amortizes the premium and accretes the discounts on a contractual basis to interest income using a level-yield methodology.  Typically, advances are issued at par.

Impairment Analysis of Advances.  An advance will be considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the FHLBNY will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the advance agreement.  The FHLBNY has established asset classification and reserve policies.  All adversely classified assets of the FHLBNY will have a reserve established for probable losses.  Following the requirements of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act of 1932 (FHLBank Act), as amended, the FHLBNY obtains sufficient collateral on advances to protect it from losses.  The FHLBank Act limits eligible collateral to certain investment securities, residential mortgage loans, cash or deposits with the FHLBNY, and other eligible real estate related assets.  Borrowing members pledge their capital stock of the FHLBNY as additional collateral for advances.

The FHLBNY has not incurred any credit losses on advances since its inception.  Based upon the financial condition of its borrowers, the collateral held as security on the advances and repayment history, management of the FHLBNY believes that an allowance for credit losses on advances is unnecessary.

Advance Modifications.  From time to time, the FHLBNY will enter into an agreement with a member to modify the terms of an existing advance.  The FHLBNY evaluates whether the modified advance meets the accounting criteria under ASC 310-20 to qualify as a modification of an existing advance or as a new advance in accordance with provisions under creditor’s accounting for a modification or exchange of debt instruments.  The evaluation includes analysis of (i) whether the effective yield on the new advance is at least equal to the effective yield for a comparable advance to a similar member that is not refinancing or restructuring, and (ii) whether the modification of the original advance is more than minor.  If the FHLBNY determines that the modification is more than minor, the transaction is treated as an advance termination and the subsequent funding of a new advance, with gains or losses recognized in earnings for the period.  If the advance is in a hedging relationship, and the modification is more than minor, the FHLBNY will consider the hedge relationship as terminated and previously recorded hedge basis adjustments are amortized over the life of the hedged advance through interest income as a yield adjustment.  If the modification of the hedged item and the derivative instrument is considered minor, and if the hedge relationship is de-designated and contemporaneously re-designated, the FHLBNY would not require amortization of previously recorded hedge basis adjustments, although the assumption of no ineffectiveness is removed if the hedge was previously designated as a short-cut hedge.

The FHLBNY performs a “test of a modification” under the guidance provided in ASC 310-20-35-11 each time a new advance is borrowed within a short-period of time, typically 5 business days after a prepayment.  If a prepayment fee is received on an advance that is determined to be a modification of the original advance, the fee would be deferred, recorded in the basis of the modified advance, and amortized over the life of the modified advance using the level-yield method.  This amortization would be recorded as a component of interest income from advances.

Prepayment Fees on Advances.  Generally, advances are prepaid by members at their fair values.  The FHLBNY also charges the member a prepayment fee to make the FHLBNY financially indifferent to the early termination of the advance.

For a prepaid advance that had been hedged under a qualifying fair value hedge, the FHLBNY would terminate the hedging relationship.  Typically, the FHLBNY would terminate the interest rate swap, and would record the fair value exchanged with the swap counterparty as its settlement value.  Prepayment fees received from the prepaying member to make the FHLBNY financially indifferent is recognized in earnings as interest income from advances.

For prepaid advances that are not hedged or that are economically hedged, the FHLBNY would also charge the member the fair value of the advance, in addition to a prepayment fee that would make the FHLBNY financially indifferent to the early termination.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The FHLBNY offers a rebate, which is typically a portion of the prepayment fee. The rebate is contingent upon the prepaying member borrowing new advances within a 30-day period following prepayment, also satisfying conditions to qualify for the rebate, and complying with the then prevailing terms and conditions for borrowing new advances. At the time a prepayment fee is received from the borrowing member, a portion of the fee, deemed to be potentially rebatable, is not recognized in earnings. The rebatable amount is deferred as a liability as the FHLBNY considers the rebate opportunity for the member a contingency for the FHLBNY.  Until no likelihood exists, such that the member has a potential claim to a rebate within the 30-day rebate period, the potential rebatable amount will be considered to be contingently payable.  That amount will be deferred, based on the supposition that the rebatable portion of the prepayment fee may not be recognized as a revenue in its entirety because it may be subject to a claim payable to a third party, the borrowing member. Amounts would be recorded once the contingency has been resolved, i.e. when any future potential claims to rebatable funds have expired (30-day rebate period has expired) or has been otherwise settled and resolved (member enters into new qualifying advances within the 30-day period). Only after the member has no further claims on the funds, and the FHLBNY has no obligations to rebate funds, the deferred amounts may only then be released to earnings. The actual rebate would depend on the amount and the maturity duration of the new advance.

Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio

Mortgage Partnership Finance® program loans, or (MPF®), are mortgage loans held-for-portfolio. The FHLBNY participates in the MPF program by purchasing and originating conventional mortgage loans from its participating members (Participating Financial Institutions or PFIs).

We introduced a new mortgage purchase program in 2020. Amount outstanding was $0.3 million at December 31, 2020. We plan to roll out the new program fully in late March 2021. The new program, Mortgage Asset Programsm (MAP), was created based on feedback from members and is expected to better serve the needs of our district. We will cease to purchase loans in MPF Program®beginning late March 2021. Legacy MPF loans will continue to be supported by the FHLBNY and the FHLBank of Chicago as MPF Provider. In the MAP program, we will purchase investment grade, conventional one-to-four family or government-insured loans from participating members. Due to the unique credit enhancement structure and MAP program requirements of acquiring loans with strong credit quality indicators, we expect loan performance to remain within its credit quality indicators. To capitalize this activity, member sellers will also be required to purchase stock, as mandated by the FHLBNY’s capital plan, equal to 4.5% of the outstanding principal balance of the MAP assets sold by the member to the FHLBNY.  At this point, we cannot forecast with certainty the volume of loans or the income from this program. We do not expect the new program to have a significant impact on our earnings, cash flows or our operations.  MAP will help fulfill our mission by providing an off-balance sheet option of providing liquidity in all operating environments. Because of the immateriality of loans acquired, certain disclosures are omitted at December 31, 2020.

The remaining disclosures pertain to mortgage loans under the MPF program.

Credit Enhancement Obligations and Loss Layers. The FHLBNY and the PFI share the credit risks of the uninsured MPF loans by structuring potential credit losses into layers. Collectability of the loans is first supported by liens on the real estate securing the loan.  For conventional mortgage loans, additional loss protection is provided by private mortgage insurance required for MPF loans with a loan-to-value ratio of more than 80% at origination, which is paid for by the borrower.  Credit losses are absorbed by the FHLBNY to the extent of the First Loss Account (FLA) for which the maximum exposure is estimated to be $43.9 million at December 31, 2020 and $40.2 million at December 31, 2019.  The aggregate amount of FLA is memorialized and tracked but is neither recorded nor reported as a loan loss reserve in the FHLBNY’s financial statements. If “second losses” beyond this layer are incurred, they are absorbed through a credit enhancement provided by the PFI. The credit enhancement held by PFIs ensures that the lender retains a credit stake in the loans it sells to the FHLBNY, or for the MPF 100 product that the PFI originates as an agent for the FHLBNY. For assuming the second loss credit risk, PFIs receive monthly credit enhancement fees from the FHLBNY. For most MPF products, the credit enhancement fee is accrued and paid monthly after the FHLBNY has accrued 12 months of credit enhancement fees. For loans acquired after May 2017, the amount of the credit enhancement is computed with the use of a Standard & Poor’s model to determine the amount of credit enhancement necessary to bring a pool of uninsured loans to a “Single A” credit risk. Prior to May 2017, the credit enhancement was calculated to a “Double A” credit risk. The credit enhancement becomes an obligation of the PFI.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Delivery commitment fees are charged to a PFI for extending the scheduled delivery period of the loans. Pair-off fees may be assessed and charged to a PFI when the settlement of the delivery commitment (1) fails to occur, or (2) the principal amount of the loans purchased by the FHLBNY under a delivery commitment is not equal to the contract amount beyond established limits.

Accounting for Mortgage Loans.  The FHLBNY has the intent and ability to hold these mortgage loans for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff, and classifies mortgage loans as held-for-portfolio. Loans are reported at their principal amount outstanding, net of premiums and discounts, which is the fair value of the mortgage loan on settlement date. The FHLBNY defers premiums and discounts, and uses the contractual method to amortize premiums and accrete discounts on mortgage loans. The contractual method recognizes the income effects of premiums and discounts in a manner that is reflective of the actual behavior of the mortgage loans during the period in which the behavior occurs while also reflecting the contractual terms of the assets without regard to changes in estimated prepayments based upon assumptions about future borrower behavior.

Mortgage loans are written down to their fair values either at foreclosure or to their collateral values when collectability is doubtful, typically when delinquent 180 days or greater and the loan is not well collateralized. When a loan is partially charged off, the remaining loan balance is typically written down and recorded at its collateral value on a non-recurring basis (see Note 18. Fair Values of Financial Instruments).

The FHLBNY records credit enhancement fees as a reduction to mortgage loan interest income.  Other non-origination fees, such as delivery commitment extension fees and pair-off fees, are considered as derivative income and recorded over the life of the commitment; all such fees were insignificant for all periods reported.

Non-Accrual Mortgage Loans. The FHLBNY places a mortgage loan on non-accrual status when the collection of the contractual principal or interest is seriously delinquent, which for the FHLBNY is typically 90-days or more past due. When a mortgage loan is placed on non-accrual status, accrued but uncollected interest is reversed against interest income. A loan on non-accrual status may be restored to accrual when (1) principal and interest is no longer delinquent, (2) the FHLBNY expects to collect the remaining interest and principal, and (3) the collection is not under legal proceedings. For mortgage loans on non-accrual status, impairment calculations would consider if the collection of the remaining principal and interest due is determined to be doubtful, and any cash received would be applied first to principal until the remaining principal amount due is collected, and then as a recovery of any charge-offs.  Any remaining cash flows would be recorded as interest income. If the FHLBNY determines that the loan servicer on a non-accrual loan has paid the accrued interest receivable as an advance, which is likely to be subject to recovery by the borrower, the FHLBNY would consider the cash received as a liability until the impaired loan returns to a performing status.  The cumulative amounts of cash received and recorded as a liability was $1.9 million at December 31, 2020 and $1.6 million at December 31, 2019. The FHLBNY is continuing to apply its existing non-accrual standards, which is to consider a loan to be in a non-accrual status if the loan is seriously delinquent (90-days plus delinquent) on loans impacted by forbearance and deferral programs due to COVID-19.

Impairment Methodology and Portfolio Segmentation and Disaggregation Except for VA and FHA insured mortgage loans, all MPF loans are measured for impairment and analyzed for credit losses.  Measurement of credit losses is based on current information and events and when it is probable that the FHLBNY will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Credit losses are measured for impairment based on the fair value of the underlying property less estimated selling costs. It is assumed that repayment is expected to be provided solely by the sale of the underlying property, that is, there is no other available and reliable source of repayment. To the extent that the net fair value of the property (collateral) is less than the recorded investment in the loan, a loan loss allowance is recorded. FHA and VA are insured loans, and are excluded from the loan-by-loan analysis. FHA and VA insured mortgage loans have minimal inherent credit risk; risk generally arises mainly from the servicers defaulting on their obligations. FHA and VA insured mortgage loans, if adversely classified, would have reserves established only in the event of a default of a PFI, and reserves would be based on aging, collateral value and estimated costs to recover any uninsured portion of the MPF loan.

Aside from separating conventional mortgage loans from FHA and VA insured loans, the FHLBNY has determined that no further disaggregation or portfolio segmentation is needed as the credit risk is measured at the individual loan level.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Charge-Off Policy The FHLBNY complies with the guidance provided by the FHFA to perform a charge-off analysis when a loan is on non-accrual status for 180 days or more and the loan is not well collateralized. The charge-off is calculated as the amount of the shortfall of the fair value of the underlying collateral, less estimated selling costs, compared to the recorded investment in the loan.

Real Estate Owned (REO) — REO includes assets that have been received in satisfaction of mortgage loans through foreclosure.  REO is recorded at the lower of cost or fair value less estimated selling costs of the REO.  At the date of transfer, from mortgage loan to REO, the FHLBNY recognizes a charge-off to allowance for credit losses if the fair value of the REO is less than the recorded investment in the loan.  Any subsequent realized gains, realized or unrealized losses and carrying costs are included in Other income (non-interest) in the Statements of Income.  REO is recorded in Other assets in the Statements of Condition.

Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock

Generally, the FHLBNY’s capital stock is redeemable at the option of both the member and the FHLBNY, subject to certain conditions. The FHLBNY’s capital stock is accounted for under the guidance for financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.  Dividends paid on capital stock classified as mandatorily redeemable stock are accrued at an estimated dividend rate and reported as interest expense in the Statements of Income.

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock at December 31, 2020 and 2019 represented capital stocks held by former members.

Accounting Considerations under the Capital Plan — There are three triggering events that could cause the FHLBNY to repurchase capital stock.

 

·
a member requests redemption of excess membership stock;

·
a member delivers notice of its intent to withdraw from membership; or

·
a member attains non-member status (through merger into or acquisition by a non-member, charter termination, or involuntary termination from membership).

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The member’s request to redeem excess Membership Stock will be considered to be revocable until the stock is repurchased.  Since the member’s request to redeem excess Membership Stock can be withdrawn by the member without penalty, the FHLBNY considers the member’s intent regarding such request to not be substantive in nature; therefore, no reclassification to a liability will be made at the time the request is delivered.

Under the Capital Plan, when a member delivers a notification of its intent to withdraw from membership, the reclassification from equity to a liability will become effective upon receipt of the notification.  The FHLBNY considers the member’s intent regarding such notification to be substantive in nature; therefore, reclassification to a liability will be made at the time the notification of the intent to withdraw is delivered.  When a member is acquired by a non-member, the FHLBNY reclassifies stock of former members to a liability on the day the member’s charter is dissolved.  Unpaid dividends related to capital stock reclassified as a liability are accrued at an estimated dividend rate and reported as interest expense in the Statements of Income.  The repurchase of these mandatorily redeemable financial instruments is reflected as a cash outflow in the financing activities section of the Statements of Cash Flows.

The FHLBNY’s capital stock can only be acquired and redeemed at par value; and are not traded and no market mechanism exists for the exchange of stock outside the cooperative structure.

Affordable Housing Program

The FHLBank Act requires each FHLBank to establish and fund an AHP (see Note 13. Affordable Housing Program).  The FHLBNY charges the required funding for AHP to earnings and establishes a liability.  The AHP funds provide subsidies to members to assist in the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.  The AHP assessment is based on a fixed percentage of income before adjustment for dividends associated with mandatorily redeemable capital stock. Dividend payments are reported as interest expense in accordance with the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.  If the FHLBNY incurs a loss for


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

the entire year, no AHP assessment or assessment credit is due or accrued, as explained more fully in Note 13. Affordable Housing Program.

From time to time, the FHLBNY may also issue AHP advances at interest rates below the customary interest rates for non-subsidized advances.  When the FHLBNY makes an AHP advance, the present value of the variation in the cash flow caused by the difference between the AHP advance interest rate and the FHLBNY’s related cost of funds for comparable maturity funding is charged against the AHP liability.  The amounts are then recorded as a discount on the AHP advance.  As an alternative, the FHLBNY has the authority to make the AHP subsidy available to members as a grant.

Commitment Fees

The FHLBNY records the present value of fees receivable from standby letters of credit as an asset and an offsetting liability for the obligation.  Fees, which are generally received for one year in advance, are recorded as unrecognized standby commitment fees (deferred credit) and amortized monthly over the commitment period.  The FHLBNY amortizes fees received to income using the straight line method.

Premises, Software and Equipment

The Bank computes depreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of assets ranging from four to five years.  Leasehold improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the lesser of the useful life of the asset or the remaining term of the lease.  The FHLBNY capitalizes improvements and major renewals but expenses ordinary maintenance and repairs when incurred, and would include gains and losses on disposal of premises and equipment in Other income (loss).

Lease Accounting

The FHLBNY adopted ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) effective January 1, 2019. Leases are recognized on the balance sheet as a lease liability with a right-of-use asset as an offset. See Operating lease commitment disclosures in Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies.

Consolidated Obligations

Accounting for Consolidated obligation debt.  The FHLBNY reports Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes at amortized cost, net of discounts and premiums.  If the consolidated obligation debt is hedged in a benchmark hedge, its carrying value will include hedging valuation adjustments, which will typically be the changes in the LIBOR index.  The carrying value of Consolidated obligation debt elected under the FVO will be its fair value.  The FHLBNY records interest paid on Consolidated obligation bonds in interest expense.  The FHLBNY expenses the discounts on Consolidated obligation discount notes, using the level-yield method, over the term of the related notes and amortizes the discounts and premiums on callable and non-callable Consolidated bonds, also using the contractual level-yield method, over the term to maturity of the Consolidated obligation bonds.

Concessions on Consolidated Obligations.  Concessions are paid to dealers in connection with the issuance of certain Consolidated obligation bonds.  The Office of Finance prorates the amount of the concession to the FHLBNY based upon the percentage of the debt issued that is assumed by the FHLBNY.  Concessions paid on Consolidated obligation bonds elected under the FVO are expensed as incurred.  Concessions paid on Consolidated obligation bonds not designated under the FVO are deferred and amortized, using the contractual level-yield method, over the term to maturity of the Consolidated obligation bond.  Unamortized debt issuance costs are recorded in Consolidated obligation bond liabilities in the Statements of Condition. The FHLBNY charges to expense, as incurred, the concessions applicable to the sale of Consolidated obligation discount notes because of their short maturities; amounts are recorded in Consolidated obligations interest expense.

Finance Agency and Office of Finance Expenses

The FHLBNY is assessed for its proportionate share of the costs of operating the Finance Agency and the Office of Finance.  The Finance Agency is authorized to impose assessments on the FHLBanks and two other GSEs, in amounts sufficient to pay the Finance Agency’s annual operating expenses.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The Office of Finance is also authorized to impose assessments on the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, in amounts sufficient to pay the Office of Finance’s annual operating and capital expenditures.  Each FHLBank is assessed a prorated  (1) two-thirds based upon each FHLBank’s share of total Consolidated obligations outstanding and (2) one-third based upon an equal pro-rata allocation.

Earnings per Share of Capital

Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to stockholders by the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the period.  Capital stock classified as mandatorily redeemable capital stock is excluded from this calculation.  Basic and diluted earnings per share are the same, as the FHLBNY has no additional potential shares that may be dilutive.

Cash Flows

In the Statements of Cash Flows, the FHLBNY considers Cash and due from banks to be cash. Interest-bearing deposits, Federal funds sold, and securities purchased under agreements to resell are reported in the Statements of Cash Flows as investing activities.

Federal funds sold, securities purchased under agreements to resell, and deposits with other FHLBanks are deemed short-term under ASC 320 and therefore, net presentation is appropriate.

Derivative instruments — Cash flows from a derivative instrument that is accounted for as a fair value or cash flow hedge, including those designated as economic hedges, are reflected as cash flows from operating activities if the derivative instrument did not include “an other-than-insignificant” financing element at inception. When the FHLBNY executes an off-market derivative, which would typically require an up-front cash exchange, the FHLBNY will analyze the transaction and would deem it to contain a financing element if the cash exchange is more than insignificant. Financing elements are recorded as a financing activity in the Statements of Cash Flows.

Losses on debt extinguishment — Losses from debt retirement and transfers (debt retirement) are considered financing activities in the Statements of Cash Flows. Losses are added back as an adjustment to Net cash provided by operating activities, with an offsetting increase in payments on maturing Consolidated obligation bonds as a financing activity.

Note 2. FASB Standards Issued But Not Yet Adopted.

 

The member’s request to redeem excess Membership Stock will be considered to be revocable until
StandardSummary of GuidanceEffective DateEffects on the stock is repurchased.  Since the member’s request to redeem excess Membership Stock can be withdrawn by the member without penalty, the FHLBNY considers the member’s intent regarding such request to not be substantive in nature; therefore, no reclassification to a liability will be made at the time the request is delivered.

Under the Capital Plan, when a member delivers a notification of its intent to withdraw from membership, the reclassification from equity to a liability will become effective upon receiptFinancial Statements

Facilitation of the notification.Effects of Reference Rate Reform on
Financial Reporting
ASU 2020-04, Reference Rate
Reform (Topic 848)
Issued in March 2020,
as amended in January 2021
This guidance provides temporary optional guidance to ease the potential burden in accounting for reference rate reform.  The FHLBNY considers the member’s intent regarding such notificationnew guidance provides optional expedients and exceptions for applying generally accepted accounting principles to be substantive in nature; therefore, reclassification to a liability will be made at the time the notification of the intent to withdraw is delivered.  When a member is acquired by a non-member, the FHLBNY reclassifies stock of former members to a liability on the day the member’s charter is dissolved.  Unpaid dividends related to capital stock reclassified as a liability are accrued at an estimated dividend rate and reported as interest expense in the Statements of Income.  The repurchase of these mandatorily redeemable financial instruments is reflected as a cash outflow in the financing activities section of the Statements of Cash Flows.

The FHLBNY’s capital stock can only be acquired and redeemed at par value; and are not traded and no market mechanism exists for the exchange of stock outside the cooperative structure.

Affordable Housing Program

The FHLBank Act requires each FHLBank to establish and fund an AHP (see Note 12. Affordable Housing Program).  The FHLBNY charges the required funding for AHP to earnings and establishes a liability.  The AHP funds provide subsidies to members to assist in the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.  The AHP assessment is based on a fixed percentage of income before adjustment for dividends associated with mandatorily redeemable capital stock. Dividend payments are reported as interest expense in accordance with the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.  If the FHLBNY incurs a loss for the entire year, no AHP assessment or assessment credit is due or accrued, as explained more fully in Note 12. Affordable Housing Program.

From time to time, the FHLBNY may also issue AHP advances at interest rates below the customary interest rates for non-subsidized advances.  When the FHLBNY makes an AHP advance, the present value of the variation in the cash flow caused by the difference between the AHP advance interest rate and the FHLBNY’s related cost of funds for comparable maturity funding is charged against the AHP liability.  The amounts are then recorded as a discount on the AHP advance.  As an alternative, the FHLBNY has the authority to make the AHP subsidy available to members as a grant.

Commitment Fees

The FHLBNY records the present value of fees receivable from standby letters of credit as an asset and an offsetting liability for the obligation.  Fees, which are generally received for one year in advance, are recorded as unrecognized standby commitment fees (deferred credit) and amortized monthly over the commitment period.  The FHLBNY amortizes fees received to income using the straight line method.

Derivatives

All derivatives are recognized on the balance sheet at their estimated fair values, including accrued unpaid interest as either a derivative asset or a derivative liability net of cash collateral received from and posted to derivative counterparties. The FHLBNY has no foreign currency assets, liabilities or hedges.

To qualify as an accounting hedge under the hedge accounting rules (versus an economic hedge where hedge accounting is not sought), a derivative must be highly effective in offsetting the risk designated as being hedged. The hedge relationship must be formally documented at inception, detailing the particular risk management objective and strategy for the hedge, which includes the item and risk that is being hedged and the derivative that is being used, as well as how effectiveness will be assessed and ineffectiveness measured.  The effectiveness of these hedging relationships is evaluated on a retrospective and prospective basis, typically using quantitative measures of correlation with hedge ineffectiveness measured and recorded in current earnings.  If a hedge relationship is found to be ineffective, it no longer qualifies as an accounting hedge and hedge accounting would not be applied.

Realized gains or losses attributable to the derivatives and changes in the fair values of derivatives are recognized in Other Income (loss) as a Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities.  When hedge accounting is discontinued, the offsetting changes of fair values of the hedged item are also discontinued.

Each derivative is designated as one of the following:

(1)              a qualifying (a) hedge of the fair value of a recognized asset or liability or an unrecognized firm commitment (a “Fair value” hedge);

(2)              a qualifying (a) hedge of a forecasted transaction or the variability of cash flows that are to be received or paid in connection with a recognized asset or liability (a “Cash flow” hedge);

(3)              a non-qualifying (a) hedge of an asset or liability (“economic hedge”) for asset-liability management purposes; or

(4)              a non-qualifying (a) hedge of another derivative (an “intermediation” hedge) that is offered as a product to members or used to offset other derivatives with non-member counterparties.


(a)The terms “qualifying” and “non-qualifying” refer to accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

·                  Fair value hedging.  Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is designated and qualifies as a Fair value hedge, along with changes in the fair value of the hedged asset or liability that are attributable to the hedged risk (including changes that reflect losses or gains on firm commitments), are recorded in current period’s earnings in Other income (loss) as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities.

·                  Cash flow hedging.  Changes in the fair value of a derivative that is designated and qualifies as a Cash flow hedge, to the extent that the hedge is effective, are reported in AOCI, a component of equity, until earnings aretransactions affected by the variability of the cash flows of the hedged transaction (i.e., until the recognition of interest on a variablereference rate asset or liability is recorded in earnings).

Measurement of hedge ineffectiveness — For each financial statement reporting period, the FHLBNY measures the changes in the fair values of all derivatives, and changes in fair value of the hedged items attributable to the risk being hedged and reports changes through current earnings.  To the extent the changes in fair values of the derivatives do not offset the changes in the fair values of the hedged item, the difference results in hedge ineffectiveness, which is recorded in current period earnings.

For hedged items eligible for the short-cut method, the FHLBNY will assume that during the life of the hedge the change in fair value of the hedged item attributable to the benchmark interest rates (LIBOR for us) equals the change in fair value of the derivative.  The short-cut method is employed only for highly effective hedging relationships that meetreform if certain specific criteria under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging that would qualify for an assumption of no ineffectiveness.

Effectiveness testing — The FHLBNY has designed effectiveness testing criteria based on management’s knowledge of the hedged item and hedging instruments that are employed to create the hedging relationship.  The FHLBNY uses statistical analyses to evaluate effectiveness results, which must fall within established tolerances.  Effectiveness testing is performed at hedge inception and on at least a quarterly basis for both prospective considerations and retrospective evaluations.

Effectiveness is determined by how closely the changes in the fair value of the hedging instrument offset the changes in the fair value or cash flows of the hedged item relating to the risk being hedged.  Hedge accounting is permitted only if the hedging relationship is expected to be highly effective at the inception of the hedge and on an ongoing basis.  The FHLBNY assesses hedge effectiveness in the following manner:

·Inception prospective assessment.  Upon designation of themet.  These transactions include:

• contract modifications,
hedging relationship, and on an ongoing basis, the FHLBNY hedge documentation demonstrates that it expects the hedging relationship to be highly effective.  This is a forward-looking consideration.  A prospective assessment is performed at the designation
• sale or transfer of the hedging relationship.  The assessment uses sensitivity analysis employing an option-adjusted valuation model to generate changes in market value of the hedged item and the swap.  These projected market values are run under instantaneous parallel rate shocks, and the hedge is expected to be highly effective if the change in fair value of the swap divided by the change in the fair value of the hedged item is within the 80% - 125% dollar value offset boundaries.

·Retrospective assessment.  At least quarterly, the FHLBNY’s hedge documentation demonstrates whether the hedging relationship was highly effective in offsetting changes in fair value or cash flows through the date of the periodic assessment.  This is an evaluation of the past experience.  The retrospective test utilizes multiple regression and statistical validation parameters to determine that the hedging relationship was highly effective (i.e., it has remained within the 80% - 125% dollar value offset boundaries).

·Ongoing prospective assessment.  For purposes of assessing effectiveness on an ongoing basis, the FHLBNY’s documentation utilizes the regression results from the retrospective assessment as a means of demonstrating that the hedge relationships are expected to be highly effective in future periods.

Ineffectiveness on Fair value and Cash flow hedging.  For both Fair value and Cash flow hedges that qualify for hedge accounting treatment, any hedge ineffectiveness (which represents the amount by which the change in the fair value of the derivative differs from the change in the fair value of the hedged item or the variability in the cash flows of the forecasted transaction) are recorded in current period’s earnings in Other income (loss) as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities.  The differentials between accruals of interest income and expense on derivatives designated as Fair value or Cash flow hedges that qualify for hedge accounting treatment are recognized as adjustments to the interest income or expense of the hedged advances and hedged Consolidated obligations.

Derivatives in economic hedges.  Changes in the fair value of a derivative designated as economic hedges (also referred to as standalone hedges) and of a derivative that no longer qualifies as an accounting hedge are recorded in current period earnings with no fair value adjustment to the asset or liability that is being hedged on an economic basis.  The net interest associated with a standalone derivative is recorded together with changes in its fair value in Other income (loss) as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities.  When derivatives are executed as intermediated derivatives for members, the derivatives are treated as standalone derivatives.

Trade date conventions.  The FHLBNY records derivatives on trade date, but records the associated hedged Consolidated obligations and advances on settlement date.  Hedge accounting commences on trade date, at which time subsequent changes to the derivative’s fair value are recorded along with the offsetting changes in the fair value of the hedged item attributable to the risk being hedged.  On settlement date, the basis adjustments to the hedged

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

item’s carrying amount are combined with the principal amounts and the basis becomes part of the total carrying amount of the hedged item.  The FHLBNY has defined its market settlement conventions for hedged items to be five business days or less for advances and thirty calendar days or less, using a next business day convention, for Consolidated obligations bonds and discount notes.  These market settlement conventions are the shortest period possible for each type of advance and Consolidated obligation from the time the instruments are committed to the time they settle.

The FHLBNY considers hedges of committed advances and Consolidated obligation bonds eligible for the “short cut” provisions (assumption of no-ineffectiveness), as long as settlement of the committed asset or liability occurs within the market settlement conventions for that type of instrument.  A short-cut hedge is a highly effective hedging relationship that uses an interest rate swap as the hedging instrument to hedge a recognized asset or liability and that meets the criteria under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging to qualify for an assumption of no ineffectiveness.  To meet the short-cut provisions that assume no ineffectiveness, hedge accounting standards also require the fair value of the swap to approximate zero on the date the FHLBNY designates the hedge.

Embedded Derivatives.  The FHLBNY routinely issues debt to investors and makes advances to members.  In certain such instruments, the FHLBNY may embed a derivative.  Typically, such derivatives are call and put options to early terminate the instruments at par on pre-determined dates.  The FHLBNY may also embed interest rate caps and floors, or step-up or step-down interest rate features within the instruments.  The FHLBNY also routinely structures interest rate swaps to hedge the FHLBank debt and advances, and the FHLBNY may also embed derivative instruments, such as those identified in the previous discussion, in the swaps.  When such instruments are conceived, designed and structured, our control procedures require the identification and evaluation of embedded derivatives, as defined under accounting standards for derivatives and hedging activities.  This evaluation will consider whether the economic characteristics of the embedded derivative are clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the remaining component of the advance or debt (the host contract) and whether a separate, non-embedded instrument with the same terms as the embedded instrument would meet the definition of a derivative instrument.  If the FHLBNY determines that (1) the embedded derivative has economic characteristics that are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the host contract, and (2) a separate, standalone instrument with the same terms would qualify as a derivative instrument, the embedded derivative would be separated from the host contract as prescribed for hybrid financial instruments under accounting standards for derivatives and hedge accounting, and carried at fair value.  However, if the entire contract (the host contract and the embedded derivative) is to be measured at fair value, the changes in fair value would be reported in current earnings (such as an investment securitysecurities classified as “trading”; or, if the FHLBNY cannot reliably identify and measure the embedded derivative for purposes of separating that derivative from its host contract, the entire contract would be carried on the balance sheet at fair value and no portion of the contract would be designated as a hedging instrument).  The FHLBNY had no financial instruments with embedded derivatives that required separate accounting as a result of meeting the bifurcation test under ASC 815.

Discontinuation of Hedge Accounting.  When hedge accounting is discontinued because the FHLBNY determines that the derivative no longer qualifies as an effective Fair value hedge of an existing hedged item, the FHLBNY continues to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value, ceases to adjust the hedged asset or liability for changes in fair value, and amortizes the cumulative basis adjustment on the hedged item into earnings over the remaining life of the hedged item (for callable as well as non-callable previously hedged debt and advances)  using the level-yield methodology.  When the hedged item is a firm commitment, and hedge accounting is discontinued because the hedged item no longer meets the definition of a firm commitment, the FHLBNY would continue to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value, removing from the balance sheet any asset or liability that was recorded to recognize the firm commitment and recording it as a gain or loss in current period earnings.

When hedge accounting is discontinued because the FHLBNY determines that the derivative no longer qualifies as an effective Cash flow hedge of an existing hedged item, the FHLBNY continues to carry the derivative on the balance sheet at its fair value and reclassifies the basis adjustment in AOCI to earnings when earnings are affected by the existing hedge item, which is the original forecasted transaction.  Under limited circumstances, when the FHLBNY discontinues cash flow hedge accounting because it is no longer probable that the forecasted transaction will occur in the originally expected period plus the following two months, but it is probable the transaction will still occur in the future, the gain or loss on the derivative remains in AOCI and is recognized into earnings when the forecasted transaction affects earnings.  However, if it is probable that a forecasted transaction will not occur by the end of the originally specified time period or within two months after that, the gains and losses that were included in AOCI are recognized immediately in earnings.

The FHLBNY treats modifications of hedged items (e.g. reduction in par amounts, change in maturity date, and change in strike rates) that are other than minor as a termination of a hedge relationship, and previously recorded hedge basis adjustments of the hedged items are amortized over the life of the hedged item.

Hedges of Similar Assets.  It is not our practice to engage in portfolio hedging.  However, from time-to-time, we may execute interest rate swaps in a portfolio hedge of advances if the hedge meets the specific provisions under hedge accounting.  The FHLBNY has insignificant amounts of similar advances that were hedged in aggregate as a portfolio.  For such hedges, the FHLBNY performs a similar asset test for homogeneity to ensure the hedged advances share the risk exposure for which they are designated as being hedged.  Other than the very limited number of portfolio hedges, our other hedged items and derivatives are hedged as separately identifiable instruments.

Cash Collateral Associated with Derivative Contracts.  The FHLBNY reports derivative assets and derivative liabilities in its Statements of Condition after giving effect to legally enforceable master netting, or when an agreement is not available as with OTC cleared derivatives, enforceability is based on a legal analysis or legal opinion.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Reported Derivative assets and liabilities include interest receivable and payable on derivative contracts and the fair values of the derivative contracts.  The Bank records cash collateral received and posted in the Statements of Condition as an adjustment to Derivative assets and liabilities in the following manner — Cash collateral posted by the FHLBNY is reported as a deduction to Derivative liabilities; cash collateral received from derivative counterparties is reported as a deduction to Derivative assets.  Cash posted by the FHLBNY in excess of margin requirements is recorded as a receivable in Derivative assets.

Variation margin exchanged with Derivative Clearing Organizations on cleared derivatives is treated as a settlement of the derivative itself — a reduction of the fair value of the derivative — and not as collateral.

When derivative counterparties pledge marketable securities, they typically retain title and the securities are treated as non-cash collateral.  When the FHLBNY pledges securities to counterparties, we also retain title to the securities and treat the securities as collateral.  Securities pledged or received are not netted against the derivative exposures on the Statements of Condition.

Premises, Software and Equipment

The Bank computes depreciation using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of assets ranging from four to five years.  Leasehold improvements are amortized on a straight-line basis over the lesser of their useful life of the asset or the remaining term of the lease.  The FHLBNY capitalizes improvements and major renewals but expenses ordinary maintenance and repairs when incurred, and would include gains and losses on disposal of premises and equipment in Other income (loss).

Consolidated Obligations

Accounting for Consolidated obligation debt.  The FHLBNY reports Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes at amortized cost, net of discounts and premiums.  If the consolidated obligation debt is hedged in a benchmark hedge, its carrying value will include hedging valuation adjustments, which will typically be the changes in the LIBOR index.  The carrying value of Consolidated obligation debt elected under the FVO will be its fair value.  The FHLBNY records interest paid on Consolidated obligation bonds in interest expense.  The FHLBNY expenses the discounts on Consolidated obligation discount notes, using the level-yield method, over the term of the related notes and amortizes the discounts and premiums on callable and non-callable Consolidated bonds, also using the contractual level-yield method, over the term to maturity of the Consolidated obligation bonds.

Concessions on Consolidated Obligations.  Concessions are paid to dealers in connection with the issuance of certain Consolidated obligation bonds.  The Office of Finance prorates the amount of the concession to the FHLBNY based upon the percentage of the debt issued that is assumed by the FHLBNY.  Concessions paid on Consolidated obligation bonds elected under the FVO are expensed as incurred.  Concessions paid on Consolidated obligation bonds not designated under the FVO are deferred and amortized, using the contractual level-yield method, over the term to maturity of the Consolidated obligation bond.  The FHLBNY charges to expense, as incurred, the concessions applicable to the sale of Consolidated obligation discount notes because of their short maturities; amounts are recorded in Consolidated obligations interest expense. The FHLBNY adopted ASU 2015-03, Interest-imputation of interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs on January 1, 2016, and reclassified $9.7 million of unamortized debt issuance costs from Other assets to Consolidated obligations on the Statements of Condition.

Finance Agency and Office of Finance Expenses

The FHLBNY is assessed for its proportionate share of the costs of operating the Finance Agency and the Office of Finance.  The Finance Agency is authorized to impose assessments on the FHLBanks and two other GSEs, in amounts sufficient to pay the Finance Agency’s annual operating expenses.

The Office of Finance is also authorized to impose assessments on the FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, in amounts sufficient to pay the Office of Finance’s annual operating and capital expenditures.  Each FHLBank is assessed a prorated  (1) two-thirds based upon each FHLBank’s share of total Consolidated obligations outstanding and (2) one-third based upon an equal pro-rata allocation.

Earnings per Share of Capital

Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to stockholders by the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the period.  Capital stock classified as mandatorily redeemable capital stock is excluded from this calculation.  Basic and diluted earnings per share are the same, as the FHLBNY has no additional potential shares that may be dilutive.

Cash Flows

In the Statements of Cash Flows, the FHLBNY considers Cash and due from banks to be cash.  Federal funds sold, and securities purchased under agreements to resell are reported in the Statements of Cash Flows as investing activities.

Federal funds sold, securities purchased under agreements to resell, and deposits with other FHLBanks are deemed short-term under ASC 320 and therefore, net presentation is appropriate.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Derivative instruments — Cash flows from a derivative instrument that is accounted for as a fair value or cash flow hedge, including those designated as economic hedges, are reflected as cash flows from operating activities if the derivative instrument did not include “an other-than-insignificant” financing element at inception.  When the FHLBNY executes an off-market derivative, which would typically require an up-front cash exchange, the FHLBNY will analyze the transaction and would deem it to contain a financing element if the cash exchange is more than insignificant.  Financing elements are recorded as a financing activity in the Statements of Cash Flows. Losses on debt extinguishment — Losses from debt retirement and transfers (debt retirement) are considered financing activities in the Statements of Cash Flows.  Losses are added back as an adjustment to Net cash provided by operating activities, with an offsetting increase in payments on maturing Consolidated obligation bonds as a financing activity.

Recently Adopted Significant Accounting Policies

Contingent Put and Call Options in Debt Instruments.  In March 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued ASU No. 2016-06, Contingent Put and Call options in Debt Instruments, as an amendment to Derivatives and Hedging Activities (Topic 815).  The amendments clarify the requirements for assessing whether contingent call (put) options that can accelerate the payment of principal on debt instruments are clearly and closely related to their debt hosts.  The guidance requires entities to apply only the four-step decision sequence when assessing whether the economic characteristics and risks of call (put) options are clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics and risks of their debt hosts.  Consequently, when a call (put) option is contingently exercisable, an entity does not have to assess whether the event that triggers the ability to exercise a call (put) option is related to interest rates or credit risks.  This guidance became effective for the FHLBNY as of January 1, 2017, and adoption had no impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.  Certain FHLBNY’s debt instruments are structured with call options, but the options are not considered as contingently exercisable.

Note 2.Recently Issued Accounting Standards and Interpretations.

Derivatives and Hedging.  In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities (Topic 815).  The FASB has issued this ASU with the objective of improving the financial reporting of hedging relationships to better portray the economic results of an entity’s risk management activities in its financial statements. In addition to that main objective, the amendments in this ASU make certain targeted improvements to simplify the application of the hedge accounting guidance in current GAAP.  The amendments in this guidance are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018 (January 1, 2019 for the FHLBNY).  While early application is permitted in any interim period after issuance of the ASU, the FHLBNY has elected to not early adopt the guidances under the ASU.

While the FHLBNY is in the process of evaluating this ASU, we expect to realize operational benefits upon adoption, and potentially to also benefit from expanded hedging opportunities permitted under the ASU.  Other than changes in disclosures required under the ASU, the FHLBNY does not believe adoption will have a material effect on the Bank’s financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Accounting for Financial Instruments Credit Losses.  In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326)The ASU introduces a new accounting model, the Current Expected Credit Losses model (“CECL”), which requires earlier recognition of credit losses, while also providing additional transparency about credit risk.  The FASB’s CECL model utilizes a lifetime “expected credit loss” measurement objective for the recognition of credit losses for loans, held-to-maturity securities and other receivables at the time the financial asset is originated or acquired.  The expected credit losses are adjusted each period for changes in expected lifetime credit losses.  For available-for-sale securities where fair value is less than cost, credit-related impairment, if any, will be recognized in an allowance for credit losses and adjusted each period for changes in expected credit risk.  This model replaces the multiple existing impairment models in current GAAP, which generally require that a loss be incurred before it is recognized.  We are in the process of evaluating this guidance.  The CECL model represents a significant departure from existing GAAP, but we do not expect adoption will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.  HTM.

This guidance is effective for interim and annual periodsthe FHLBNY beginning on January 1, 2020.  EarlyMarch 12, 2020, and we may elect to apply the amendments prospectively through December 31, 2022.We are actively engaged in reviewing LIBOR-indexed contracts, including the application is permitted as of the interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018 (January 1, 2019 for the FHLBNY).  The FHLBNY does not intend to early adopt the ASU.

Lease Accounting.  In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842), which is intended to increase transparency and comparability of accounting for lease transactions.  The ASU will require lessees to recognize all leases on the balance sheet as lease assets and lease liabilities and will require both quantitative and qualitative disclosures regarding key information about leasing arrangements.  The FHLBNY will adopt the guidance on its effective date on January 1, 2019.  In 2017, we entered into long-term lease contracts for our office premises in New York and New Jersey.  Beginning January 1, 2019, all leases will be recognized on our balance sheet under ASU No. 2016-02 Leases (Topic 842).  Recognition of the “right-to-use” asset and an offsetting lease liability for our operating leasespermissible expedients offered under the ASU would have a minimal impact on our statements of condition and the statements of income upon adoption.  The leasing standard is required to be appliedstreamline an orderly transition to leases in existence as of the date of adoption, January 1, 2019, and under recent amendments to the ASU, entities may elect not to restate comparative periods.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.  In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities, as an amendment to Financial Instruments — Overall (Subtopic 825-10).  The amendments provide guidance on certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments.

This ASU requires entities to present separately in OCI the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments.  To evaluate this provision,SOFR.

While we have analyzednot yet concluded a comprehensive review, we believe the FHLBank issued Consolidated obligation debt (“CO debt”), for which the fair value option has been elected, and have estimated the instrument-specific credit risk of CO debt as deminimis, if any, and accordingly no cumulative catch-up reclassification was necessary upon adoption at January 1, 2018.

The ASU will also require certain equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, thus eliminating eligibility for the current available-for-sale category.  We have also analyzed this provision of the ASU and have identified certain mutual fund assets in available-for-sale grantor trusts that would be subject to this provision of the ASU.  The FHLBNY adopted the guidance on January 1, 2018, the effective date.  The impact of adoption resulted in an immaterial cumulative catch-up reclassification of the fair values of the trust assets from AOCI to retained earnings.  Prior period financial statements would not be subject to restatement under the transition provisions of this ASU.

Revenue Recognition.  In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, (Topic 606): Revenue from Contracts with Customers.  The FASB and the International Accounting Standards Board (“IASB”) initiated a joint project to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and to develop a common revenue standard for U.S. GAAP and International Financial Reporting Standards (“IFRS”) that would remove inconsistencies and improve comparability of revenue recognition practices across entities and industries, and provide more useful information to users of financial statements through improved disclosure requirements.  The core principle of the guidance is that an entity should recognize revenue to depictwill streamline the transfertransition broadly, and specifically ease the administrative burden for the accounting for the effects of promised goodsreference rate reform. If elected, a one-time expedient allowing transfer/sale of LIBOR-indexed securities from  HTM could potentially result in a material accounting impact on the FHLBNY’s financial position or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services.  results of operations.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 3. Cash and Due from Banks.

Cash on hand, cash items in the process of collection, and amounts due from correspondent banks and the Federal Reserve Banks are recorded as cash and cash equivalent in the Statements of Cash Flows. The FHLBNY is exempted from maintaining any required clearing balance at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Compensating Balances

The FHLBNY has arrangements with Citibank (a member/stockholder of the FHLBNY) to maintain compensating collected cash balances in return for certain fee based safekeeping and back office operational services that the counterparty provides to the FHLBNY. There are no restrictions on the withdrawal of funds in this arrangement. There were no compensating balances at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. There were no restricted cash balances at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Pass-through Deposit Reserves

The FHLBNY acts as a pass-through correspondent for member institutions who are required by banking regulations to deposit reserves with the Federal Reserve Banks. Pass-through reserves deposited with Federal Reserve Banks on behalf of the members by the FHLBNY were $32.4 million at December 31, 2020 and $45.4 million at December 31, 2019. The liabilities offsetting the pass-through reserves were due to member institutions and were recorded in Other liabilities in the Statements of Condition.

Note 4. Interest-bearing Deposits, Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell.

The Bank invests in interest-bearing deposits, securities purchased under agreements to resell, and federal funds sold to provide short-term liquidity. These investments are generally transacted with counterparties that have received a credit rating of triple-B or higher (investment grade) by a nationally recognized statistical rating organization.

Interest-bearing deposits — Investments are typically short-term deposits placed with highly-rated large financial institutions and are recorded at amortized cost. Deposits placed were uncollateralized. At December 31, 2020, deposits placed were $0.7 billion and $0 at December 31, 2019. Deposits are evaluated quarterly for expected credit losses based on the probability of default of the borrowing counterparty and the terms to maturity of the outstanding investments at the measurement dates. Based on analysis performed, no allowance for credit losses was recorded at December 31, 2020. Accrued interest receivable was $2.5 thousand as of December 31, 2020, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due was collected.

Federal funds sold — Federal funds sold are unsecured advances to highly-rated large financial institutions. Federal funds sold are unsecured loans that are generally transacted on an overnight term and recorded at amortized cost basis. FHFA regulations include a limit on the amount of unsecured credit an individual Bank may extend to a counterparty. At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, federal funds sold were $6.3 billion and $8.6 billion, and were repaid according to their contractual terms. Investments are evaluated quarterly for expected credit losses based on the probability of default of the borrowing counterparty and the terms to maturity of the outstanding investments at the measurement dates. Generally, federal funds are short-term and typically overnight. Counterparties are highly-rated. Based on analysis, no allowance for credit losses was recorded for Federal funds sold at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Accrued interest receivable was $14.4 thousand and $0.4 million as of December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due was collected.

Securities purchased under agreements to resell — The outstanding balances of Securities purchased under agreements to resell were recorded at amortized cost basis of $4.7 billion at December 31, 2020 and $15.0 billion at December 31, 2019. The investments typically matured overnight, and were executed through a tri-party arrangement that involved transfer of overnight funds to a segregated safekeeping account at the Bank of New York (BONY). BONY, acting as an independent agent on behalf of the FHLBNY and the counterparty to the transactions, assumes the responsibility of receiving eligible securities as collateral and releasing funds to the counterparty. The amount of cash loaned against the collateral is a function of the liquidity and quality of the collateral. The collateral is typically in the form of securities that meet the FHLBNY’s


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

credit quality standards, are highly-rated and readily marketable. The FHLBNY has the ability to call for additional collateral if the value of the securities falls below a pre-defined haircut. The FHLBNY can terminate the transaction and liquidate the collateral if the counterparty fails to post the additional margin. Agreements generally allow the FHLBNY to repledge securities under certain conditions. No adjustments for instrument-specific credit risk were deemed necessary as market values of collateral were in excess of principal amounts loaned. Accrued interest receivable was $10.0 thousand at December 31, 2020 and $0.6 million at December 31, 2019, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due was collected.

U.S. Treasury securities at market values of $4.7 billion at December 31, 2020 and $15.2 billion at December 31, 2019 were received at BONY to collateralize the overnight investments. Securities purchased under agreements to resell averaged $4.4 billion for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and $8.3 billion for the same period in 2019. Interest income from securities purchased under agreements to resell was $28.6 million for 2020, $178.6 million for 2019 and $78.3 million for 2018. No overnight investments had been executed bilaterally with counterparties at those dates. Transactions recorded as Securities purchased under agreements to resell (reverse repos) were accounted as collateralized financing transactions.

Investments are evaluated quarterly for expected credit losses based on the probability of default of the borrowing counterparty and the terms to maturity of the outstanding investments at the measurement dates. A credit loss would also be recognized if there is a collateral shortfall which the FHLBNY does not believe the counterparty will replenish in accordance with its contractual terms. The credit loss would be limited to the difference between the fair value of the collateral and the investment’s amortized cost. Repurchase agreements are short-term and generally overnight and counterparties are highly-rated. Based on analysis performed, no allowance for credit losses was recorded for these assets at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Note 5. Trading Securities.

The carrying value of a trading security equals its fair value.  The following table provides major security types at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 (in thousands):

Fair value December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Corporate notes $2,164  $3,217 
U.S. Treasury notes  11,240,915   15,315,592 
U.S. Treasury bills  499,886   - 
Total trading securities $11,742,965  $15,318,809 

The carrying values of trading securities included net unrealized fair value gains of $87.6 million at December 31, 2020, and $53.1 million at December 31, 2019. We have classified investments acquired for purposes of meeting short-term contingency and other liquidity needs as trading securities. In accordance with Finance Agency guidance, we do not participate in speculative trading practices.

Trading Securities Pledged

The FHLBNY had pledged marketable securities at fair values of $630.4 million at December 31, 2020 and $251.2 million at December 31, 2019 to derivative clearing organizations to fulfill the FHLBNY’s initial margin requirements as mandated under margin rules of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The clearing organizations have rights to sell or repledge the collateral securities under certain conditions.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following tables present redemption terms of the major types of trading securities (dollars in thousands):

Redemption Terms

  December 31, 2020 
  Due in one year
or less
  Due after one year
through five years
  Total Fair Value 
Corporate notes $-  $2,164  $2,164 
U.S. Treasury notes  9,563,920   1,676,995   11,240,915 
U.S. Treasury bills  499,886   -   499,886 
Total trading securities $10,063,806  $1,679,159  $11,742,965 
Yield on trading securities  1.66%  1.79%    

  December 31, 2019 
  Due in one year
or less
  Due after one year
through five years
  Total Fair Value 
Corporate notes $869  $2,348  $3,217 
U.S. Treasury notes  6,176,952   9,138,640   15,315,592 
Total trading securities $6,177,821  $9,140,988  $15,318,809 
Yield on trading securities  2.36%  2.36%    

Note 6. Equity Investments.

The FHLBNY has classified its grantor trust as equity investments. The carrying value of equity investments in the Statements of Condition, and the types of assets in the grantor trust were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Unrealized  Unrealized  Fair 
  Cost  Gains (b)  Losses (b)  Value (c) 
Cash equivalents $4,164  $-  $-  $4,164 
Equity funds  36,833   15,325   (1,909)  50,249 
Fixed income funds  24,920   1,146   (110)  25,956 
Total Equity Investments (a) $65,917  $16,471  $(2,019) $80,369 

  December 31, 2019 
     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Unrealized  Unrealized  Fair 
  Cost  Gains (b)  Losses (b)  Value (c) 
Cash equivalents $1,322  $-  $-  $1,322 
Equity funds  28,650   8,312   (623)  36,339 
Fixed income funds  22,104   412   (130)  22,386 
Total Equity Investments (a) $52,076  $8,724  $(753) $60,047 

(a)The guidance provides entities with the option of using eitherintent of the following adoption methods: a full retrospective method, retrospectively to each prior reporting period presented; or a modified retrospective method, retrospectively with the cumulative effect of initially applying this guidance recognized at the date of initial application.  The FHLBNY elected to use the modified retrospective method to adopt the guidance as of January 1, 2018.  The impact was immaterial.

Our net income is derived principally from net interest income on financial assets and liabilities, which is explicitly excluded from the scope of this guidance.  Certain other streams of non-interest revenues, which relate to fee revenues from commitments and financial letters of credit, were evaluated and we have concluded that such fees and associated expenses are out of scope of the standard and therefore will not be impacted by the adoption of this guidance.  We have also analyzed the recognition of gains and losses when mortgage loans are foreclosed and transferred to real estate owned status (“OREO”), and have concluded that while such line items are in-scope of the standard, adoption resulted in an immaterial impact on our financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Note 3.                       Cash and Due from Banks.

Cash on hand, cash items in the process of collection, and amounts due from correspondent banks and the Federal Reserve Banks are included in Cash and due from banks.  The FHLBNY is exempted from maintaining any required clearing balance at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Compensating Balances

The FHLBNY maintains compensating collected cash balances at Citibank in return for certain fee based safekeeping and back office operational services that the counterparty provides to the FHLBNY.  There are no restrictions on the withdrawal of funds.  The balance was $41.1 million at December 31, 2017 and $90.4 million at December 31, 2016.

Pass-through Deposit Reserves

The FHLBNY acts as a pass-through correspondent for member institutions who are required by banking regulations to deposit reserves with the Federal Reserve Banks.  Pass-through reserves deposited with Federal Reserve Banks on behalf of the members by the FHLBNY were $84.2 million at December 31, 2017 and $67.7 million at December 31, 2016.  The liabilities offsetting the pass-through reserves were due to member institutions and were recorded in Other liabilities in the Statements of Condition.

Note 4.Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased Under Agreements to Resell.

Federal funds sold — Federal funds sold are unsecured advances to third parties.

Securities purchased under agreements to resell — As part of the FHLBNY’s banking activities, the FHLBNY may enter into secured financing transactions that mature overnight, and can be extended only at the discretion of the FHLBNY.  These transactions involve the lending of cash, against which marketable securities are taken as collateral.  The amount of cash loaned against the collateral is a function of the liquidity and quality of the collateral.  The collateral is typically in the form of securities that meet the FHLBNY’s credit quality standards, are highly-

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

rated and readily marketable.  The FHLBNY has the ability to call for additional collateral if the value of the securities falls below a pre-defined haircut.  The FHLBNY can terminate the transaction and liquidate the collateral if the counterparty fails to post the additional margin.  Agreements generally allow the FHLBNY to repledge securities under certain conditions.  No adjustments for instrument-specific credit risk were deemed necessary as market values of collateral were in excess of principal amounts loaned.

At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the outstanding balances of Securities purchased under agreements to resell were $2.7 billion and $7.2 billion that matured overnight, and were executed through a tri-party arrangement that involved transfer of overnight funds to a segregated safekeeping account at the Bank of New York (“BONY”); BONY, acting as an independent agent on behalf of the FHLBNY and the counterparty to the transactions, assumes the responsibility of receiving eligible securities as collateral and releasing funds to the counterparty.  U.S. Treasury securities, market values $2.8 billion and $7.2 billion, were received at BONY to collateralize the overnight investments at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  No overnight investments had been executed bilaterally with counterparties.  Securities purchased under agreements to resell averaged $2.7 billion and $2.1 billion in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  Interest income from securities purchased under agreements to resell were $25.5 million, $6.9 million and $1.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.

Transactions recorded as Securities purchased under agreements to resell (reverse repos) were accounted as collateralized financing transactions.

Note 5.Trading Securities.

The carrying value of a trading security equals its fair value.  The following table provides major security types at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in thousands):

Fair value

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Non-mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

GSE securities

 

$

356,899

 

$

30,969

 

U.S. treasury notes

 

1,045,605

 

100,182

 

U.S. treasury bills

 

239,064

 

 

Total non-mortgage-backed trading securities

 

$

1,641,568

 

$

131,151

 

The carrying values of trading securities included unrealized fair value loss of $1.1 million at December 31, 2017, and unrealized fair value gains of $0.1 million at December 31, 2016.

Trading Securities Pledged

The FHLBNY had pledged marketable securities at fair values of $239.1 million at December 31, 2017 to derivative clearing organizations to fulfill the FHLBNY’s initial margin requirements as mandated under margin rules of the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”).  The clearing organizations have rights to sell or repledge the collateral securities under certain conditions.

Redemption Terms

The remaining maturities and estimated fair values of investments classified as trading (a) were as follows (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Due after one 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year

 

year through

 

Total Fair

 

 

 

 or less

 

five years

 

Value

 

Non-mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GSE securities

 

$

 210,390

 

$

 146,509

 

$

 356,899

 

U.S. treasury notes

 

1,045,605

 

 

1,045,605

 

U.S. treasury bills

 

239,064

 

 

239,064

 

Total non-mortgage-backed trading securities

 

$

 996,821

 

$

 644,747

 

$

 1,641,568

 

Yield on trading securities

 

1.34

%

1.28

%

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Due after one 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year

 

year through

 

Total Fair

 

 

 

or less

 

five years

 

Value

 

Non-mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GSE securities

 

$

 30,969

 

$

 —

 

$

 30,969

 

U.S. treasury notes

 

100,182

 

 

100,182

 

Total non-mortgage-backed trading securities

 

$

 131,151

 

$

 —

 

$

 131,151

 

Yield on trading securities

 

0.90

%

%

 

 


(a)We have classified investments acquired for purposes of meeting short-term contingency and other liquidity needs as trading securities, which are carried at their fair values.  In accordance with Finance Agency guidance, we do not participate in speculative trading practices.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 6.Available-for-Sale Securities.

The carrying value of an AFS security equals its fair value.  At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, no AFS security was other-than-temporarily impaired.  The following tables provide major security types (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Gross

 

Gross

 

 

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Unrealized

 

Unrealized

 

Fair

 

 

 

Cost

 

Gains (b)

 

Losses (b)

 

Value

 

Cash equivalents (a)

 

$

893

 

$

 

$

 

$

893

 

Equity funds (a)

 

24,869

 

5,126

 

(3

)

29,992

 

Fixed income funds (a)

 

17,957

 

43

 

(243

)

17,757

 

GSE and U.S. Obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMO-Floating

 

490,249

 

5,163

 

 

495,412

 

CMBS-Floating

 

33,123

 

92

 

 

33,215

 

Total Available-for-sale securities

 

$

567,091

 

$

10,424

 

$

(246

)

$

577,269

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Gross

 

Gross

 

 

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Unrealized

 

Unrealized

 

Fair

 

 

 

Cost

 

Gains (b)

 

Losses (b)

 

Value

 

Cash equivalents (a)

 

$

551

 

$

 

$

 

$

551

 

Equity funds (a)

 

22,667

 

1,699

 

(417

)

23,949

 

Fixed income funds (a)

 

17,642

 

 

(424

)

17,218

 

GSE and U.S. Obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMO-Floating

 

616,359

 

3,436

 

(151

)

619,644

 

CMBS-Floating

 

36,369

 

81

 

 

36,450

 

Total Available-for-sale securities

 

$

693,588

 

$

5,216

 

$

(992

)

$

697,812

 


(a)The FHLBNY has grantor trusts, the intent of whichtrust is to set aside cash to meet current and future payments for supplemental unfunded pension plans. Neither the pension plans nor employees of the FHLBNY own the trust.  Investments

(b)Changes in unrealized gains and losses are recorded through earnings, specifically in Other income in the trusts are classified as AFS.  Statements of Income.
(c)The grantor trusts investtrust invests in money market, equity and fixed income and bond funds. Daily net asset values (NAVs) are readily available and investments are redeemable at short notice. NAVs are the fair values of the funds in the grantor trusts.trust. The mutual funds used to managegrantor trust is owned by the assetsFHLBNY.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

In the Statements of Income, gains and losses related to outstanding Equity Investments were as follows (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Unrealized gains (losses) recognized during the reporting period on equity investments still held at the reporting date $6,481  $7,866 
Net gains (losses) recognized during the period on equity investments sold during the period  519   17 
Net dividend and other  2,792   1,960 
Net gains (losses) recognized during the period $9,792  $9,843 

Note 7. Available-for-Sale Securities.

No AFS security was impaired in any periods in this report, and no credit loss allowance was necessary at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, or upon adoption of ASU 2017-12 at January 1, 2020.

The following tables provide major security types (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Unrealized  Unrealized  Fair 
  Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
GSE and U.S. Obligations                
Mortgage-backed securities                
Floating                
CMO $277,372  $3,960  $-  $281,332 
Total Floating  277,372   3,960   -   281,332 
Fixed                
CMBS  2,877,947   282,913   (6,247)  3,154,613 
Total Fixed  2,877,947   282,913   (6,247)  3,154,613 
AFS Before Hedging Adjustments  3,155,319   286,873(a)  (6,247)(a)  3,435,945 
Hedging Basis Adjustments in AOCI  44,052   (44,052)(b)  -   - 
Total Available-for-sale securities $3,199,371  $242,821  $(6,247) $3,435,945 

  December 31, 2019 
     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Unrealized  Unrealized  Fair 
  Cost  Gains  Losses  Value 
GSE and U.S. Obligations                
Mortgage-backed securities                
Floating                
CMO $339,419  $2,164  $(74) $341,509 
CMBS  2,539   1   -   2,540 
Total Floating  341,958   2,165   (74)  344,049 
Fixed                
CMBS  2,213,592   99,532   (3,755)  2,309,369 
Total Fixed  2,213,592   99,532   (3,755)  2,309,369 
AFS Before Hedging Adjustments  2,555,550   101,697(a)  (3,829)(a)  2,653,418 
Hedging Basis Adjustments in AOCI  11,593   14,925(b)  3,332(b)  - 
Total Available-for-sale securities $2,567,143  $86,772  $(497) $2,653,418 

(a)Amounts represents specialized third party pricing vendors’ estimates of the grantor trusts will be sufficiently liquid to enable the trust to meet future liabilities.  Dividend incomegains/losses of AFS securities; market pricing is based on historical amortized cost adjusted for pay downs and net realized gains from salesamortization of funds was $2.6 million, $1.1 millionpremiums and $1.9 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015; dividend received, anddiscounts; fair value unrealized gains and losses from redemptionsare before adjusting book values for hedge basis adjustments and sales arewill equal market values of AFS securities recorded in Other incomeAOCI. Fair value hedges were executed to mitigate the interest rate risk of the hedged fixed-rate securities due to changes in the Statements of Income.designated benchmark rate.

(b)Recorded in AOCI — Net unrealizedAmounts represent fair value hedging basis that were recorded as an adjustment to the amortized cost of hedged securities, impacting unrealized gains were $10.2 millionand losses reported in the table above. Securities in a fair value hedging relationship at December 31, 20172020 and $4.22019 reported $44.1 million at December 31, 2016.

Impairment Analysis of AFS Securities

The FHLBNY’s portfolio of MBS classifiedand $11.6 million as AFS is comprised of GSE-issued collateralized mortgage obligations and floating rate CMBS, and U.S. Agency issued MBS.  The FHLBNY evaluates its GSE-issued securities by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the government-sponsored enterprises’ guarantees of the securities.  Fair values of mortgage-backed securitieshedging basis as noted in the AFS portfolio were in excess of their amortized costs at December 31, 2017, andtable above, with an offset to AOCI.  The hedging basis adjustment has no security was in a loss position for 12 months or longer in 2017.  Basedimpact on the analysis, GSE-issued securities are performing in accordance with their contractual agreements.  The FHLBNY believes that it will recover its investments in GSE-issued securities given the current levels of collateral, credit enhancements and guarantees that exist to protect the investments.market based fair values.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Credit Loss Analysis of AFS Securities

The FHLBNY’s portfolio of MBS classified as AFS is comprised primarily of GSE-issued collateralized mortgage obligations and CMBS. The FHLBNY evaluates its GSE-issued securities by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the government-sponsored enterprises’ guarantees of the securities.

Based on credit and performance analysis, GSE-issued securities are performing in accordance with their contractual agreements. The FHLBNY believes that it will recover its investments in GSE-issued securities given the current levels of collateral, credit enhancements and guarantees that exist to protect the investments. At December 31, 2020 and 2019, unrealized fair value losses have been aggregated in the table below by the length of time a security was in a continuous unrealized loss position.

The Bank evaluates its individual AFS securities for impairment by comparing the security’s fair value to its amortized cost. Impairment may exist when the fair value of the investment is less than its amortized cost (i.e. in an unrealized loss position). As noted in the table below, AFS securities in an unrealized loss position for 12 months or longer were not material. These losses are considered temporary as the Bank expects to recover the entire amortized cost basis on these AFS investment securities and neither intends to sell these securities nor considers it more likely than not that it will be required to sell these securities before its anticipated recovery of each security's remaining amortized cost basis. We have not experienced any payment defaults on the instruments. As noted previously, substantially all of these securities are GSE-issued and carry an implicit or explicit U.S. government guarantee. Based on the analysis, no allowance for credit losses was recorded on these AFS securities at December 31, 2020 and 2019. Accrued interest receivable was $6.7 million at December 31, 2020 and $6.1 million at December 31, 2019, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due was collected.

No credit loss allowance was necessary at December 31, 2020 based on analysis noted above. The following table summarizes available-for-sale securities with estimated fair values below their amortized cost basis (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
  Less than 12 months  12 months or more  Total 
  Estimated  Unrealized  Estimated  Unrealized  Estimated  Unrealized 
  Fair Value  Losses  Fair Value  Losses  Fair Value  Losses 
MBS Investment Securities                        
MBS-GSE                        
Freddie Mac-CMBS $526,365  $(6,247) $-  $-  $526,365  $(6,247)
Total Temporarily Impaired $526,365  $(6,247) $-  $-  $526,365  $(6,247)

  December 31, 2019 
  Less than 12 months  12 months or more  Total 
  Estimated  Unrealized  Estimated  Unrealized  Estimated  Unrealized 
  Fair Value  Losses  Fair Value  Losses  Fair Value  Losses 
MBS Investment Securities                        
MBS-GSE                        
Fannie Mae-CMO $32,012  $(65) $-  $-  $32,012  $(65)
Freddie Mac-CMO  7,071   (9)  -   -   7,071   (9)
Freddie Mac-CMBS  129,496   (423)  -   -   129,496   (423)
Total Temporarily Impaired $168,579  $(497) $-  $-  $168,579  $(497)


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Redemption Terms

Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment fees. The amortized cost and estimated fair value (a) of investments classified as AFS, by contractual maturity, were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amortized Cost (b)  Fair Value  Amortized Cost (b)  Fair Value 
Mortgage-backed securities                
Due in one year or less $-  $-  $2,539  $2,540 
Due after one year through five years  332,752   364,081   -   - 
Due after five year through ten years  2,550,443   2,750,824   2,189,350   2,273,352 
Due after ten years  316,176   321,040   375,254   377,526 
Total Available-for-sale securities $3,199,371  $3,435,945  $2,567,143  $2,653,418 

 

Redemption Terms(a)

Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment fees.  The amortized cost and estimated fair value (a) of investments classified as AFS, by contractual maturity, were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amortized Cost (c)

 

Fair Value

 

Amortized Cost (c)

 

Fair Value

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due after one year through five years

 

$

33,123

 

$

33,215

 

$

36,369

 

$

36,450

 

Due after ten years

 

490,249

 

495,412

 

616,359

 

619,644

 

Fixed income/bond funds, equity funds and cash equivalents (b)

 

43,719

 

48,642

 

40,860

 

41,718

 

Total Available-for-sale securities

 

$

567,091

 

$

577,269

 

$

693,588

 

$

697,812

 


(a)

The carrying value of AFS securities equals fair value.

(b)Funds in the grantor trusts are determined to be redeemable at short notice.  Fair values are the daily NAVs of the bond and equity funds.

(c)

Amortized cost is UPB after adjusting for net unamortized discountspremiums of $1.9$41.1 million and $2.4$30.4 million at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016.2019. Additionally, historical amortized cost in the table above is after adjustment for hedging basis.  

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Interest Rate Payment Terms

The following table summarizes interest rate payment terms of investments in mortgage-backed securities classified as AFS securities (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amortized Cost   Fair Value  Amortized Cost  Fair Value 
Mortgage-backed securities                
Floating                
CMO - LIBOR $277,372  $281,332  $339,419  $341,509 
CMBS - LIBOR  -   -   2,539   2,540 
Total Floating  277,372   281,332   341,958   344,049 
Fixed                
CMBS  2,921,999   3,154,613   2,225,185   2,309,369 
Total Mortgage-backed securities $3,199,371  $3,435,945  $2,567,143  $2,653,418 

133

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 8. Held-to-Maturity Securities.

Major Security Types (in thousands)

  December 31, 2020 
     Allowance  OTTI     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  for Credit  Recognized  Carrying  Unrecognized  Unrecognized  Fair 
Issued, guaranteed or insured: Cost (d)  Loss (ACL)   in AOCI  Value  Holding Gains (a)  Holding Losses (a)  Value 
Pools of Mortgages                            
Fannie Mae $47,558  $-  $-  $47,558  $6,626  $-  $54,184 
Freddie Mac  9,813   -   -   9,813   1,305   -   11,118 
Total pools of mortgages  57,371   -   -   57,371   7,931   -   65,302 
                             
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations/Real                            
Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits                            
Fannie Mae  942,268   -   -   942,268   9,204   (830)  950,642 
Freddie Mac  604,713   -   -   604,713   5,709   (385)  610,037 
Ginnie Mae  6,458   -   -   6,458   108   -   6,566 
Total CMOs/REMICs  1,553,439   -   -   1,553,439   15,021   (1,215)  1,567,245 
                             
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (b)                            
Fannie Mae  1,570,197   -   -   1,570,197   53,905   (1,428)  1,622,674 
Freddie Mac  8,503,433   -   -   8,503,433   591,514   (5,142)  9,089,805 
Total commercial mortgage-backed securities  10,073,630   -   -   10,073,630   645,419   (6,570)  10,712,479 
                             
Non-GSE MBS (c)                            
CMOs/REMICs  3,824   (257)  (294)  3,273   146   (71)  3,348 
                             
Asset-Backed Securities (c)                            
Manufactured housing (insured)  23,763   -   -   23,763   768   -   24,531 
Home equity loans (insured)  52,262   -   (3,308)  48,954   13,340   (52)  62,242 
Home equity loans (uninsured)  17,450   -   (1,986)  15,464   2,588   (284)  17,768 
Total asset-backed securities  93,475   -   (5,294)  88,181   16,696   (336)  104,541 
                             
Total MBS  11,781,739   (257)  (5,588)  11,775,894   685,213   (8,192)  12,452,915 
                             
Other                            
State and local housing finance agency obligations (e)     1,097,752       -       -       1,097,752       76       (21,562)     1,076,266  
                             
Total Held-to-maturity securities $12,879,491  $(257) $(5,588) $12,873,646  $685,289  $(29,754) $13,529,181 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

  December 31, 2019 
     OTTI     Gross  Gross    
  Amortized  Recognized  Carrying  Unrecognized  Unrecognized  Fair 
Issued, guaranteed or insured: Cost (d)  in AOCI  Value  Holding Gains (a)  Holding Losses (a)  Value 
Pools of Mortgages                        
Fannie Mae $61,990  $-  $61,990  $6,255  $-  $68,245 
Freddie Mac  11,526   -   11,526   1,135   -   12,661 
Total pools of mortgages  73,516   -   73,516   7,390   -   80,906 
                         
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations/Real                        
Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits                        
Fannie Mae  1,403,787   -   1,403,787   4,281   (3,130)  1,404,938 
Freddie Mac  878,068   -   878,068   2,871   (2,526)  878,413 
Ginnie Mae  9,265   -   9,265   113   -   9,378 
Total CMOs/REMICs  2,291,120   -   2,291,120   7,265   (5,656)  2,292,729 
                         
Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (b)                        
Fannie Mae  1,822,310   -   1,822,310   16,796   (1,372)  1,837,734 
Freddie Mac  9,815,215   -   9,815,215   215,919   (18,584)  10,012,550 
Total commercial mortgage-backed securities  11,637,525   -   11,637,525   232,715   (19,956)  11,850,284 
                         
Non-GSE MBS (c)                        
CMOs/REMICs  4,451   (331)  4,120   56   (30)  4,146 
                         
Asset-Backed Securities (c)                        
Manufactured housing (insured)  28,618   -   28,618   1,175   -   29,793 
Home equity loans (insured)  61,186   (4,062)  57,124   17,912   -   75,036 
Home equity loans (uninsured)  23,322   (3,178)  20,144   4,209   (146)  24,207 
Total asset-backed securities  113,126   (7,240)  105,886   23,296   (146)  129,036 
                         
Total MBS  14,119,738   (7,571)  14,112,167   270,722   (25,788)  14,357,101 
                         
Other                        
State and local housing finance agency obligations     1,122,315       -       1,122,315       400       (23,210)     1,099,505  
                         
Total Held-to-maturity securities $15,242,053  $(7,571) $15,234,482  $271,122  $(48,998) $15,456,606 

 

Interest Rate Payment Terms(a)

The following table summarizes interest rate payment terms of investments in mortgage-backed securities classified as AFS securities (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amortized Cost

 

Fair Value

 

Amortized Cost

 

Fair Value

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMO floating - LIBOR

 

$

490,249

 

$

495,412

 

$

616,359

 

$

619,644

 

CMBS floating - LIBOR

 

33,123

 

33,215

 

36,369

 

36,450

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Mortgage-backed securities (a)

 

$

523,372

 

$

528,627

 

$

652,728

 

$

656,094

 


(a)Total will not agree to total AFS portfolio because the grantor trusts, which primarily comprise of mutual funds, have been excluded.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 7.Held-to-Maturity Securities.

Major Security Types (in thousands)

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

OTTI

 

 

 

Gross

 

Gross

 

 

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Recognized

 

Carrying

 

Unrecognized

 

Unrecognized

 

Fair

 

Issued, guaranteed or insured:

 

Cost (d)

 

in AOCI

 

Value

 

Holding Gains (a)

 

Holding Losses (a)

 

Value

 

Pools of Mortgages

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

$

97,579

 

$

 

$

97,579

 

$

7,978

 

$

 

$

105,557

 

Freddie Mac

 

20,160

 

 

20,160

 

1,512

 

 

21,672

 

Total pools of mortgages

 

117,739

 

 

117,739

 

9,490

 

 

127,229

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collateralized Mortgage Obligations/Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

1,612,543

 

 

1,612,543

 

10,716

 

(662

)

1,622,597

 

Freddie Mac

 

960,374

 

 

960,374

 

7,485

 

(404

)

967,455

 

Ginnie Mae

 

14,513

 

 

14,513

 

175

 

 

14,688

 

Total CMOs/REMICs

 

2,587,430

 

 

2,587,430

 

18,376

 

(1,066

)

2,604,740

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

2,955,640

 

 

2,955,640

 

8,497

 

(15,639

)

2,948,498

 

Freddie Mac

 

10,834,852

 

 

10,834,852

 

76,196

 

(16,272

)

10,894,776

 

Total commercial mortgage-backed securities

 

13,790,492

 

 

13,790,492

 

84,693

 

(31,911

)

13,843,274

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-GSE MBS (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMOs/REMICs

 

9,159

 

(172

)

8,987

 

85

 

(385

)

8,687

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asset-Backed Securities (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manufactured housing (insured)

47,660

 

 

47,660

 

2,439

 

(40

)

50,059

 

Home equity loans (insured)

 

86,606

 

(8,746

)

77,860

 

26,479

 

(21

)

104,318

 

Home equity loans (uninsured)

 

52,740

 

(5,885

)

46,855

 

7,847

 

(973

)

53,729

 

Total asset-backed securities

 

187,006

 

(14,631

)

172,375

 

36,765

 

(1,034

)

208,106

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total MBS

 

16,691,826

 

(14,803

)

16,677,023

 

149,409

 

(34,396

)

16,792,036

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

1,147,510

 

 

1,147,510

 

204

 

(32,977

)

1,114,737

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Held-to-maturity securities

 

$

17,839,336

 

$

(14,803

)

$

17,824,533

 

$

149,613

 

$

(67,373

)

$

17,906,773

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

OTTI

 

 

 

Gross

 

Gross

 

 

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Recognized

 

Carrying

 

Unrecognized

 

Unrecognized

 

Fair

 

Issued, guaranteed or insured:

 

Cost (d)

 

in AOCI

 

Value

 

Holding Gains (a)

 

Holding Losses (a)

 

Value

 

Pools of Mortgages

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

$

133,071

 

$

 

$

133,071

 

$

11,601

 

$

 

$

144,672

 

Freddie Mac

 

32,402

 

 

32,402

 

2,325

 

 

34,727

 

Total pools of mortgages

 

165,473

 

 

165,473

 

13,926

 

 

179,399

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Collateralized Mortgage Obligations/Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduits

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

1,972,878

 

 

1,972,878

 

7,538

 

(1,015

)

1,979,401

 

Freddie Mac

 

1,214,823

 

 

1,214,823

 

4,232

 

(561

)

1,218,494

 

Ginnie Mae

 

18,979

 

 

18,979

 

126

 

(1

)

19,104

 

Total CMOs/REMICs

 

3,206,680

 

 

3,206,680

 

11,896

 

(1,577

)

3,216,999

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial Mortgage-Backed Securities (b)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

2,612,688

 

 

2,612,688

 

9,870

 

(15,660

)

2,606,898

 

Freddie Mac

 

8,740,573

 

 

8,740,573

 

107,137

 

(19,338

)

8,828,372

 

Total commercial mortgage-backed securities

 

11,353,261

 

 

11,353,261

 

117,007

 

(34,998

)

11,435,270

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-GSE MBS (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMOs/REMICs

 

15,844

 

(285

)

15,559

 

1,372

 

(1,001

)

15,930

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Asset-Backed Securities (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Manufactured housing (insured)

61,293

 

 

61,293

 

2,258

 

 

63,551

 

Home equity loans (insured)

 

119,527

 

(22,434

)

97,093

 

45,228

 

(70

)

142,251

 

Home equity loans (uninsured)

 

66,949

 

(7,515

)

59,434

 

9,307

 

(1,853

)

66,888

 

Total asset-backed securities

 

247,769

 

(29,949

)

217,820

 

56,793

 

(1,923

)

272,690

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total MBS

 

14,989,027

 

(30,234

)

14,958,793

 

200,994

 

(39,499

)

15,120,288

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Other

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

1,063,500

 

 

1,063,500

 

196

 

(37,013

)

1,026,683

 

Total Held-to-maturity securities

 

$

16,052,527

 

$

(30,234

)

$

16,022,293

 

$

201,190

 

$

(76,512

)

$

16,146,971

 


(a)

Unrecognized gross holding gains and losses represent the difference between fair value and carrying value.

((b)b)Commercial mortgage-backed securities (“CMBS”)(CMBS) are Agency issued securities, collateralized by income-producing “multifamily properties”. Eligible property types include standard conventional multifamily apartments, affordable multifamily housing, seniors housing, student housing, military housing, and rural rent housing.

(c)The amounts represent non-agency private-label mortgage- and asset-backed securities.

(d)Amortized cost — For securities that were deemed to be OTTI,impaired, amortized cost represents unamortized cost less credit OTTI,losses, net of credit OTTI reversedrecoveries (reversals) due to improvements in cash flows.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York(e)

Notes to Financial Statements

Certain non-Agency Private label MBS are insured by Ambac Assurance Corp (“Ambac”), MBIA Insurance Corp (“MBIA”) and Assured Guarantee Municipal Corp., (“AGM”).  Assumptions on the extent of expected reliance by the FHLBNY on insurance support by Ambac, AGM and MBIA to make whole expected cash shortfalls are noted under “Monoline insurance” within this Note 7.  Held-to-Maturity Securities.

Securities Pledged

The FHLBNY had pledged MBS, with an amortized

Amortized cost basis of $5.7 million at December 31, 2017 and $7.0 million at December 31, 2016, to the FDIC in connection with deposits maintained by the FDIC at the FHLBNY.  The FDIC does not have rights to sell or repledge the collateral unless the FHLBNY defaults under the terms of its deposit arrangements with the FDIC.

Unrealized Losses

The fair values and gross unrealized holding losses are aggregated by major security type and by the length of time the individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position.  Unrealized losses represent the difference between fair value and amortized cost.  The baseline measure of unrealized loss is amortized cost, which is not adjusted for non-credit OTTI.  Total unrealized losses in these tables will not equal unrecognized holding losses in the Major Security Types tables.  Unrealized losses are calculated after adjusting2020 includes allowance for credit OTTI.  Inloss of $0.8 million recorded at January 1, 2020, the previous tables, unrecognized holding losses are adjusted for credit and non-credit OTTI.adoption date of ASU 2016-13.

Securities Pledged

The FHLBNY had pledged MBS, with an amortized cost basis of $2.7 million at December 31, 2020 and $3.7 million at December 31, 2019, to the FDIC in connection with deposits maintained by the FDIC at the FHLBNY. The FDIC does not have rights to sell or repledge the collateral unless the FHLBNY defaults under the terms of its deposit arrangements with the FDIC.

Credit Loss Allowances on Held-to-maturity Securities

GSE-issued securities — The FHLBNY evaluates its individual securities issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and U.S. government agency, (collectively GSE-issued securities), by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the GSEs’ guarantees of the securities. Based on analysis, GSE-issued securities are performing in accordance with their contractual agreements, and we will recover our investments in GSE-issued securities given the current levels of collateral, credit enhancements and guarantees that exist to protect the investments. Numbers of investment positions that were in an unrealized loss position were 42 and 120 at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Housing finance agency bonds — The FHLBNY’s investments in housing finance agency bonds reported gross unrealized losses of $21.6 million and $23.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively. Investments are evaluated quarterly for expected credit losses based on the probability of default of the borrowing counterparty and the terms to maturity of the outstanding investments at the measurement dates. A credit loss would also be recognized if there is a collateral shortfall which the FHLBNY does not believe the counterparty will replenish in accordance with its contractual terms. The credit loss would be limited to the difference between the fair value of the collateral and the investment’s amortized cost. Our analysis identified no collateral shortfall. Number of investment positions that were in an unrealized loss position were 18 and 12 at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Based on analysis performed at January 1, 2020, the adoption date of the guidance under ASU 2016-13, a credit loss of $0.8 million was recognized as a charge to beginning retained earnings at January 1, 2020. At December 31, 2020, the probability default analysis reported cumulative credit loss of $0.7 million, materially unchanged from the evaluation at adoption date. The portfolio composition has not changed and no acquisitions or sales were made in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020. Additionally, our counterparty default analysis at December 31, 2020 identified no material changes from those at adoption date.

Accrued interest receivable was $1.3 million at December 31, 2020 and $4.5 million at December 31, 2019, no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due is expected to be collected.

Our investments are performing to their contractual terms, and management has concluded that the gross unrealized losses on its housing finance agency bonds are temporary because the underlying collateral and credit enhancements are sufficient to protect the FHLBNY from losses based on current expectations. The credit enhancements may include additional support from Monoline Insurance, reserve and investment funds allocated to the securities that may be used to make principal and interest payments in the event that the underlying loans pledged for these securities are not sufficient to make the necessary payments and the general obligation of the State issuing the bond.

Private-label mortgage-backed securities — Management evaluates its investments in private-label MBS (PLMBS) for credit losses on a quarterly basis by performing cash flow tests on its entire portfolio of PLMBS. Allowance for credit loss of $0.3 million and $0.6 million were recognized in 2020 and 2019, respectively. Our investments in PLMBS were less than 1% of our investments in MBS. No acquisitions or sale of PLMBS were made in 2020; balances declined due to paydowns, and the portfolio composition remains largely unchanged. Based on cash flow testing, the Bank believes no material credit losses remains. Certain securities are insured by monoline insurers, and we have analyzed their guarantees with appropriate haircuts. The Bank’s conclusions are also based upon multiple factors, but not limited to the expected performance of the underlying collateral, and the evaluation of the fundamentals of the issuers’ financial condition. Management has not made a decision to sell such securities at December 31, 2020, and has concluded that it will not be required to sell such securities before recovery of the amortized cost basis of the securities. Number of investment positions that were in an unrealized loss position was 10 and 8 at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Redemption Terms

Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment features. The amortized cost and estimated fair value of held-to-maturity securities, arranged by contractual maturity, were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amortized  Estimated  Amortized  Estimated 
  Cost (a)  Fair Value  Cost (a)  Fair Value 
State and local housing finance agency obligations                
Due after one year through five years $30,867  $30,758  $9,770  $9,781 
Due after five years through ten years  100   100   36,810   36,250 
Due after ten years  1,066,785   1,045,408   1,075,735   1,053,474 
State and local housing finance agency obligations  1,097,752   1,076,266   1,122,315   1,099,505 
                 
Mortgage-backed securities                
Due in one year or less  690,206   694,962   613,863   619,948 
Due after one year through five years  2,991,105   3,114,446   4,102,650   4,142,443 
Due after five years through ten years  6,137,440   6,629,839   6,648,746   6,815,921 
Due after ten years  1,962,988   2,013,668   2,754,479   2,778,789 
Mortgage-backed securities  11,781,739   12,452,915   14,119,738   14,357,101 
Total Held-to-Maturity Securities $12,879,491  $13,529,181  $15,242,053  $15,456,606 

 

The following tables summarize held-to-maturity securities with estimated fair values below their amortized cost basis (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Less than 12 months

 

12 months or more

 

Total

 

 

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Non-MBS Investment Securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

$

191,872

 

$

(73

)

$

343,791

 

$

(32,904

)

$

535,663

 

$

(32,977

)

MBS Investment Securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MBS-GSE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

1,181,936

 

(7,047

)

331,845

 

(9,254

)

1,513,781

 

(16,301

)

Freddie Mac

 

2,051,154

 

(8,968

)

781,211

 

(7,708

)

2,832,365

 

(16,676

)

Total MBS-GSE

 

3,233,090

 

(16,015

)

1,113,056

 

(16,962

)

4,346,146

 

(32,977

)

MBS-Private-Label

 

10,674

 

(41

)

31,527

 

(1,545

)

42,201

 

(1,586

)

Total MBS

 

3,243,764

 

(16,056

)

1,144,583

 

(18,507

)

4,388,347

 

(34,563

)

Total

 

$

3,435,636

 

$

(16,129

)

$

1,488,374

 

$

(51,411

)

$

4,924,010

 

$

(67,540

)

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Less than 12 months

 

12 months or more

 

Total

 

 

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

Estimated

 

Unrealized

 

 

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Fair Value

 

Losses

 

Non-MBS Investment Securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

$

29,486

 

$

(13

)

$

355,230

 

$

(37,000

)

$

384,716

 

$

(37,013

)

MBS Investment Securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MBS-GSE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fannie Mae

 

1,131,586

 

(15,615

)

359,921

 

(1,060

)

1,491,507

 

(16,675

)

Freddie Mac

 

2,245,856

 

(12,111

)

1,364,856

 

(7,788

)

3,610,712

 

(19,899

)

Ginnie Mae

 

3,828

 

(1

)

 

 

3,828

 

(1

)

Total MBS-GSE

 

3,381,270

 

(27,727

)

1,724,777

 

(8,848

)

5,106,047

 

(36,575

)

MBS-Private-Label

 

7,432

 

(10

)

39,078

 

(2,422

)

46,510

 

(2,432

)

Total MBS

 

3,388,702

 

(27,737

)

1,763,855

 

(11,270

)

5,152,557

 

(39,007

)

Total

 

$

3,418,188

 

$

(27,750

)

$

2,119,085

 

$

(48,270

)

$

5,537,273

 

$

(76,020

)

The FHLBNY’s investments in housing finance agency bonds reported gross unrealized losses of $33.0 million at December 31, 2017 and $37.0 million at December 31, 2016.  Management has reviewed the portfolio and has observed that the bonds are performing to their contractual terms, and has concluded that as of December 31, 2017 all of the gross unrealized losses on its housing finance agency bonds are temporary because the underlying collateral and credit enhancements are sufficient to protect the FHLBNY from losses based on current expectations.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York(a)

Notes to Financial Statements

The credit enhancements may include additional support from:

·                  Monoline Insurance

·                  Reserve and investment funds allocated to the securities that may be used to make principal and interest payments in the event that the underlying loans pledged for these securities are not sufficient to make the necessary payments

·                  General obligation of the State

Our analyses of the fair values of HFA bonds have concluded that the market is generally pricing the bonds to the “AA municipal sector”.  Based on our review, the FHLBNY expects to recover the entire amortized cost basis of these securities.  If conditions in the housing and mortgage markets, and general business and economic conditions remain stressed or deteriorate further, the fair value of the bonds may decline further and the FHLBNY may experience OTTI in future periods.

Redemption Terms

Expected maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment features.  The amortized cost and estimated fair value of held-to-maturity securities, arranged by contractual maturity, were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Estimated

 

Amortized

 

Estimated

 

 

 

Cost (a)

 

Fair Value

 

Cost (a)

 

Fair Value

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year or less

 

$

11,400

 

$

11,388

 

$

 

$

 

Due after one year through five years

 

5,785

 

5,855

 

22,800

 

22,552

 

Due after five years through ten years

 

47,830

 

45,602

 

57,660

 

55,095

 

Due after ten years

 

1,082,495

 

1,051,892

 

983,040

 

949,036

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

1,147,510

 

1,114,737

 

1,063,500

 

1,026,683

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Due in one year or less

 

880,774

 

880,780

 

101,348

 

102,474

 

Due after one year through five years

 

4,617,456

 

4,670,742

 

4,689,552

 

4,786,141

 

Due after five years through ten years

 

8,225,685

 

8,225,011

 

6,602,905

 

6,587,939

 

Due after ten years

 

2,967,911

 

3,015,503

 

3,595,222

 

3,643,734

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

16,691,826

 

16,792,036

 

14,989,027

 

15,120,288

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Held-to-maturity securities

 

$

17,839,336

 

$

17,906,773

 

$

16,052,527

 

$

16,146,971

 


(a)

Amortized cost is UPB after adjusting for net unamortized premiums of $51.8$57.4 million at December 31, 2020 and $36.6$72.5 million at December 31, 2019 (net of unamortized discounts) at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.before adjustments for allowance for credit losses.

Note 9. Advances.

The FHLBNY offers to its members a wide range of fixed- and adjustable-rate advance loan products with different maturities, interest rates, payment characteristics, and optionality.

Redemption Terms

Contractual redemption terms and yields of advances were as follows (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
     Weighted (a)        Weighted (a)    
     Average  Percentage     Average  Percentage 
  Amount  Yield  of Total  Amount  Yield  of Total 
Overdrawn demand deposit accounts $-   -%  -% $-   -%  -%
Due in one year or less  51,202,647   0.65   56.42   69,206,283   1.99   68.93 
Due after one year through two years  11,520,983   1.52   12.70   8,727,277   2.16   8.69 
Due after two years through three years  7,734,061   1.65   8.52   6,214,853   2.32   6.19 
Due after three years through four years  4,400,913   1.55   4.85   3,032,507   2.68   3.02 
Due after four years through five years  3,770,927   1.50   4.16   2,709,805   2.02   2.70 
Thereafter  12,111,628   1.87   13.35   10,505,353   2.13   10.47 
Total par value  90,741,159   1.09%  100.00%  100,396,078   2.06%  100.00%
Hedge valuation basis adjustments (b)  1,325,945           299,163         
Total $92,067,104          $100,695,241         

 

Interest Rate Payment Terms(a)

The following table summarizes interest rate payment terms of securities classified as held-to-maturity (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amortized

 

Carrying

 

Amortized

 

Carrying

 

 

 

Cost

 

Value

 

Cost

 

Value

 

Mortgage-backed securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

CMO

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

$

880,842

 

$

880,671

 

$

1,117,308

 

$

1,117,023

 

Floating

 

1,714,068

 

1,714,068

 

2,101,376

 

2,101,377

 

Total CMO

 

2,594,910

 

2,594,739

 

3,218,684

 

3,218,400

 

CMBS

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

7,310,487

 

7,310,487

 

5,838,381

 

5,838,381

 

Floating

 

6,480,005

 

6,480,005

 

5,514,880

 

5,514,880

 

Total CMBS

 

13,790,492

 

13,790,492

 

11,353,261

 

11,353,261

 

Pass Thru (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

262,569

 

248,499

 

360,255

 

330,968

 

Floating

 

43,855

 

43,293

 

56,827

 

56,164

 

Total Pass Thru

 

306,424

 

291,792

 

417,082

 

387,132

 

Total MBS

 

16,691,826

 

16,677,023

 

14,989,027

 

14,958,793

 

State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed

 

8,010

 

8,010

 

9,790

 

9,790

 

Floating

 

1,139,500

 

1,139,500

 

1,053,710

 

1,053,710

 

Total State and local housing finance agency obligations

 

1,147,510

 

1,147,510

 

1,063,500

 

1,063,500

 

Total Held-to-maturity securities

 

$

17,839,336

 

$

17,824,533

 

$

16,052,527

 

$

16,022,293

 


(a)Includes MBS supported by pools of mortgages.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Impairment Analysis (OTTI) of GSE-issued and Private Label Mortgage-backed Securities

The FHLBNY evaluates its individual securities issued by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and U.S. government agency, (collectively GSE-issued securities), by considering the creditworthiness and performance of the debt securities and the strength of the GSEs’ guarantees of the securities.  Based on analysis, GSE-issued securities are performing in accordance with their contractual agreements.  The FHLBNY believes that it will recover its investments in GSE- issued securities given the current levels of collateral, credit enhancements and guarantees that exist to protect the investments.

Management evaluates its investments in private-label MBS (“PLMBS”) for OTTI on a quarterly basis by performing cash flow tests on its entire portfolio of PLMBS.

OTTI — No OTTI was recorded in 2017.  OTTI recorded in 2016 and 2015 was not material (see table below).  Based on cash flow testing, the Bank believes no additional material OTTI exists for the remaining investments at December 31, 2017.  The Bank’s conclusion is also based upon multiple factors, but not limited to the expected performance of the underlying collateral, and the evaluation of the fundamentals of the issuers’ financial condition.  Management has not made a decision to sell such securities at December 31, 2017, and has concluded that it will not be required to sell such securities before recovery of the amortized cost basis of the securities.

The following table provides rollforward information about the cumulative credit component of OTTI recognized as a charge to earnings related to held-to-maturity securities (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Beginning balance

 

$

29,117

 

$

31,892

 

$

34,893

 

Additional credit losses for which an OTTI charge was previously recognized

 

 

231

 

206

 

Realized credit losses

 

(269

)

 

 

Increases in cash flows expected to be collected, recognized over the remaining life of the securities

 

(6,117

)

(3,006

)

(3,207

)

Ending balance

 

$

22,731

 

$

29,117

 

$

31,892

 

Monoline insurance — Certain PLMBS owned by the FHLBNY are insured by third-party bond insurers (“monoline insurers”).  The bond insurance on these investments guarantees the timely payments of principal and interest if these payments cannot be satisfied from the cash flows of the underlying mortgage pool.  The FHLBNY performs cash flow credit impairment tests on all of its PLMBS, and the analysis of the securities protected by such third-party insurance looks first to the performance of the underlying security, and considers its embedded credit enhancements in the form of excess spread, overcollateralization, and credit subordination, to determine the collectability of all amounts due.  If the embedded credit enhancement protections are deemed insufficient to make timely payment of all amounts due, then the FHLBNY considers the capacity of the third-party bond insurer to cover any shortfalls.  Certain monoline insurers have been subject to adverse ratings, rating downgrades, and weakening financial performance measures.  In estimating the insurers’ capacity to provide credit protection in the future to cover any shortfall in cash flows expected to be collected for securities deemed OTTI, the FHLBNY has developed a methodology to analyze and assess the ability of the monoline insurers to meet future insurance obligations.  Based on analysis performed, the FHLBNY has determined that for bond insurer AGM, insurance guarantees can be relied upon to cover projected shortfalls.  For bond insurer MBIA, financial guarantee is at risk and no financial guarantees were assumed in 2018.  For bond insurer Ambac, the reliance period is through December 31, 2023 and is further limited to cover 45% of shortfalls.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Key Base Assumptions

The tables below summarize the range and weighted average of Key Base Assumptions for private-label MBS at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, including those deemed OTTI:

 

 

Key Base Assumptions - All PLMBS at December 31, 2017

 

 

 

CDR % (a)

 

CPR % (b)

 

Loss Severity % (c)

 

Security Classification

 

Range

 

Average

 

Range

 

Average

 

Range

 

Average

 

RMBS Prime (d)

 

0.0-1.3

 

0.7

 

3.2-19.1

 

7.5

 

0.0-110.3

 

70.4

 

RMBS Alt-A (d)

 

1.0-1.3

 

1.1

 

2.0-6.7

 

2.4

 

30.0-30.0

 

30.0

 

HEL Subprime (e)

 

1.0-6.7

 

3.3

 

2.0-12.3

 

4.1

 

29.6-100.0

 

64.4

 

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

2.9-3.7

 

3.5

 

3.2-4.6

 

3.4

 

87.0-97.8

 

95.9

 

 

 

Key Base Assumptions - All PLMBS at December 31, 2016

 

 

 

CDR% (a)

 

CPR% (b)

 

Loss Severity% (c)

 

Security Classification

 

Range

 

Average

 

Range

 

Average

 

Range

 

Average

 

RMBS Prime (d)

 

0.1-5.2

 

2.2

 

7.5-14.8

 

10.7

 

0.0-70.8

 

45.4

 

RMBS Alt-A (d)

 

1.0-2.7

 

1.2

 

2.0-4.2

 

2.8

 

30.0-30.0

 

30.0

 

HEL Subprime (e)

 

1.0-12.3

 

3.9

 

2.0-16.3

 

4.1

 

30.0-100.0

 

62.9

 

Manufactured Housing Loans

 

2.5-3.3

 

3.1

 

2.7-4.1

 

3.1

 

77.1-88.4

 

85.4

 


(a)Conditional Default Rate (CDR): 1— ((1-MDR)^12) where, MDR is defined as the “Monthly Default Rate (MDR)” = (Beginning Principal Balance of Liquidated Loans)/(Total Beginning Principal Balance).

(b)Conditional Prepayment Rate (CPR): 1— ((1-SMM)^12) where, SMM is defined as the “Single Monthly Mortality (SMM)” = (Voluntary Partial and Full Prepayments + Repurchases + Liquidated Balances)/(Beginning Principal Balance - Scheduled Principal). Voluntary prepayment excludes the liquidated balances mentioned above.

(c)Loss Severity (Principal and Interest in the current period) = Sum (Total Realized Loss Amount)/Sum (Beginning Principal and Interest Balance of Liquidated Loans).

(d)CMOs/REMICS private-label MBS.

(e)Residential asset-backed MBS.

Significant Inputs

For determining the fair values of all MBS, the FHLBNY has obtained pricing from multiple pricing services; the prices were clustered, averaged, and then assessed qualitatively before adopting the “final price”.  Disaggregation of the Level 3 bonds is by collateral type supporting the credit structure of the PLMBS, and the FHLBNY deems that no further disaggregation is necessary for a qualitative understanding of the sensitivity of fair values.

Note 8.Advances.

The FHLBNY offers to its members a wide range of fixed- and adjustable-rate advance loan products with different maturities, interest rates, payment characteristics, and optionality.

Redemption Terms

Contractual redemption terms and yields of advances were as follows (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted (a)

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Average

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Amount

 

Yield

 

of Total

 

Amount

 

Yield

 

of Total

 

Overdrawn demand deposit accounts

 

$

 

%

%

$

1,388

 

1.49

%

%

Due in one year or less

 

85,291,491

 

1.62

 

69.51

 

50,260,910

 

1.01

 

46.01

 

Due after one year through two years

 

16,866,935

 

1.78

 

13.74

 

34,111,721

 

1.39

 

31.23

 

Due after two years through three years

 

9,513,504

 

1.97

 

7.75

 

11,078,731

 

1.67

 

10.14

 

Due after three years through four years

 

5,173,778

 

2.18

 

4.22

 

6,467,290

 

2.03

 

5.92

 

Due after four years through five years

 

2,757,648

 

2.42

 

2.25

 

3,106,275

 

2.16

 

2.84

 

Thereafter

 

3,104,085

 

2.27

 

2.53

 

4,214,677

 

2.28

 

3.86

 

Total par value

 

122,707,441

 

1.72

%

100.00

%

109,240,992

 

1.34

%

100.00

%

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (b)

 

(265,260

)

 

 

 

 

1,980

 

 

 

 

 

Fair value option valuation adjustments and accrued interest (c)

 

5,624

 

 

 

 

 

13,653

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

122,447,805

 

 

 

 

 

$

109,256,625

 

 

 

 

 


(a)

The weighted average yield is the weighted average coupon rates for advances, unadjusted for swaps. For floating-rate advances, the weighted average rate is the rate outstanding at the reporting dates.

(b)Hedge valuation basis adjustments under ASC 815 hedges represent changes in the fair values of fixed-rate advances due to changes in LIBOR, which isdesignated benchmark interest rates, the remaining terms to maturity or to next call and the notional amounts of advances in a hedging relationship.  The FHLBNY’s benchmark rate in a Fair value hedge.rates are LIBOR, OIS/FF index and OIS/SOFR index.

137

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Monitoring and Evaluating Credit Losses on Advances

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326). The ASU introduced a new accounting framework, which was adopted effective January 1, 2020.

Advances borrowed by members increased in the aftermath of the global Coronavirus-19 pandemic, resulting in an unprecedented demand for liquidity (advances) from our borrowing members. The increase largely occurred in March 2020 and carrying value of advances borrowed increased to $136.2 billion at March 31, 2020, up from $100.7 billion at December 31, 2019. Since then demand has declined with maturing advances not replaced by borrowing members or due to prepayments. Carrying values were $92.1 billion at December 31, 2020.

Demand for funds have been generally from a wide base of member financial institutions, although the larger members were the significant borrowers. For more information about borrower concentration, see Note 21. Segment Information and Concentration. Our collateral monitoring and valuation processes have remained robust through the increase in borrowing activities. We experienced a similar spike in demand during the 2008-9 financial crisis, and our operations were able to process, then as now, such growth in demand and maintain a robust and vigilant credit and collateral monitoring and operating environment.

Our credit and collateral practices have not identified allowance for credit losses at December 31, 2020, or at January 1, 2020, the date ASU 2016-13 was adopted, or in the periods in 2020. Accrued interest receivable was $89.6 million and $181.8 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, and no allowance for credit losses was recorded as interest due is well collateralized and interest due is expected to be collected. No subsequent events have occurred that would require us to report a credit loss on advances.

The FHLBNY’s (or the Bank’s) advances are primarily made to member financial institutions, which include commercial banks and insurance companies. The Bank manages its credit exposure to advances through an integrated approach that includes establishing a credit limit for each borrower. This approach includes an ongoing review of each borrower's financial condition, in conjunction with the Bank's collateral and lending policies to limit risk of loss, while balancing borrowers' needs for a reliable source of funding.

In addition, the Bank lends to eligible borrowers in accordance with federal law and FHFA regulations. Specifically, the Bank is required to obtain sufficient collateral to fully secure credit products up to the counterparty’s total credit limit. Collateral eligible to secure new or renewed advances includes:

(c)Valuation adjustments represent changes
·one-to-four family and multifamily mortgage loans (delinquent for no more than 90-days) and securities representing such mortgages;
·securities issued, insured, or guaranteed by the U.S. government or any U.S. government agency (for example, mortgage-backed securities issued or guaranteed by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, or Ginnie Mae);
·cash or deposits in the entire fair values of advances elected under the FVO.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Monitoring and Evaluating Credit Losses on Advances — Summarized below are the FHLBNY’s assessment methodologies for evaluating advances for credit losses.

The FHLBNY closely monitors the creditworthiness of the institutions to which it lends.  The FHLBNY also closely monitors the quality and value of the assets that are pledged as collateral by its members.  The FHLBNY’s members are required to pledge collateral to secure advances.  Eligible collateral includes: (1) one-to-four-family and multi-family mortgages; (2) U.S. Treasury and government-agency securities; (3) mortgage-backed securities; and (4) Bank;

·certain other collateral whichthat is real estate related andestate-related, provided that the collateral has a readily ascertainable value and in whichthat the FHLBNYBank can perfect a security interest.  The FHLBNY has the right to take such steps, as it deems necessary to protect its secured position on outstanding advances, including requiring additional collateral (whether or not such additional collateral would otherwise be eligible to secure a loan;interest in it; and the provision would benefit the FHLBNY in a scenario when a member defaults).  The FHLBNY also has a statutory lien under the FHLBank Act on members’ capital stock, which serves as further collateral for members’ indebtedness to the FHLBNY.

Credit Risk.  The FHLBNY has policies and procedures in place to manage credit risk.  There were no past due advances and all advances were current for all periods in this report.  Management does not anticipate any credit losses, and accordingly, the FHLBNY has not provided an allowance for credit losses on advances.  Potential credit risk from advances is concentrated in commercial banks, savings institutions, and insurance companies.

Concentration of Advances Outstanding.  Advances to the FHLBNY’s top ten borrowing member institutions are reported in Note 20. Segment Information and Concentration.  The FHLBNY held sufficient collateral to cover the advances to all institutions and it does not expect to incur any credit losses.  Advances borrowed by insurance companies accounted for 17.1% and 18.7% of total advances at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  Lending to insurance companies poses a number of unique risks not present in lending to federally insured depository institutions.  For example, there is no single federal regulator for insurance companies.  They are supervised by state regulators and subject to state insurance codes and regulations.  There is uncertainty about whether a state insurance commissioner would try to void the FHLBNY’s claims on collateral in the event of an insurance company failure.  As with all members, insurance companies are also required to purchase the FHLBNY’s capital stock as a prerequisite to membership and borrowing activity.  The FHLBNY’s management takes a number of steps to mitigate the unique risk of lending to insurance companies.  At the time of membership, the FHLBNY requires an insurance company to be highly-rated and to meet the FHLBNY’s credit quality standards.  The FHLBNY performs quarterly credit analysis of the insurance borrower.

The FHLBNY also requires member insurance companies to pledge highly-rated readily marketable securities or mortgage collateral which are held in the FHLBNY’s custody or by our third party custodian.  Such collateral must meet the FHLBNY’s credit quality standards, with appropriate minimum margins applied.  Very high credit quality insurance companies may be allowed to retain possession of the mortgage collateral provided the mortgage collateral is held by a third-party custodian pursuant to a tri-party security agreement.  Marketable securities pledged as collateral by the insurance company must be held by the FHLBNY’s third party custodian.

Security TermsThe FHLBNY lends to financial institutions involved in housing finance within its district.  Borrowing members are required to purchase capital stock of the FHLBNY and pledge collateral for advances.  As of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016,

·qualifying securities.

Residential mortgage loans are the principal form of collateral for advances. The estimated value of the collateral required to secure each member's credit products is calculated by applying collateral discounts, or haircuts, to the market value or unpaid principal balance of the collateral, as applicable. In addition, community financial institutions are eligible to use expanded statutory collateral provisions for small business, agriculture loans, and community development loans. The Bank’s capital stock owned by each borrower is also pledged as collateral. Collateral arrangements may vary depending upon borrower credit quality, financial condition, and performance; borrowing capacity; and overall credit exposure to the borrower. The Bank can also require additional or substitute collateral to protect its security interest. The Bank also has policies and procedures for validating the reasonableness of our collateral valuations.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Summarized below are the FHLBNY’s credit loss allowance methodologies:

Adoption of the guidance under ASU 2016-13, resulted in formalizing the governance stipulated under the new guidance. Our pre-existing processes - collateral monitoring, valuation of collateral and haircuts in addition to borrower credit analysis - are extensive and remain key to our operations. We devote considerable resources towards these procedures and processes.

The FHLBNY closely monitors the creditworthiness of the institutions to which it lends. The FHLBNY also closely monitors the quality and value of the assets that are pledged as collateral by its members. The FHLBNY’s members are required to pledge collateral to secure advances. Eligible collateral includes: (1) one-to-four-family and multi-family mortgages; (2) U.S. Treasury and government-agency securities; (3) mortgage-backed securities; and (4) certain other collateral which is real estate related and has a readily ascertainable value, and in which the FHLBNY can perfect a security interest. The FHLBNY has the right to take such steps, as it deems necessary to protect its secured position on outstanding advances, including requiring additional collateral (whether or not such additional collateral would otherwise be eligible to secure a loan; and the provision would benefit the FHLBNY in a scenario when a member defaults). The FHLBNY also has a statutory lien under the FHLBank Act on members’ capital stock, which serves as further collateral for members’ indebtedness to the FHLBNY.

Allowance for Credit Risk. The FHLBNY has policies and procedures in place to manage credit risk. The FHLBNY has a continuous process of evaluating collateral supporting advances and to make changes to its collateral guidelines, as necessary, based on current market conditions. None of the FHLBNY’s advances were past due, on non-accrual status, or considered impaired as of December 31, 2020 and in any reporting period in 2020. In addition, there were no troubled debt restructurings related to advances at the FHLBNY at any time in this report.

As of December 31, 2020, and in all reporting periods in 2020, the FHLBNY had collateral on a borrower-by-borrower basis with a value equal to, or greater than, its outstanding advances. Based on the collateral held as security, the FHLBNY’s management's credit extension and collateral policies, and repayment history on advances, the FHLBNY did not expect any losses on its advances at any time in the periods in 2020 and through the filing date on this report; therefore, no allowance for credit losses on advances was recorded. For the same reasons, the FHLBNY did not record any allowance for credit losses on advances as of December 31, 2020.

Concentration of Advances Outstanding. Advances to the FHLBNY’s top ten borrowing member institutions are reported in Note 21. Segment Information and Concentration. The FHLBNY held sufficient collateral to cover the advances to all institutions and it does not expect to incur any credit losses.

Advances borrowed by insurance companies accounted for 35.6% and 24.9% of total advances at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Lending to insurance companies poses a number of unique risks not present in lending to federally insured depository institutions. For example, there is no single federal regulator for insurance companies. They are supervised by state regulators and subject to state insurance codes and regulations. There is uncertainty about whether a state insurance commissioner would try to void the FHLBNY’s claims on collateral in the event of an insurance company failure. As with all members, insurance companies are also required to purchase the FHLBNY’s capital stock as a prerequisite to membership and borrowing activity. The FHLBNY’s management takes a number of steps to mitigate the unique risk of lending to insurance companies. At the time of membership, the FHLBNY requires an insurance company to be highly-rated and to meet the FHLBNY’s credit quality standards. The FHLBNY performs quarterly credit analysis of the insurance borrower. Insurance companies are required to successfully complete an onsite review prior to pledging collateral. Additionally, in order to ensure its position as a first priority secured creditor, FHLBNY typically requires insurance companies to place physical possession of all pledged eligible collateral with FHLBNY or deposit it with a third party custodian or control agent. Such collateral must meet the FHLBNY’s credit quality standards, with appropriate minimum margins applied.

Security Terms. The FHLBNY lends to financial institutions involved in housing finance within its district. Borrowing members are required to purchase capital stock of the FHLBNY and pledge collateral for advances. During all periods in this report and as of December 31, 2020, the FHLBNY had rights to collateral with an estimated value greater than outstanding advances. Based upon the financial condition of the member, the FHLBNY:

 

(1)Allows a member to retain possession of the mortgage collateral pledged to the FHLBNY if the member executes a written security agreement, provides periodic listings and agrees to hold such collateral for the benefit of the FHLBNY; however, securities and cash collateral are always in physical possession; or

(2)Requires the member specifically to assign or place physical possession of such mortgage collateral with the FHLBNY or its custodial agent.

139

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Beyond these provisions, Section 10(e) of the FHLBank Act affords any security interest granted by a member to the FHLBNY’s priority over the claims or rights of any other party. The two exceptions are claims that would be entitled to priority under otherwise applicable law or perfected security interests. All member obligations with the FHLBNY were fully collateralized throughout their entire term. The total of collateral pledged to the FHLBNY includes excess collateral pledged above the minimum collateral requirements. However, a “Maximum Lendable Value” is established to ensure that the FHLBNY has sufficient eligible collateral securing credit extensions.

Note 10. Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

Mortgage Partnership Finance® program loans, or (MPF®), are the mortgage loans held-for-portfolio. The FHLBNY participates in the MPF program by purchasing and originating conventional mortgage loans from its participating members, hereafter referred to as Participating Financial Institutions (PFI). The FHLBNY manages the liquidity, interest rate and prepayment option risk of the MPF loans, while the PFIs retain servicing activities, and may credit-enhance the portion of the loans participated to the FHLBNY. No intermediary trust is involved.

As noted under Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates, the FHLBNY has introduced a new mortgage loan program the Mortgage Asset Program sm (MAP) and plan to fully roll it out starting in late March 2021, and cease to acquire loans under the MPF program. Legacy loans under the MPF programs would continue to be supported and serviced under the MPF loan agreements. At December 31, 2020, mortgage loans under the MAP program were $0.3 million. Because of the immateriality of loans acquired, required mortgage-loan disclosures on MAP were omitted.

The FHLBNY classifies mortgage loans as held for investment, and accordingly reports them at their principal amount outstanding net of unamortized premiums, discounts, and unrealized gains and losses from loans initially classified as mortgage loan commitments.

The following table presents information on mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Carrying Amount  Percentage of Total  Carrying Amount  Percentage of Total 
Real Estate (a):                
Fixed medium-term single-family mortgages $178,968   6.25% $174,291   5.57%
Fixed long-term single-family mortgages  2,682,955   93.75   2,953,453   94.43 
Total unpaid principal balance $2,861,923   100.00% $3,127,744   100.00%
                 
Unamortized premiums  43,103       46,442     
Unamortized discounts  (1,246)      (1,562)    
Basis adjustment (b)  2,691       1,381     
Total MPF loans amortized cost $2,906,471      $3,174,005     
MPF allowance for credit losses (c)  (7,073)      (653)    
MPF loans held-for-portfolio $2,899,398      $3,173,352     
MAP loans held-for-portfolio $314             
Total mortgage loans held-for-portfolio at carrying value $2,899,712             

 

Beyond these provisions, Section 10(e) of the FHLBank Act affords any security interest granted by a member to the FHLBNY’s priority over the claims or rights of any other party.  The two exceptions are claims that would be entitled to priority under otherwise applicable law or perfected security interests.  All member obligations with the FHLBNY were fully collateralized throughout their entire term.  The total of collateral pledged to the FHLBNY includes excess collateral pledged above the minimum collateral requirements.  However, a “Maximum Lendable Value” is established to ensure that the FHLBNY has sufficient eligible collateral securing credit extensions.

Note 9.(a)Mortgage Loans Held-for-Portfolio.

Mortgage Partnership Finance® program loans, or (MPF®), are the mortgage loans held-for-portfolio.  The FHLBNY participates in the MPF program by purchasing and originating conventional mortgage loans from its participating members, hereafter referred to as Participating Financial Institutions (“PFI”).  The FHLBNY manages the liquidity, interest rate and prepayment option risk of the MPF loans, while the PFIs retain servicing activities, and may credit-enhance the portion of the loans participated to the FHLBNY.  No intermediary trust is involved.

The FHLBNY classifies mortgage loans as held for investment, and accordingly reports them at their principal amount outstanding net of unamortized premiums, discounts, and unrealized gains and losses from loans initially classified as mortgage loan commitments.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following table presents information on mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

Real Estate(a):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed medium-term single-family mortgages

 

$

238,057

 

8.35

%

$

259,742

 

9.62

%

Fixed long-term single-family mortgages

 

2,612,315

 

91.65

 

2,441,109

 

90.38

 

Multi-family mortgages

 

 

 

56

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

2,850,372

 

100.00

%

2,700,907

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unamortized premiums

 

48,011

 

 

 

48,008

 

 

 

Unamortized discounts

 

(1,833

)

 

 

(1,928

)

 

 

Basis adjustment (b)

 

1,418

 

 

 

1,126

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

2,897,968

 

 

 

2,748,113

 

 

 

Allowance for credit losses

 

(992

)

 

 

(1,554

)

 

 

Total mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net of allowance for credit losses

 

$

2,896,976

 

 

 

$

2,746,559

 

 

 


(a)

Conventional mortgages represent the majority of mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, with the remainder invested in FHA and VA insured loans (also referred to as government loans).

(b)Balances represent unamortized fair value basis of closed delivery commitments. A basis adjustment is recorded at the settlement of the loan and it represents the difference in trade price paid for acquiring the loan and the price at the settlement date for a similar loan. The basis adjustment is amortized as a yield adjustment to Interest income.

(c)The FHLBNY and its members shareBank’s methodology for determining the credit risk of MPF loans by structuring potentialallowance for credit losses into layers.  The first layer is typically 100 bps, but this varieson mortgage loans changed on January 1, 2020 with the particular MPF product.  The amountadoption of CECL, the first layer, or First Loss Account (“FLA”), was estimated at $33.3 million and $30.9 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  The FLA is not recorded or reported as a reservenew accounting framework for loan losses, as it serves as a memorandum or information account.  The FHLBNY is responsible for absorbing the first layer.  The second layer is that amountmeasurement of credit obligations thatlosses on financial instruments. Consistent with the PFImodified retrospective method of adoption, the prior period has agreednot been revised to assume at the “Master Commitment” level.  The FHLBNY pays a credit enhancement feeconform to the PFI for taking on this obligation.  The FHLBNY assumes all residual risk.  Credit enhancement fees accrued were $2.4 million, $2.3 million, and $2.0 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015.new basis of accounting.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The FHLBNY and its members share the credit risk of MPF loans by structuring potential credit losses into layers. The first layer is typically 100 bps, but this varies with the particular MPF product. The amount of the first layer, or First Loss Account (FLA), was estimated at $43.9 million and $40.2 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. The FLA is not recorded or reported as a reserve for loan losses, as it serves as a memorandum or information account. The FHLBNY is responsible for absorbing the first layer. The second layer is that amount of credit obligations that the PFI has agreed to assume at the “Master Commitment” level. The FHLBNY pays a credit enhancement fee to the PFI for taking on this obligation. The FHLBNY assumes all residual risk. Credit enhancement fees accrued were $2.7 million in 2020 and $2.5 million in 2019 and 2018. These fees were reported as a reduction to mortgage loan interest income.

 

In terms of the credit enhancement waterfall, the MPF program structures potential credit losses on conventional MPF loans into layers on each loan pool as follows:

 

(1)(1)The first layer of protection against loss is the liquidation value of the real property securing the loan.

(2)The next layer of protection comes from the primary mortgage insurance (“PMI”)(PMI) that is required for loans with a loan-to-value ratio greater than 80% at origination.

(3)Losses that exceed the liquidation value of the real property and any PMI will be absorbed by the FHLBNY, limited to the amount of the FLA available under the Master Commitment. For certain MPF products, the FHLBNY could recover previously absorbed losses by withholding future credit enhancement fees (“CE Fees”)(CE Fees) otherwise payable to the PFI, and applying the amounts to recover losses previously absorbed. In effect, the FHLBNY may recover losses allocated to the FLA from CE Fees. The amount of CE Fees depends on the MPF product and the outstanding balances of loans funded in the Master Commitment. CE Fees payable (and potentially(potentially available for loss recovery) will decline as the outstanding loan balances in the Master Commitment declines.

(4)(4)The second layeror portion of credit losses is incurred by the PFI and/or the Supplemental Mortgage Insurance (“SMI”)(SMI) provider as follows: The PFI absorbs losses in excess of any FLA up to the amount of the PFI’s credit obligation amount and/or to the SMI provider for MPF 125 Plus products if the PFI has selected SMI coverage.

(5)(5)The third layerof losses is absorbed by the FHLBNY.

Allowance Methodology for Loan Losses

Allowance Policy — Mortgage loans are considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the FHLBNY will be unable to collect all principal and interest amounts due according to the contractual terms of the mortgage loan agreements.  The FHLBNY considers a loan to be seriously delinquent when it is past due 90-days or more. The FHLBNY considers the occurrence of serious delinquency as a primary confirming event of a credit loss.  Bankruptcy and foreclosures are also considered as confirming events.  When a loan is seriously delinquent, or in bankruptcy or in foreclosure, the FHLBNY measures

Allowance Methodology for Mortgage Loan Losses under New Accounting Framework under ASU 2016-13.

Effective January 1, 2020, the FHLBNY adopted ASU 2016-13, Financial Instruments Credit Losses (Topic 326). With the adoption of the CECL guidance, the estimate of expected credit losses for MPF will be forward-looking. CECL will require the use of forecasts about future economic conditions to estimate the expected credit loss over the remaining life of an instrument. The estimated credit loss is recorded upon initial recognition of the asset, even if the asset is performing at the time of purchase, in anticipation of a future event that will lead to a loss being realized (including consideration of remote scenarios as required under ASC 326-20-30-10). The objective of the estimate is to record the net amount expected to be collected for the asset, while considering available relevant information about the collectability of cash flows.

Mortgage loans are evaluated for credit losses on an individual basis. The following table presents the impacts to the allowance for credit losses and retained earnings upon adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2020 and at December 31, 2020. Amounts represent cumulative loan loss allowances at each of the dates (in thousands):

     December 31, 2019     CECL Adoption Impact    Reserves Recorded
in 2020
     December 31, 2020  
Allowance for Credit Losses $653  $2,972  $3,448  $7,073 

The impact of adoption of ASU 2016-13 — Upon adoption at January 1, 2020, the Bank recorded $3.0 million as the incremental expected life-time losses.

Our allowance for credit loss of $7.1 million at December 31, 2020 took into consideration several factors. First, the Bank’s mortgage loan portfolio has a history of incurred losses that accumulates to less than $5 million in life-time losses. Second, loss sharing and insurance mitigates forecasted losses. Lastly, forbearance processes are likely to be temporary for the MPF loans.

141

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Evaluation of Credit Losses under the new framework — MPF loans are evaluated for credit losses using the practical expedient for collateral dependent assets. We consider a conventional mortgage loan as a collateral dependent loan because we expect repayment to be provided by the sale of the underlying property, that is, if it is considered likely that the borrower will default. We may estimate the applicable fair value of this collateral by applying an appropriate loss severity rate or using third party estimates or property valuation model. The expected credit loss of a collateral dependent mortgage loan is equal to the difference between the amortized cost of the loan and the estimated fair value of the collateral, less estimated selling costs. We will either reserve for these estimated losses or record a direct charge-off of the loan balance, if certain triggering criteria are exceeded. Expected recoveries of prior charge-offs would be included in the allowance for credit loss.

The Bank���s credit risk model (model) estimates the probabilities of prepayments and defaults concurrently. Prepayments represent the probability that an individual loan will voluntarily prepay while defaults represent the probability that an individual loan will transition to involuntary payoffs. Defaults transition from one delinquency status to another (e.g., current to 30 days, 30 days to 60 days, etc.) until the loan is involuntarily paid off. The transition probabilities are a function of collateral types, borrower characteristics, and economic factors. The model utilizes economic data files that provide interest rates, the applicable house price index, and applicable foreclosure timeline, which are used in simulating transition probabilities. The Bank’s third party credit loss model provides the ability to update assumptions and calculate the probability of default of each individual mortgage loan. The model also uses loan and borrower information along with economic assumptions about applicable housing prices and interest rates as inputs to generate a distribution of projected cash flows over the life of the mortgage. The model estimates the loss given default (LGD) for each loan during the simulation based on assumptions adopted in the model by projecting loan status probabilities and aggregating projected cash flows for each loan in the portfolio. A loan in foreclosure or REO sale is considered to be a default.

Accrued interest receivable was $14.2 million and $15.5 million at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. Delinquency and non-accruals are factors that are applied in estimating expected credit losses. Refer to discussions on non-accrual and delinquent loans.

Government mortgages, which carry FHA, VA or USDA guarantees presents a minimal risk of loss. Additionally, as part of the service agreement between FHLBNY and the members that sold us government loans, those members will buy back delinquent government loans.

Credit enhancements under the MPF Program may include primary mortgage insurance, supplemental mortgage insurance, in addition to recoverable performance-based credit enhancement fees. Potential recoveries from credit enhancements for conventional loans are evaluated at the individual master commitment level to determine the credit enhancements available to recover losses on loans under each individual master commitment. However, expected recoveries from credit enhancements are not factored into the calculation of expected credit losses. The MPF program’s actual loss experience has been immaterial and inclusion of recoveries in the allowance calculations would result in an immaterial change.

Allowance Methodology for Loan Losses under Methodology Prior to the Adoption of ASU 2016-13.

Allowance Policy — Mortgage loans were considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it was probable that the FHLBNY would be unable to collect all principal and interest amounts due according to the contractual terms of the mortgage loan agreements. The FHLBNY considered a loan to be seriously delinquent when it was past due 90-days or more, and was a primary confirming event of a credit loss. When a loan was seriously delinquent, or in bankruptcy or in foreclosure, the FHLBNY measured estimated credit losses on an individual loan basis by looking to the value of the real property collateral. For such loans, the FHLBNY believed it was probable that we would be unable to collect all contractual interest and principal in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement.

We computed the provision for credit losses without considering the private mortgage insurance and other accompanying credit enhancement features that provide credit assurance to the FHLBNY.

For loans that were not individually measured for estimated credit losses (i.e. they are not seriously delinquent, or in bankruptcy or in foreclosure), the FHLBNY measured estimated incurred credit losses on a collective basis and recorded a valuation reserve. We reviewed government insured loans (FHA- and VA-insured MPF loans) on a collective basis.

142

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Under the incurred loss model (prior to the adoption of the expected loss model at January 1, 2020), we collectively evaluated the majority of our conventional mortgage loan portfolio for impairment (excluding those individually evaluated), and estimated an allowance for credit losses based primarily upon the following factors: (i) loan delinquencies, and (ii) actual historical loss severities. We had utilized a roll-rate methodology when estimating allowance for credit losses. This methodology projected loans migrating to charge off status (180 days delinquency) based on historical average rates of delinquency. We then applied a loss severity factor to calculate an estimate of credit losses.

We collectively evaluated government insured loans (Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and/or the Rural Housing Service of the Department of Agriculture). Any losses incurred on these loans that are not recovered from the insurer/guarantor are absorbed by the servicers. The FHLBNY’s credit risk for these loans is if the servicer or PFI fails to pay for losses not covered by the guarantee or insurance. We evaluated the credit worthiness of our member, the PFI. 

Rollforward Analysis of Allowance for Credit Losses

The following table provides a rollforward analysis of the allowance for credit losses (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Allowance for credit losses:            
Beginning balance $653  $814  $992 
Adjustment for cumulative effect of accounting change  2,972   -   - 
Charge-offs    (94)  (19)  (172)
Recoveries    -   -   365 
Provision (Reversal) for credit losses on mortgage loans  3,542   (142)  (371)
Balance, at end of period $7,073  $653  $814 
             
   December 31, 
   2020 (a)  2019   2018 
Ending balance, individually evaluated for impairment $7,073  $160  $238 
Ending balance, collectively evaluated for impairment  -   493   576 
Total Allowance for credit losses $7,073  $653  $814 

(a)With the adoption of ASU 2016-13 in 2020, we evaluate all loans on a loan-by-loan basis by looking to the value of the real property collateral.  For such loans, the FHLBNY believes it is probable that we will be unable to collect all contractual interest and principal in accordance with the terms of the loan agreement.  For loans that have not been individually measured for estimated credit losses (i.e. they are not seriously delinquent, or in bankruptcy or in foreclosure), the FHLBNY measures estimated incurred credit losses on a collective basis and records a valuation reserve.policy.

The FHLBNY’s total MPF loans and impaired MPF loans were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Total MPF Mortgage loans, carrying values net (a) $2,899,398  $3,173,352 
Non-performing MPF mortgage loans - Conventional (a)(b) $58,498  $6,899 
Insured MPF loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest (a)(b) $14,760  $3,935 

 

When a loan is delinquent 180 days or more, the FHLBNY will charge-off the excess carrying value over the net realizable value of the loan because the FHLBNY deems that foreclosure is probable at 180 days delinquency.  When the loan is foreclosed and the FHLBNY takes possession of real estate, the balance of the loan that has not been charged off is recorded as real estate owned at the lower of carrying value or net realizable value.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York(a)

Notes to Financial Statements

Periodic review — The FHLBNY performs periodic reviews of impaired mortgage loans within the MPF loan portfolio to identify the potential for credit losses inherent in the impaired loan to determine the likelihood of collection of the principal and interest.  We utilize an allowance for credit losses to reserve for estimated losses in our conventional mortgage loan portfolio (uninsured MPF loans).  The measurement of our allowance for credit losses is determined by (i) reviewing certain conventional mortgage loans for impairment on an individual basis, (ii) reviewing remaining conventional mortgage loans (not individually assessed) on a collective basis, and (iii) reviewing government insured loans (FHA- and VA-insured MPF loans) on a collective basis.

We compute the provision for credit losses without considering the private mortgage insurance and other accompanying credit enhancement features that provide credit assurance to the FHLBNY.

·Individually evaluated conventional mortgage loans — We evaluate impaired conventional mortgage loans for impairment individually.  A conventional mortgage loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that we will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement.  The primary credit quality indicator that we use in evaluating impairment on mortgage loans includes a serious delinquency rate — MPF loans that are 90 days or more past due, in bankruptcy, or in the process of foreclosure.  We also individually measure credit losses on loans that are restructured in a troubled debt restructuring involving a modification of terms.  Loans discharged under Chapter 7 bankruptcy are considered TDR, and are individually measured for credit losses when seriously delinquent.  We measure estimated credit impairment based on the estimated fair value of the underlying collateral, which is determined using property values, less selling costs.

·Collectively evaluated conventional mortgage loans — We collectively evaluate the majority of our conventional mortgage loan portfolio for impairment (excluding those individually evaluated), and estimate an allowance for credit losses based primarily upon the following factors: (i) loan delinquencies, and (ii) actual historical loss severities.  We utilize a roll-rate methodology when estimating allowance for credit losses.  This methodology projects loans migrating to charge off status (180 days delinquency) based on historical average rates of delinquency.  We then apply a loss severity factor to calculate an estimate of credit losses.

·Collectively evaluated government insured loans — The FHLBNY invests in government-insured mortgage loans that are insured or guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration, the Department of Veterans Affairs, and/or the Rural Housing Service of the Department of Agriculture.  The servicer or PFI obtains and maintains insurance or a guaranty from the applicable government agency.  The servicer or PFI is responsible for compliance with all government agency requirements and for obtaining the benefit of the applicable guarantee or insurance with respect to defaulted government-insured mortgage loans.  Any losses incurred on these loans that are not recovered from the insurer/guarantor are absorbed by the servicers.  The FHLBNY’s credit risk for these loans is if the servicer or PFI fails to pay for losses not covered by the guarantee or insurance.  We evaluate the credit worthiness of our member, the PFI.

Classes of the MPF loan portfolio would be subject to disaggregation to the extent that it is needed to understand the exposure to credit risk arising from these loans.  The FHLBNY has determined that no further disaggregation of portfolio segments is needed other than the methodology discussed above.

Credit Enhancement Fees

The credit enhancement fee (“CE fees”) due to the PFI for taking on a credit enhancement obligation is accrued based on the master commitments outstanding.  For certain MPF products, the CE fees are held back for 12 months and then paid monthly to the PFIs.  Under the MPF agreements with PFIs, the FHLBNY may recover credit losses from future CE fees.  The FHLBNY does not consider CE fees when computing the allowance for credit losses.  It is assumed that repayment is expected to be provided solely by the sale of the underlying property, and there is no other available and reliable source of repayment.  If losses were incurred, the FHLBNY would withhold CE fee payments to the PFI associated with the loan that is in a loss position.  The amount withheld would be commensurate with the credit loss and the loss layer for which the PFI has assumed the credit enhancement responsibility.  The FHLBNY’s loss experience has been insignificant and amounts of CE fees withheld have been insignificant in all periods in this report.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Allowance for Credit Losses

Allowances for credit losses have been recorded against the uninsured MPF loans.  All other types of mortgage loans were insignificant and no allowances were necessary.  The following table provides a rollforward analysis of the allowance for credit losses (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Allowance for credit losses:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning balance

 

$

1,554

 

$

326

 

$

4,507

 

Charge-offs

 

(580

)

(738

)

(4,699

)

Recoveries

 

305

 

 

 

(Reversal)/Provision for credit losses on mortgage loans

 

(287

)

1,966

 

518

 

Ending balance

 

$

992

 

$

1,554

 

$

326

 

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Ending balance, individually evaluated for impairment

 

$

210

 

$

600

 

$

326

 

Ending balance, collectively evaluated for impairment

 

782

 

954

 

 

Total Allowance for credit losses

 

$

992

 

$

1,554

 

$

326

 

Mortgage Loans Non-performing Loans

The FHLBNY’s total MPF loans and impaired MPF loans were as follows (UPB, in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Total Mortgage loans, net of allowance for credit losses (a)

 

$

2,896,976

 

$

2,746,559

 

Non-performing mortgage loans - Conventional (a)(b)

 

$

13,272

 

$

14,917

 

Insured MPF loans past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest (a)(b)

 

$

5,582

 

$

5,227

 


(a)

Includes loans classified as special mention, sub-standard, doubtful or loss under regulatory criteria, net of amounts charged-off if delinquent for 180 days or more.

(b)Data in this table represents unpaid principal balance,UPB, and would not agree to data reported in other tables at “recorded investment,” which includes interest receivable.“amortized cost”.

Under the new framework, the FHLBNY evaluates all loans, including non-performing conventional loans, on an individual basis for lifetime credit losses.

FHA and VA loans are considered as insured MPF loans, and while the loans are evaluated on an individual basis, we have deemed that FHFA and VA loans as collectively insured. Additionally, based on the Bank's assessment of its servicers and the collateral backing the insured loans, the risk of loss was deemed immaterial. The Bank has not recorded an allowance for credit losses for government-guaranteed or -insured mortgage loans in any periods in 2020 or 2019. Furthermore, none of these mortgage loans has been placed on non-accrual status because of the U.S. government guarantee or insurance on these loans and the contractual obligation of the loan servicer to repurchase the loans when certain criteria are met.

143

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following tables present unpaid principal balances with and without related loan loss allowances for conventional loans (excluding insured FHA/VA MPF loans) in the MPF program (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
  Unpaid        Average 
  Principal  Related  Amortized Cost  Amortized Cost 
  Balance  Allowance  After Allowance  After Allowance (d) 
Conventional Loans - MPF (a)(c)                
No related allowance  (b) $1,792,650  $-  $1,818,942  $1,903,273 
With a related allowance  873,955   (7,073)  881,661   994,262 
Total measured for impairment $2,666,605  $(7,073) $2,700,603  $2,897,535 

  December 31, 2019 
  Unpaid        Average 
  Principal  Related  Recorded  Recorded 
  Balance  Allowance  Investment  Investment (d) 
Conventional Loans - MPF (a)(c)                
No related allowance  (b) $9,025  $-  $9,061  $10,169 
With a related allowance  2,901,719   (653)  2,958,205   2,795,017 
Total measured for impairment $2,910,744  $(653) $2,967,266  $2,805,186 

 

Mortgage Loans (a) Interest on Non-performing Loans

The table summarizes interest income that was not recognized in earnings.  It also summarizes the actual cash that was received against interest due, but not recognized (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest contractually due (a)

 

$

816

 

$

1,004

 

$

1,165

 

Interest actually received

 

751

 

949

 

1,072

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Shortfall

 

$

65

 

$

55

 

$

93

 


(a)Represents the amount of interest accrual on non-accrual conventional loans that were not recorded as income.  When interest is received on non-accrual loans, cash received is recorded as a liability as the FHLBNY considers such amounts received as an advance from servicers that would be subject to repayment at foreclosure; the cash received remains in Other liabilities until legal determination is made at foreclosure.  For more information about the FHLBNY’s policy on non-accrual loans, see financial statements, Note 1.  Significant Accounting Policies and Estimates.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following summarizes the recorded investment in impaired loans (excluding insured FHA/VA loans), the unpaid principal balance, and the related allowance (individually assessed), and the average recorded investment of loans for which the related allowance was individually measured (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid

 

 

 

Average

 

 

 

Recorded

 

Principal

 

Related

 

Recorded

 

 

 

Investment

 

Balance

 

Allowance

 

Investment (d)

 

Conventional MPF Loans (a)(c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No related allowance (b)

 

$

14,343

 

$

14,222

 

$

 

$

14,386

 

With a related allowance

 

1,509

 

1,494

 

210

 

1,393

 

Total individually measured for impairment

 

$

15,852

 

$

15,716

 

$

210

 

$

15,779

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid

 

 

 

Average

 

 

 

Recorded

 

Principal

 

Related

 

Recorded

 

 

 

Investment

 

Balance

 

Allowance

 

Investment (d)

 

Conventional MPF Loans (a)(c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

No related allowance (b)

 

$

15,360

 

$

15,240

 

$

 

$

16,655

 

With a related allowance

 

2,682

 

2,651

 

600

 

1,789

 

Total individually measured for impairment

 

$

18,042

 

$

17,891

 

$

600

 

$

18,444

 


(a)

Based on analysis of the nature of risks of the FHLBNY’s investments in MPF loans, including its methodologies for identifying and measuring impairment, management has determined that presenting such loans as a single class is appropriate.

(b)Collateral values, net of estimated costs to sell, exceeded the amortized cost/recorded investments in impaired loans and no allowances were deemed necessary.

(c)Interest received is not recorded as Interest income if an uninsured loan is past due 90 days90-days or more. Cash received is recorded as a liability on the assumption that cash was remitted by the servicer to the FHLBNY that could potentially be recouped by the borrower in a foreclosure.

(d)Represents the average amortized cost after allowance for the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and average recorded investment for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.2019.

The following table summarizes MPF mortgage loans held-for-portfolio by collateral/guarantee type (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Mortgage Loans Held for Portfolio by Collateral/Guarantee Type:        
Conventional mortgage loans - MPF     $2,666,605  $2,910,744 
MPF Government-guaranteed or -insured mortgage loans      195,318   217,000 
Total MPF loans - unpaid principal balance     $2,861,923  $3,127,744 

144

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Payment Status of Mortgage Loans

Payment status is the key credit quality indicator for conventional mortgage loans and allows the Bank to monitor the migration of past due loans. Past due loans are those where the borrower has failed to make timely payments of principal and/or interest in accordance with the terms of the loan. Other delinquency statistics include non-accrual loans and loans in process of foreclosure. The following tables present the payment status for conventional mortgage loans and other delinquency statistics for the Bank’s mortgage loans at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, respectively.

Credit Quality Indicator for Conventional Mortgage Loans (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
  Conventional Loans 
  Origination Year    
  Prior to 2016  2016 to 2020  Total 
Payment Status, at Amortized Cost:            
Conventional Loans            
Past due 30 - 59 days $10,088  $9,768  $19,856 
Past due 60 - 89 days  4,267   7,682   11,949 
Past due 90 days or more  28,157   31,002   59,159 
Total past due MPF mortgage loans  42,512   48,452   90,964 
Current MPF mortgage loans  1,038,404   1,578,308   2,616,712 
Current MAP mortgage loans  -   314   314 
Total conventional loans $1,080,916  $1,627,074  $2,707,990 

  December 31, 2019     
  Conventional     
  MPF Loans     
Payment Status, at Recorded Investment:          
Conventional Loans          
Past due 30 - 59 days $15,775       
Past due 60 - 89 days  3,424       
Past due 90 days or more  6,919       
Total past due mortgage loans  26,118       
Current mortgage loans  2,941,148       
Total conventional loans - MPF $2,967,266       


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Other Delinquency Statistics (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
  Conventional  MPF Government-Guaranteed    
  MPF Loans  or -Insured Loans  Total MPF Loans 
Amortized Cost:            
In process of foreclosure (a) $23,645  $9,266  $32,911 
Serious delinquency rate (b)  2.44%  8.05%  2.82%
Past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest $-  $14,986  $14,986 
Loans on non-accrual status $59,159  $-  $59,159 
Troubled debt restructurings:            
Loans discharged from bankruptcy (c) $6,802  $1,219  $8,021 
Modified loans under MPF® program $926  $-  $926 
Real estate owned (d) $133  $-  $133 

  December 31, 2019 
  Conventional  MPF Government-Guaranteed    
  MPF Loans  or -Insured Loans  Total MPF Loans 
Recorded Investment:            
In process of foreclosure (a) $4,198  $2,408  $6,606 
Serious delinquency rate (b)  0.24%  1.87%  0.36%
Past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest $-  $4,147  $4,147 
Loans on non-accrual status $6,919  $-  $6,919 
Troubled debt restructurings:            
Loans discharged from bankruptcy (c) $7,711  $1,028  $8,739 
Modified loans under MPF® program $1,138  $-  $1,138 
Real estate owned (d) $293  $-  $293 

 

The following tables summarize
(a)Includes loans where the recorded investment, the unpaid principal balance, and the average recorded investment of loans for which the related allowance was collectively measured (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid

 

 

 

Average

 

 

 

Recorded

 

Principal

 

Related

 

Recorded

 

 

 

Investment

 

Balance

 

Allowance

 

Investment (a)

 

Collectively measured for impairment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Insured loans

 

$

241,575

 

$

235,232

 

$

 

$

238,661

 

Uninsured loans

 

2,654,882

 

2,599,424

 

782

 

2,602,298

 

Total loans collectively measured for impairment

 

$

2,896,457

 

$

2,834,656

 

$

782

 

$

2,840,959

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Unpaid

 

 

 

Average

 

 

 

Recorded

 

Principal

 

Related

 

Recorded

 

 

 

Investment

 

Balance

 

Allowance

 

Investment (a)

 

Collectively measured for impairment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Insured loans

 

$

232,888

 

$

226,504

 

$

 

$

222,299

 

Uninsured loans

 

2,510,550

 

2,456,512

 

954

 

2,405,685

 

Total loans collectively measured for impairment

 

$

2,743,438

 

$

2,683,016

 

$

954

 

$

2,627,984

 


(a)Represents the average recorded investment for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Recorded investments in MPF loans that were past due, and real estate owned are summarized below.  Recorded investment, which includes accrued interest receivable, would not equal carrying values reported elsewhere (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Conventional

 

Insured

 

Other

 

Conventional

 

Insured

 

Other

 

 

 

MPF Loans

 

Loans

 

Loans

 

MPF Loans

 

Loans

 

Loans

 

Mortgage loans:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Past due 30 - 59 days

 

$

18,216

 

$

12,561

 

$

 

$

18,935

 

$

8,529

 

$

 

Past due 60 - 89 days

 

3,914

 

2,712

 

 

3,823

 

2,851

 

 

Past due 90 - 179 days

 

3,860

 

2,545

 

 

3,215

 

2,029

 

 

Past due 180 days or more

 

9,464

 

3,378

 

 

11,741

 

3,486

 

 

Total past due

 

35,454

 

21,196

 

 

37,714

 

16,895

 

 

Total current loans

 

2,635,280

 

220,379

 

 

2,490,821

 

215,993

 

57

 

Total mortgage loans

 

$

2,670,734

 

$

241,575

 

$

 

$

2,528,535

 

$

232,888

 

$

57

 

Other delinquency statistics:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Loans in process of foreclosure, included above

 

$

6,191

 

$

2,524

 

$

 

$

9,152

 

$

1,995

 

$

 

Number of foreclosures outstanding at period end

 

48

 

23

 

 

77

 

17

 

 

Serious delinquency rate (a)

 

0.50

%

2.45

%

%

0.59

%

2.37

%

%

Serious delinquent loans total used in calculation of serious delinquency rate

 

$

13,324

 

$

5,923

 

$

 

$

14,956

 

$

5,515

 

$

 

Past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest

 

$

 

$

5,923

 

$

 

$

 

$

5,515

 

$

 

Loans on non-accrual status

 

$

13,324

 

$

 

$

 

$

14,956

 

$

 

$

 

Troubled debt restructurings:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Loans discharged from bankruptcy (b)

 

$

8,772

 

$

648

 

$

 

$

9,723

 

$

622

 

$

 

Modified loans under MPF® program

 

$

1,144

 

$

 

$

 

$

1,641

 

$

 

$

 

Real estate owned

 

$

682

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

1,653

 

 

 

 

 


(a)Serious delinquency rate is defined as recorded investments in loans that are 90 days or more past due or in the processdecision of foreclosure expressedor a similar alternative, such as pursuit of deed-in-lieu, has been reported.

(b)Represents seriously delinquent loans as a percentage of total loan class.mortgage loans. Seriously delinquent loans are comprised of all loans past due 90-days or more delinquent or loans that are in the process of foreclosure.

(b)(c)Loans discharged from Chapter 7 bankruptcies are considered as TDRs.
(d)REO is reported at carrying value.

Note 11.              Deposits.

The FHLBNY accepts demand, overnight and term deposits from its members. Also, a member that services mortgage loans may deposit funds collected in connection with the mortgage loans as a pending disbursement to the owners of the mortgage loans. The following table summarizes deposits (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Interest-bearing deposits        
Interest-bearing demand $1,677,526  $1,144,519 
Term (a)  5,000   15,000 
Total interest-bearing deposits  1,682,526   1,159,519 
Non-interest-bearing demand  70,437   34,890 
Total deposits (b) $1,752,963  $1,194,409 

 

Troubled Debt Restructurings (“TDRs”) and MPF Modification Standards(a).  Troubled debt restructuring is considered to have occurred when a concession is granted to a borrower for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties and that concession would not have been otherwise considered.  The MPF program offers a temporary loan payment modification plan for participating PFIs, which was initially available until December 31, 2011 and has been extended indefinitely.  This modification plan is made available to homeowners currently in default or imminent danger of default.  Only a few MPF loans had been modified under the plan.  Due to the insignificant numbers of loans modified and considered to be a TDR, forgiveness and other information with respect to the modifications have been omitted.  Loans modified under this program are considered impaired.  The allowance for credit losses on impaired modified loans were evaluated individually and allowance, if any, was not material at December 31, 2017.  At December 31, 2016, the allowance on modified loans was $0.2 million, which was recovered in 2017 when the loans were paid off, repurchased or became current.  A loan involved in the MPF modification program is individually evaluated by the FHLBNY for impairment when determining its related allowance for credit losses.  A modified loan is considered a TDR until the modified loan is performing to its original terms.

The FHLBNY measures all estimated credit losses based on the liquidation value of the real property collateral supporting the impaired loan after deducting costs to liquidate.  That value is compared to the carrying value of the impaired mortgage loan, and a shortfall is recorded as an allowance for credit losses.

Loans Discharged from Bankruptcy.  The FHLBNY includes MPF loans discharged from Chapter 7 bankruptcy as TDRs; $8.8 million and $9.7 million of such loans were outstanding at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  The FHLBNY has determined that the discharge of mortgage debt in bankruptcy is a concession as defined under existing accounting literature for TDRs.  A loan discharged from bankruptcy is assessed for credit impairment only if seriously delinquent (past due 90 days or more) — $0.4 million and $0.7 million were deemed impaired due to their past due delinquency status at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  The allowance for credit losses associated with those loans was immaterial as the loans were well collateralized.

The following table summarizes performing and non-performing troubled debt restructurings balances (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Recorded Investment Outstanding

 

Performing

 

Non- performing

 

Total TDRs

 

Performing

 

Non- performing

 

Total TDRs

 

Troubled debt restructurings (TDRs) (a)(b) :

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Loans discharged from bankruptcy

 

$

8,383

 

$

389

 

$

8,772

 

$

9,026

 

$

697

 

$

9,723

 

Modified loans under MPF® program

 

670

 

474

 

1,144

 

1,514

 

127

 

1,641

 

Total troubled debt restructurings

 

$

9,053

 

$

863

 

$

9,916

 

$

10,540

 

$

824

 

$

11,364

 

Related Allowance

 

 

 

 

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

$

183

 


(a) Insured loans were not included in the calculation for troubled debt restructuring.

(b) Loans discharged from Chapter 7 bankruptcy are also considered as TDRs.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 10.Deposits.

The FHLBNY accepts demand, overnight and term deposits from its members.  Also, a member that services mortgage loans may deposit funds collected in connection with the mortgage loans as a pending disbursement to the owners of the mortgage loans.  The following table summarizes deposits (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Interest-bearing deposits

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing demand

 

$

1,142,056

 

$

1,183,468

 

Term (a)

 

36,000

 

35,000

 

Total interest-bearing deposits

 

1,178,056

 

1,218,468

 

Non-interest-bearing demand

 

17,999

 

22,281

 

Total deposits (b)

 

$

1,196,055

 

$

1,240,749

 


(a)

Term deposits were for periods of one year or less.

(b)Specific disclosures about deposits that exceed FDIC limits have been omitted as deposits are not insured by the FDIC. Deposits are received in the ordinary course of the FHLBNY’s business. The FHLBNY has pledged securities to the FDIC to collateralize deposits maintained at the FHLBNY by the FDIC; for more information, see Securities Pledged in Note 7.8. Held-to-Maturity Securities.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Interest rate payment terms for deposits are summarized below (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amount  Average  Amount  Average 
  Outstanding  Interest Rate (b)  Outstanding  Interest Rate (b) 
Due in one year or less                
Interest-bearing deposits (a) $1,682,526   0.26% $1,159,519   2.03%
Non-interest-bearing deposits  70,437       34,890     
Total deposits $1,752,963      $1,194,409     

 

Interest rate payment terms for deposits are summarized below (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amount
Outstanding

 

Weighted
Average Interest
Rate 
(b)

 

Amount
Outstanding

 

Weighted
Average Interest
Rate 
(b)

 

Due in one year or less

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing deposits (a)

 

$

1,178,056

 

0.85

%

$

1,218,468

 

0.22

%

Non-interest-bearing deposits

 

17,999

 

 

 

22,281

 

 

 

Total deposits

 

$

1,196,055

 

 

 

$

1,240,749

 

 

 


(a)Primarily adjustable rate.

(b)The weighted average interest rate is calculated based on the average balance.

Note 12.           Consolidated Obligations.

The FHLBanks have joint and several liability for all the Consolidated obligations issued on their behalf (for more information, see Note 19. Commitments and Contingencies). Consolidated obligations consist of bonds and discount notes. The FHLBanks issue Consolidated obligations through the Office of Finance as their fiscal agent. In connection with each debt issuance, a FHLBank specifies the amount of debt it wants issued on its behalf. The Office of Finance tracks the amount of debt issued on behalf of each FHLBank. Each FHLBank separately tracks and records as a liability for its specific portion of Consolidated obligations for which it is the primary obligor. Consolidated obligation bonds (CO bonds or Consolidated bonds) are issued primarily to raise intermediate- and long-term funds for the FHLBanks and are not subject to any statutory or regulatory limits on maturity.

Consolidated obligation discount notes (CO discount notes, Discount notes, or Consolidated discount notes) are issued primarily to raise short-term funds. Discount notes sell at less than their face amount and are redeemed at par value when they mature.

The following table summarizes carrying amounts of Consolidated obligations issued by the FHLBNY and outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Consolidated obligation bonds-amortized cost $69,063,948  $78,179,661 
Hedge valuation basis adjustments  514,436   377,000 
Hedge basis adjustments on de-designated hedges  132,450   139,605 
FVO - valuation adjustments and accrued interest  5,464   67,043 
Total Consolidated obligation bonds $69,716,298  $78,763,309 
Discount notes-amortized cost $57,642,972  $73,955,552 
Hedge value basis adjustments  321   (105)
FVO - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion  15,545   3,758 
Total Consolidated obligation discount notes $57,658,838  $73,959,205 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Redemption Terms of Consolidated Obligation Bonds

The following table is a summary of carrying amounts of Consolidated obligation bonds outstanding by year of maturity (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
     Weighted        Weighted    
     Average  Percentage     Average  Percentage 
Maturity Amount  Rate (a)  of Total  Amount  Rate (a)  of Total 
One year or less $45,481,150   0.34%  66.00% $62,319,595   1.77%  79.79%
Over one year through two years  10,367,545   1.01   15.05   4,061,125   2.10   5.20 
Over two years through three years  4,324,660   1.72   6.28   2,817,715   2.22   3.61 
Over three years through four years  1,581,355   1.94   2.29   1,538,835   2.69   1.97 
Over four years through five years  822,620   1.62   1.19   1,240,735   2.60   1.58 
Thereafter  6,329,200   3.14   9.19   6,130,800   3.34   7.85 
Total par value  68,906,530   0.84%  100.00%  78,108,805   1.96%  100.00%
Bond premiums (b)  184,084           95,560         
Bond discounts (b)  (26,666)          (24,704)        
Hedge valuation basis adjustments (c)  514,436           377,000         
Hedge basis adjustments on de-designated hedges (d)  132,450           139,605         
FVO (e) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest  5,464           67,043         
Total Consolidated obligation-bonds $69,716,298          $78,763,309         

 

Note 11.(a)Consolidated Obligations.

Consolidated obligations are the joint and several obligations of the FHLBanks, and consist of bonds and discount notes.  The FHLBanks issue Consolidated obligations through the Office of Finance as their fiscal agent.  In connection with each debt issuance, a FHLBank specifies the amount of debt it wants issued on its behalf.  The Office of Finance tracks the amount of debt issued on behalf of each FHLBank.  Each FHLBank separately tracks and records as a liability for its specific portion of Consolidated obligations for which it is the primary obligor.  Consolidated obligation bonds (“CO bonds” or “Consolidated bonds”) are issued primarily to raise intermediate- and long-term funds for the FHLBanks and are not subject to any statutory or regulatory limits on maturity.  Consolidated obligation discount notes (“CO discount notes” or “Consolidated discount notes”) are issued primarily to raise short-term funds.  Discount notes sell at less than their face amount and are redeemed at par value when they mature.

The Finance Agency, at its discretion, may require any FHLBank to make principal or interest payments due on any Consolidated obligations.  Although it has never occurred, to the extent that a FHLBank would make a payment on a Consolidated obligation on behalf of another FHLBank, the paying FHLBank would be entitled to reimbursement from the non-complying FHLBank.  However, if the Finance Agency determines that the non-complying FHLBank is unable to satisfy its obligations, then the Finance Agency may allocate the outstanding liability among the remaining FHLBanks on a pro rata basis in proportion to each FHLBank’s participation in all Consolidated obligations outstanding, or on any other basis the Finance Agency may determine.  Based on management’s review, the FHLBNY has no reason to record actual or contingent liabilities with respect to the occurrence of events or circumstances that would require the FHLBNY to assume an obligation on behalf of other FHLBanks.  The par amounts of the FHLBanks’ outstanding Consolidated obligations, including Consolidated obligations held by other FHLBanks, were approximately $1.0 trillion as of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Finance Agency regulations require the FHLBanks to maintain, in the aggregate, unpledged qualifying assets equal to the Consolidated obligations outstanding.  Qualifying assets are defined as cash; secured advances; obligations, participations, mortgages, or other securities of or issued by the United States or an agency of the United States; and securities in which fiduciary and trust funds may invest under the laws of the state in which the FHLBank is located.

The FHLBNY met the qualifying unpledged asset requirements as follows:

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

Percentage of unpledged qualifying assets to consolidated obligations

 

106

%

107

%

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following table summarizes Consolidated obligations issued by the FHLBNY and outstanding at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds-amortized cost

 

$

98,878,469

 

$

84,351,354

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)

 

273,585

 

290,016

 

Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges (b)

 

134,920

 

140,331

 

FVO (c) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

1,074

 

2,963

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Consolidated obligation bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

$

84,784,664

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Discount notes-amortized cost

 

$

49,610,668

 

$

49,334,380

 

FVO (c) - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion

 

3,003

 

23,514

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

$

49,613,671

 

$

49,357,894

 


(a)Hedge valuation basis adjustments represent changes in the fair values due to changes in LIBOR on fixed-rate bonds in a Fair value hedge.

(b)Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges represent the unamortized balances of valuation basis of fixed-rate bonds that were previously in a qualifying hedge relationship.  The valuation basis at the time of hedge termination is amortized as a yield adjustment through Interest expense.

(c)Valuation adjustments represent changes in the entire fair values of bonds and discount notes elected under the FVO.

Redemption Terms of Consolidated Obligation Bonds

The following table is a summary of Consolidated obligation bonds outstanding by year of maturity (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average

 

Percentage

 

 

 

Average

 

Percentage

 

Maturity

 

Amount

 

Rate (a)

 

of Total

 

Amount

 

Rate (a)

 

of Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

One year or less

 

$

82,118,565

 

1.30

%

83.07

%

$

55,251,690

 

0.80

%

65.52

%

Over one year through two years

 

7,363,255

 

1.43

 

7.45

 

19,603,965

 

0.95

 

23.25

 

Over two years through three years

 

2,462,400

 

1.91

 

2.49

 

3,376,095

 

1.39

 

4.00

 

Over three years through four years

 

1,158,595

 

2.18

 

1.17

 

1,225,175

 

2.12

 

1.45

 

Over four years through five years

 

1,640,835

 

2.13

 

1.66

 

1,060,320

 

2.08

 

1.26

 

Thereafter

 

4,107,500

 

3.35

 

4.16

 

3,810,300

 

3.25

 

4.52

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

98,851,150

 

1.44

%

100.00

%

84,327,545

 

1.00

%

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bond premiums (b)

 

54,654

 

 

 

 

 

52,336

 

 

 

 

 

Bond discounts (b)

 

(27,335

)

 

 

 

 

(28,527

)

 

 

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (c)

 

273,585

 

 

 

 

 

290,016

 

 

 

 

 

Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges (d)

 

134,920

 

 

 

 

 

140,331

 

 

 

 

 

FVO (e) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

1,074

 

 

 

 

 

2,963

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Consolidated obligation-bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

 

 

 

 

$

84,784,664

 

 

 

 

 


(a)

Weighted average rate represents the weighted average contractual coupons of bonds, unadjusted for swaps.

(b)Amortization of CO bond premiums and discounts wasare recorded in interest expense as a yield adjustment, which reduced Interest expense by $20.4 million, $15.6 million and $18.8 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015.adjustments.

(c)Hedge valuation basis adjustments under ASC 815 fair value hedges represent changes in the fair values of fixed-rate CO bonds due to changes in the designated benchmark interest rate, remaining terms to maturity or next call, and the notional amounts of CO bonds designated in hedge relationship. Our interest rate benchmarks are LIBOR, on fixed-rate bonds in a Fair value hedge.the FF/OIS index and the FF/SOFR index.

(d)Hedge basis adjustments on terminatedde-designated hedges represent the unamortized balances of valuation basis of fixed-rate CO bonds that were previously in a fair value hedging relationship. Generally, when a hedging relationship is de-designated, the valuation basis is no longer adjusted for changes in the valuation of the debt for changes in the benchmark rate; instead, the basis is amortized over the debt’s remaining life, so that at maturity of the debt the unamortized basis is reversed to zero.  The unamortized basis was $134.9 million and $140.3 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  Amortization of hedge basis adjustments was recorded as a yield adjustment, which reduced Interest expenses by $5.9 million, $5.7 million and $5.5 million in 2017, 2016 and 2015.

(e)Valuation adjustments on FVO designated bonds represent changes in the entire fair values of CO bonds elected under the FVO.

Federal Home Loan BankFVO plus accrued unpaid interest. Changes in the timing of New York

Notescoupon payments impact outstanding accrued interest.  Changes in benchmark interest rates, notional amounts of CO bonds elected under FVO and remaining terms to Financial Statementsmaturity or next call will impact hedge valuation adjustments.

Interest Rate Payment Terms

The following table summarizes par amounts of major types of Consolidated obligation bonds issued and outstanding (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Amount  Percentage
of Total
  Amount  Percentage
of Total
 
Fixed-rate, non-callable $49,275,530   71.51% $32,588,805   41.72%
Fixed-rate, callable  1,434,000   2.08   4,803,000   6.15 
Step Up, callable  -   -   15,000   0.02 
Single-index floating rate  18,197,000   26.41   40,702,000   52.11 
Total par value $68,906,530   100.00% $78,108,805   100.00%


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Discount Notes

Consolidated obligation discount notes are issued to raise short-term funds. Discount notes are Consolidated obligations with original maturities of up to one year. These notes are issued at less than their face amount and redeemed at par when they mature. The FHLBNY’s outstanding Consolidated obligation discount notes were as follows (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Par value $57,668,646  $74,094,586 
Amortized cost $57,642,972  $73,955,552 
Hedge value basis adjustments (a)  321   (105)
FVO (b) - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion  15,545   3,758 
Total discount notes $57,658,838  $73,959,205 
Weighted average interest rate  0.15%  1.60%

 

(a)Interest Rate Payment Terms

The following table summarizes types of bonds issued and outstanding (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

Amount

 

Percentage
of Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed-rate, non-callable

 

$

24,080,150

 

24.36

%

$

32,878,545

 

38.99

%

Fixed-rate, callable

 

3,658,000

 

3.70

 

1,255,000

 

1.49

 

Step Up, callable

 

253,000

 

0.26

 

160,000

 

0.19

 

Single-index floating rate

 

70,860,000

 

71.68

 

50,034,000

 

59.33

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total par value

 

98,851,150

 

100.00

%

84,327,545

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bond premiums

 

54,654

 

 

 

52,336

 

 

 

Bond discounts

 

(27,335

)

 

 

(28,527

)

 

 

Hedge valuation basis adjustments (a)

 

273,585

 

 

 

290,016

 

 

 

Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges (b)

 

134,920

 

 

 

140,331

 

 

 

FVO (c) - valuation adjustments and accrued interest

 

1,074

 

 

 

2,963

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total Consolidated obligation-bonds

 

$

99,288,048

 

 

 

$

84,784,664

 

 

 


(a)HedgeHedging valuation basis adjustments represent — The reported carrying values of hedged CO discount notes are adjusted for changes in their fair values (fair value basis adjustments or fair value) that are attributable to changes in the fair valuesbenchmark risk being hedged. The application of fixed-rate CO bondsASC 815 accounting methodology resulted in the recognition of a Fair valuenet cumulative hedge due to changes in LIBOR.

(b)Hedge basis adjustments on terminated hedges represent the unamortized balances of valuation basis loss of fixed-rate bonds that were previously$0.3 million at December 31, 2020 and a gain of $0.1 million at December 31, 2019. Changes in athe designated benchmark interest rate, notional amounts of CO discount notes in hedging relationship.relationships and remaining terms to maturity or next call will impact hedge valuation adjustments.

(c)(b)FVO valuation adjustments Valuation adjustments representbasis adjustment losses are recorded to recognize changes in the entire or full fair values of bonds elected under the FVO.

Discount Notes

Consolidated obligation discount notes are issued to raise short-term funds.  Discount notes are Consolidated obligations with original maturities of up to one year.  These notes are issued at less than their face amount and redeemed at par when they mature.

The FHLBNY’s outstanding Consolidated obligation discount notes were as follows (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Par value

 

$

49,685,334

 

$

49,392,445

 

Amortized cost

 

$

49,610,668

 

$

49,334,380

 

FVO (a) - valuation adjustments and remaining accretion

 

3,003

 

23,514

 

Total discount notes

 

$

49,613,671

 

$

49,357,894

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted average interest rate

 

1.23

%

0.48

%


(a)Valuation adjustments represent changes in the entire fair values ofincluding unaccreted discounts on CO discount notes elected under the FVO.

Note 12.Affordable Housing Program.

The FHLBank Act requires each FHLBank  Changes in benchmark interest rates, notional amounts of CO discount notes elected under FVO and remaining terms to establish an Affordable Housing Program.  Each FHLBank provides subsidies in the form of direct grants and below-market interest rate advances to its members who use the funds to assist the purchase, construction, or rehabilitation of housing for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households.  Annually, the FHLBanks must set aside, in aggregate, the greater of $100 million or 10% of regulatory income for the AHP.  The FHLBNY charges the amount set aside for AHP to incomematurity will impact hedge valuation adjustments.

Note 13.            Affordable Housing Program.

The FHLBNY charges the amount allocated for the Affordable Housing Program (AHP) to expense and recognizes it as a liability.  The FHLBNY relieves the AHP liability as members use the subsidies.  If the result of the aggregate 10% calculation is less than $100 million for all eleven FHLBanks, then the FHLBank Act requires the shortfall to be allocated among the FHLBanks based on the ratio of each FHLBank’s pre-assessment income to the sum of total pre-assessment income for all 11 FHLBanks.  There were no shortfalls in any periods in this report.

Each FHLBank accrues this expense monthly based on its income before assessments.  Pre-assessment income is net income before the AHP assessment.  If a FHLBank experienced a loss during a quarter, but still had income for the year, the FHLBank’s obligation to the AHP would be calculated based on the FHLBank’s year-to-date income.  If the FHLBank had income in subsequent quarters, it would be required to contribute additional amounts to meet its calculated annual obligation.  If the FHLBank experienced a loss for a full year, the FHLBank would have no obligation to the AHP for the year unless the aggregate 10% calculation was less than $100 million for all 11 FHLBanks, if it were, each FHLBank would be required to assure that the aggregate contribution of the FHLBanks equals $100 million.  The proration would be made on the basis of a FHLBank’s income in relation to the income of all FHLBanks for the previous year.  Each FHLBank’s required annual AHP contribution is limited to its annual net earnings.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

The following table provides rollforward information with respect to changes in Affordable Housing Program liabilities (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Beginning balance $153,894  $161,718  $131,654 
Additions from current period's assessments  49,180   52,552   62,382 
Net disbursements for grants and programs  (54,247)  (60,376)  (32,318)
Ending balance $148,827  $153,894  $161,718 

Note 14.Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, have a cooperative structure. To access the FHLBNY’s products and services, a financial institution must be approved for membership and purchase capital stock in the FHLBNY. A member’s stock requirement is generally based on its use of FHLBNY products, subject to a minimum membership requirement as prescribed by the FHLBank Act and the FHLBNY’s Capital Plan. FHLBNY stock can be issued, exchanged, redeemed and repurchased only at its stated par value of $100 per share. It is not publicly traded. An option to redeem capital stock that is greater than a member’s minimum requirement is held by both the member and the FHLBNY. The FHLBNY’s Capital Plan offers two sub-classes of Class B capital stock, membership and activity-based capital stock, and members can redeem Class B stock by giving five years notice. The FHLBNY’s Class B capital stock issued and outstanding was $5.4 billion at December 31, 2020 and $5.8 billion at December 31, 2019.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Membership and Activity-based Class B capital stocks have the same voting rights and dividend rates. (See Statements of Capital):

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning balance

 

$

125,062

 

$

113,352

 

$

113,544

 

Additions from current period’s assessments

 

53,417

 

44,752

 

46,182

 

Net disbursements for grants and programs

 

(46,825

)

(33,042

)

(46,374

)

Ending balance

 

$

131,654

 

$

125,062

 

$

113,352

 

Note 13.Capital Stock, Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock and Restricted Retained Earnings.

The FHLBanks, including the FHLBNY, have a cooperative structure.  To access the FHLBNY’s products and services, a financial institution must be approved for membership and purchase capital stock in the FHLBNY.  A member’s stock requirement is generally based on its use of FHLBNY products, subject to a minimum membership requirement as prescribed by the FHLBank Act and the FHLBNY’s Capital Plan.  FHLBNY stock can be issued, exchanged, redeemed and repurchased only at its stated par value of $100 per share.  It is not publicly traded.  An option to redeem capital stock that is greater than a member’s minimum requirement is held by both the member and the FHLBNY.  The FHLBNY’s Capital Plan offers two sub-classes of Class B capital stock, membership and activity-based capital stock.  Membership and Activity-based Class B capital stock have the same voting rights and dividend rates.  Members can redeem Class B stock by giving five years notice.  The FHLBNY’s capital plan does not provide for the issuance of Class A capital stock.

·Membership stock is issued to meet membership stock purchase requirements. The FHLBNY requires member institutions to maintain membership stock based on a percentage of the member’s mortgage-related assets. Effective August 1, 2017, the FHLBNY reduced theThe current capital stock purchase requirement for membership from 15.0 basis points tois 12.5 basis points;points. In addition, notwithstanding this requirement, the change resulted in the repurchase of $225.0FHLBNY has a $100 million of excesscap on membership stock.  At December 31, 2017, membership based capital stock was $1.1 billion, compared to $1.3 billion at December 31, 2016.

per member.

 

·Activity based stock is issued on a percentage of outstanding balances of advances, MPF loans and certain commitments. The FHLBNY’s current capital plan requires a stock purchase of 4.5% of the member’s borrowed amount. Excess activity-based capital stock is repurchased daily.  At December 31, 2017, activity-based capital stock was $5.6 billion, compared to $5.0 billion at December 31, 2016.

The FHLBNY is subject to risk-based capital rules of the Finance Agency, the regulator of the FHLBanks. Specifically, the FHLBNY is subject to three capital requirements under its capital plan. First, the FHLBNY must maintain at all times permanent capital in an amount at least equal to the sum of its credit risk, market risk, and operations risk capital requirements as calculated in accordance with the FHLBNY policy, and rules and regulations of the Finance Agency. Only permanent capital, defined as Class B stock and retained earnings, satisfies this risk-based capital requirement. The capital plan does not provide for the issuance of Class A capital stock. The Finance Agency may require the FHLBNY to maintain an amount of permanent capital greater than what is required by the risk-based capital requirements. Second, the FHLBNY is required to maintain at least a 4.0% total capital-to-asset ratio; and third, the FHLBNY will maintain at least a 5.0% leverage ratio at all times. The FHFA’s regulatory leverage ratio is defined as the sum of permanent capital weighted 1.5 times and non-permanent capital weighted 1.0 times divided by total assets.

The FHLBNY was in compliance with the aforementioned capital rules and requirements for all periods presented, and met the “adequately capitalized” classification, which is the highest rating, under the capital rule. The Director of the Finance Agency has discretion to add to or modify the corrective action requirements for each capital classification other than adequately capitalized if the Director of the Finance Agency determines that such action is necessary to ensure the safe and sound operation of the FHLBank and the FHLBank’s compliance with its risk-based and minimum capital requirements.

Risk-based Capital — The following table summarizes the FHLBNY’s risk-based capital ratios (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  Required (d)  Actual  Required (d)  Actual 
Regulatory capital requirements:                
Risk-based capital (a)(e) $1,067,518  $7,279,437  $1,107,356  $7,584,829 
Total capital-to-asset ratio  4.00%  5.31%  4.00%  4.68%
Total capital (b) $5,479,855  $7,279,437  $6,482,481  $7,584,829 
Leverage ratio  5.00%  7.97%  5.00%  7.02%
Leverage capital (c ) $6,849,819  $10,919,156  $8,103,101  $11,377,244 

 

The FHLBNY is subject to risk-based capital rules of the Finance Agency, the regulator of the FHLBanks.  Specifically, the FHLBNY is subject to three capital requirements under its capital plan.  First, the FHLBNY must maintain at all times permanent capital in an amount at least equal to the sum of its credit risk, market risk, and operations risk capital requirements as calculated in accordance with the FHLBNY policy, and rules and regulations of the Finance Agency.  Only permanent capital, defined as Class B stock and retained earnings, satisfies this risk-based capital requirement.  The Finance Agency may require the FHLBNY to maintain an amount of permanent capital greater than what is required by the risk-based capital requirements.  In addition, the FHLBNY is required to maintain at least a 4.0% total capital-to-asset ratio and at least a 5.0% leverage ratio at all times.  The FHFA’s regulatory leverage ratio is defined as the sum of permanent capital weighted 1.5 times and non-permanent capital weighted 1.0 times divided by total assets.

The FHLBNY was in compliance with the aforementioned capital rules and requirements for all periods presented, and met the “adequately capitalized” classification, which is the highest rating, under the capital rule.  However, the Finance Agency has discretion to reclassify a FHLBank and to modify or add to the corrective action requirements for a particular capital classification.  If the FHLBNY became classified into a capital classification other than adequately capitalized, the Bank could be adversely impacted by the corrective action requirements for that capital classification.

The following describes each capital classification and its related corrective action requirements, if any.

·(a)Adequately capitalized.  A FHLBank is adequately capitalized if it has sufficient permanent and total capital to meet or exceed its risk-based and minimum capital requirements.  FHLBanks that are adequately capitalized have no corrective action requirements.

·Undercapitalized.  A FHLBank is undercapitalized if it does not have sufficient permanent or total capital to meet one or more of its risk-based and minimum capital requirements, but such deficiency is not large enough to classify the FHLBank as significantly undercapitalized or critically undercapitalized.  A FHLBank classified as undercapitalized must submit a capital restoration plan that conforms with regulatory requirements to the Director of the Finance Agency for approval, execute the approved plan, suspend dividend payments and excess stock redemptions or repurchases, and not permit growth of its average total assets in any calendar quarter beyond the average total assets of the preceding quarter unless otherwise approved by the Director of the Finance Agency.

·Significantly undercapitalized.  A FHLBank is significantly undercapitalized if either (1) the amount of permanent or total capital held by the FHLBank is less than 75% of any one of its risk-based or minimum capital requirements, but such deficiency is not large enough to classify the FHLBank as critically undercapitalized or (2) an undercapitalized FHLBank fails to submit or adhere to a Finance Agency Director-approved capital restoration plan in conformance with regulatory requirements.  A FHLBank

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

classified as significantly undercapitalized must submit a capital restoration plan that conforms with regulatory requirements to the Director of the Finance Agency for approval, execute the approved plan, suspend dividend payments and excess stock redemptions or repurchases, and is prohibited from paying a bonus to or increasing the compensation of its executive officers without prior approval of the Director of the Finance Agency.

·Critically undercapitalized.  A FHLBank is critically undercapitalized if either (1) the amount of total capital held by the FHLBank is less than two percent of the FHLBank’s total assets or (2) a significantly undercapitalized FHLBank fails to submit or adhere to a Finance Agency Director-approved capital restoration plan in conformance with regulatory requirements.  The Director of the Finance Agency may place a FHLBank in conservatorship or receivership.  A FHLBank will be placed in mandatory receivership if (1) the assets of a FHLBank are less than its obligations during a 60-day period or (2) the FHLBank has not being paying its debts on a regular basis, or during a 60-day period.  Until such time the Finance Agency is appointed as conservator or receiver for a critically undercapitalized FHLBank, the FHLBank is subject to all mandatory restrictions and obligations applicable to a significantly undercapitalized FHLBank.

Each required capital restoration plan must be submitted within 15 business days following notice from the Director of the Finance Agency unless an extension is granted and is subject to the Director of the Finance Agency’s review and must set forth a plan to restore permanent and total capital levels to levels sufficient to fulfill its risk-based and minimum capital requirements.

The Director of the Finance Agency has discretion to add to or modify the corrective action requirements for each capital classification other than adequately capitalized if the Director of the Finance Agency determines that such action is necessary to ensure the safe and sound operation of the FHLBank and the FHLBank’s compliance with its risk-based and minimum capital requirements.  Further, the Capital Rule provides the Director of the Finance Agency discretion to reclassify a FHLBank’s capital classification if the Director of the Finance Agency determines that:

·                  The FHLBank is engaging in conduct that could result in the rapid depletion of permanent or total capital;

·                  The value of collateral pledged to the FHLBank has decreased significantly;

·                  The value of property subject to mortgages owned by the FHLBank has decreased significantly;

·                  The FHLBank is in an unsafe and unsound condition following notice to the FHLBank and an informal hearing before the Director of the Finance Agency; or

·                  The FHLBank is engaging in an unsafe and unsound practice because the FHLBank’s asset quality, management, earnings, or liquidity were found to be less than satisfactory during the most recent examination, and such deficiency has not been corrected.

If the FHLBNY became classified into a capital classification other than adequately capitalized, the FHLBNY could be adversely impacted by the corrective action requirements for that capital classification.

Risk-based Capital — The following table summarizes the FHLBNY’s risk-based capital ratios (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December��31, 2016

 

 

 

Required (d)

 

Actual

 

Required (d)

 

Actual

 

Regulatory capital requirements:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Risk-based capital (a)(e)

 

$

912,620

 

$

8,316,231

 

$

747,937

 

$

7,751,165

 

Total capital-to-asset ratio

 

4.00

%

5.23

%

4.00

%

5.40

%

Total capital (b)

 

$

6,356,735

 

$

8,316,231

 

$

5,744,251

 

$

7,751,165

 

Leverage ratio

 

5.00

%

7.85

%

5.00

%

8.10

%

Leverage capital (c )

 

$

7,945,919

 

$

12,474,347

 

$

7,180,314

 

$

11,626,748

 


(a)

Actual “Risk-based capital” is capital stock and retained earnings plus mandatorily redeemable capital stock. Section 932.21277.3 of the Finance Agency’s regulations (superseding section 932.2 effective January 1, 2020) also refers to this amount as “Permanent Capital.”

(b)Required “Total capital” is 4.0% of total assets.

(c)The required leverage ratio of total capital to total assets should be at least 5.0%. For the purposes of determining the leverage ratio, total capital shall be computed by multiplying the Bank’s Permanent Capital by 1.5.

(d)Required minimum.

(e)Under regulatory guidelines issued by the Finance Agency in August 2011 that was consistent with guidance provided by other federal banking agencies with respect to capital rules, risk weights are maintained at AAA for U.S. Treasury securities and other securities issued or guaranteed by the U.S. Government, government agencies, and government-sponsored entities for purposes of calculating risk-based capital.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock

Generally, the FHLBNY’s capital stock is redeemable at the option of either the member or the FHLBNY subject to certain conditions, including the provisions under the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity. In accordance with the accounting guidance, the FHLBNY generally reclassifies the stock subject to redemption from equity to a liability once a member irrevocably exercises a written redemption right, gives notice of intent to withdraw from membership, or attains non-member status by merger or acquisition, charter termination, or involuntary termination from membership. Under such circumstances, the member shares will then meet the definition of a mandatorily redeemable financial instrument. Estimated redemption periods were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Redemption less than one year $127  $835 
Redemption from one year to less than three years  293   371 
Redemption from three years to less than five years  317   402 
Redemption from five years or greater  2,254   3,521 
         
Total $2,991  $5,129 

The following table provides rollforward information with respect to changes in mandatorily redeemable capital stock liabilities (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Beginning balance $5,129  $5,845  $19,945 
Capital stock subject to mandatory redemption reclassified from equity  2,743   4,184   8,756 
Redemption of mandatorily redeemable capital stock (a)  (4,881)  (4,900)  (22,856)
Ending balance $2,991  $5,129  $5,845 
Accrued interest payable (b) $41  $84  $112 

 

Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock(a)

Generally, the FHLBNY’s capital stock is redeemable at the option of either the member or the FHLBNY subject to certain conditions, including the provisions under the accounting guidance for certain financial instruments with characteristics of both liabilities and equity.  In accordance with the accounting guidance, the FHLBNY generally reclassifies the stock subject to redemption from equity to a liability once a member irrevocably exercises a written redemption right, gives notice of intent to withdraw from membership, or attains non-member status by merger or acquisition, charter termination, or involuntary termination from membership.  Under such circumstances, the member shares will then meet the definition of a mandatorily redeemable financial instrument.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Estimated redemption periods were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Redemption less than one year

 

$

13,672

 

$

11,384

 

Redemption from one year to less than three years

 

1,145

 

14,000

 

Redemption from three years to less than five years

 

445

 

483

 

Redemption from five years or greater

 

4,683

 

5,568

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

19,945

 

$

31,435

 

Voluntary and Involuntary Withdrawal and Changes in Membership — Changes in membership due to mergers were not significant in 2017 and 2016.  When a member is acquired by a non-member, the FHLBNY reclassifies stock of the member to a liability on the day the member’s charter is dissolved.  Under existing practice, the FHLBNY repurchases Class B2 capital stock held by former members if such stock is considered “excess” and is no longer required to support outstanding advances.  Class B1 membership stock held by former members is re-calculated and repurchased annually.

The following table provides withdrawals and terminations in membership:

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Involuntary Termination (a)

 

4

 

1

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-member due to merger

 

3

 

4

 


(a)The Board of Directors of FHLBank may terminate the membership of any institution that: (1) fails to comply with any requirement of the FHLBank Act, any regulation adopted by the Finance Agency, or any requirement of the FHLBNY’s capital plan; (2) becomes insolvent or otherwise subject to the appointment of a conservator, receiver, or other legal custodian under federal or state law; or (3) would jeopardize the safety or soundness of the FHLBank if it was to remain a member.

The following table provides rollforward information with respect to changes in mandatorily redeemable capital stock liabilities (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beginning balance

 

$

31,435

 

$

19,499

 

$

19,200

 

Capital stock subject to mandatory redemption reclassified from equity

 

3,009

 

52,902

 

8,914

 

Redemption of mandatorily redeemable capital stock (a)

 

(14,499

)

(40,966

)

(8,615

)

Ending balance

 

$

19,945

 

$

31,435

 

$

19,499

 

Accrued interest payable (b)

 

$

305

 

$

606

 

$

198

 


(a)

Redemption includes repayment of excess stock.

(b)The annualized accrual rates were 6.00%, 5.00% and 4.10% atfor the three months ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 2015.2018 were 5.10%, 6.35% and 6.90%. Accrual rates are based on estimated dividend rates.

Distribution received from Financing Corporation (FICO) — FICO was established by Congress in 1987 as a vehicle for recapitalizing the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. FICO issued $8.2 billion of 30-year bonds (Obligations) with maturity dates between 2017 and 2019, the principal of which was to be repaid with the proceeds from zero-coupon U.S. Treasury bonds that FICO purchased with $680 million contributed by the Federal Home Loan Banks (FHLBanks), as FICO’s only stockholders, in exchange for nonvoting FICO stock. FICO was dissolved in 2019 in accordance with statute following payment in full of the Obligations and all creditor claims. Funds remaining were distributed in June 2020 to the FHLBanks in proportion to the amounts of FICO stock owned by each FHLBank. The FHLBNY’s share was $18.2 million, which was credited to Unrestricted retained earnings. The initial purchase of FICO capital stock in 1987 was charged-off to retained earnings; the subsequent recovery of the cost of the capital stock is also viewed as a capital transaction. In accordance with ASC 505-10-25-2 Equity, capital transactions are excluded from the determination of net income or the results of operations.

Restricted Retained Earnings

Under the FHLBank Joint Capital Enhancement Agreement (Capital Agreement), each FHLBank is required to set aside 20% of its Net income each quarter to a restricted retained earnings account until the balance of that account equals at least one percent of that FHLBank’s average balance of outstanding Consolidated obligations as calculated as of the last date of the calendar quarter. The Capital Agreement is intended to enhance the capital position of each FHLBank. These restricted retained earnings will not be available to pay dividends. Retained earnings included $774.3 million and $685.8 million as restricted retained earnings in the FHLBNY’s Total Capital at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 15.Earnings Per Share of Capital.

The FHLBNY has a single class of capital stock, and earnings per share computation is for the Class B capital stock.

The following table sets forth the computation of earnings per share. Basic and diluted earnings per share of capital are the same. The FHLBNY has no dilutive potential common shares or other common stock equivalents (dollars in thousands except per share amounts):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Net income $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 
Net income available to stockholders $442,385  $472,588  $560,478 
Weighted average shares of capital  61,334   55,511   61,798 
Less:  Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  (43)  (60)  (140)
Average number of shares of capital used to calculate earnings per share  61,291   55,451   61,658 
Basic earnings per share $7.22  $8.52  $9.09 

Note 16.Employee Retirement Plans.

The FHLBNY participates in the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions (Pentegra DB Plan), a tax-qualified, defined-benefit multiemployer pension plan that covers all FHLBNY officers and employees. The FHLBNY also participates in the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial Institutions, a tax-qualified defined contribution plan. The FHLBNY offers two non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plans, which are retirement plans. The two plans restore and enhance defined benefits for those employees who have had their qualified Defined Benefit Plan and their Defined Contribution Plan limited by IRS regulations. The two non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plans (BEP) are unfunded.

Retirement Plan Expenses Summary

The following table presents employee retirement plan expenses for the periods ended (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Defined Benefit Plan $10,000  $9,976  $10,066 
Benefit Equalization Plans (defined benefit and defined contribution)  10,450   7,613   6,838 
Defined Contribution Plans  2,701   2,501   2,329 
Postretirement Health Benefit Plan  297   (230)  (1,145)
Total retirement plan expenses $23,448  $19,860  $18,088 

Pentegra DB Plan Net Pension Cost and Funded Status

The Pentegra DB Plan operates as a multiemployer plan for accounting purposes and as a multiple-employer plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA) and the Internal Revenue Code.  As a result, certain multiemployer plan disclosures, including the certified zone status, are not applicable to the Pentegra DB Plan.  Typically, multiemployer plans contain provisions for collective bargaining arrangements.  There are no collective bargaining agreements in place at any of the FHLBanks (including the FHLBNY) that participate in the plan.  Under the Pentegra DB Plan, contributions made by a participating employer may be used to provide benefits to employees of other participating employers because assets contributed by an employer are not segregated in a separate account or restricted to provide benefits only to employees of that employer.  In addition, in the event a participating employer is unable to meet its contribution


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

requirements, the required contributions for the other participating employers could increase proportionately.  If an employee transfers employment to the FHLBNY, and the employee was a participant in the Pentegra Benefit Plan with another employer, the FHLBNY is responsible for the entire benefit.  At the time of transfer, the former employer will transfer assets to the FHLBNY’s plan, in the amount of the liability for the accrued benefit.

The Pentegra DB Plan operates on a fiscal year from July 1 through June 30, and files one Form 5500 on behalf of all employers who participate in the plan.  The Employer Identification Number is 13-5645888 and the three-digit plan number is 333.

The Pentegra DB Plan’s annual valuation process includes calculating the plan’s funded status, and separately calculating the funded status of each participating employer.  The funded status is defined as the market value of assets divided by the funding target (100 percent of the present value of all benefit liabilities accrued at that date).  As permitted by ERISA, the Pentegra DB Plan accepts contributions for the prior plan year up to eight and a half months after the asset valuation date.  As a result, the market value of assets at the valuation date (July 1) may increase by any subsequent contributions designated for the immediately preceding plan year ended June 30.

The following table presents multiemployer plan disclosure for the three years ended December 31, (dollars in thousands):

  2020  2019  2018 
Net pension cost charged to compensation and            
benefit expense for the year ended December 31 $10,000  $9,976  $10,066 
Contributions allocated to plan year ended June 30 $9,863  $9,696  $10,158 
Pentegra DB Plan funded status as of July 1 (a)  108.20%  108.59%  109.86%
FHLBNY's funded status as of July 1 (b)  105.31%  108.67%  114.77%

 

Restricted Retained Earnings(a)

Under the FHLBank Joint Capital Enhancement Agreement (“Capital Agreement”), each FHLBank is required to set aside 20% of its Net income each quarter to a restricted retained earnings account until the balance of that account equals at least one percent of that FHLBank’s average balance of outstanding Consolidated obligations.  The Capital Agreement is intended to enhance the capital position of each FHLBank.  These restricted retained earnings will not be available to pay dividends.  Retained earnings included $479.2 million and $383.3 million as restricted retained earnings in the FHLBNY’s Total Capital at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 14.Earnings Per Share of Capital.

The following table sets forth the computation of earnings per share.  Basic and diluted earnings per share of capital are the same.  The FHLBNY has no dilutive potential common shares or other common stock equivalents (dollars in thousands except per share amounts):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net income available to stockholders

 

$

479,469

 

$

401,152

 

$

414,811

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted average shares of capital

 

62,800

 

57,360

 

53,184

 

Less: Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

(215

)

(244

)

(193

)

Average number of shares of capital used to calculate earnings per share

 

62,585

 

57,116

 

52,991

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Basic earnings per share

 

$

7.66

 

$

7.02

 

$

7.83

 

Note 15.Employee Retirement Plans.

The FHLBNY participates in the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions (“Pentegra DB Plan”), a tax-qualified, defined-benefit multiemployer pension plan that covers all officers and employees of the Bank.  The Bank also participates in the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial Institutions, a tax-qualified defined contribution plan.  The FHLBNY also offers two non-qualified pension plans — Benefit Equalization Plans.  The two plans restore defined benefits for those employees who have had their qualified Defined Benefit Plan and their Defined Contribution Plan limited by IRS regulations.  The non-qualified BEP that restores benefits to participant’s Defined Contribution Plan was introduced effective at January 1, 2017.  The two non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plans (“BEP”) are unfunded.

Retirement Plan Expenses Summary

The following table presents employee retirement plan expenses for the periods ended (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Defined Benefit Plan

 

$

7,455

 

$

7,947

 

$

18,201

 

Benefit Equalization Plans (defined benefit and defined contribution)

 

5,705

 

4,566

 

4,748

 

Defined Contribution Plans

 

2,122

 

2,003

 

1,803

 

Postretirement Health Benefit Plan

 

(495

)

(176

)

(27

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total retirement plan expenses

 

$

14,787

 

$

14,340

 

$

24,725

 

Pentegra DB Plan Net Pension Cost and Funded Status

The Pentegra DB Plan operates as a multiemployer plan for accounting purposes and as a multiple-employer plan under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (“ERISA”) and the Internal Revenue Code.  As a result, certain multiemployer plan disclosures, including the certified zone status, are not applicable to the Pentegra DB Plan.  Typically, multiemployer plans contain provisions for collective bargaining arrangements.  There are no collective bargaining agreements in place at any of the FHLBanks (including the FHLBNY) that participate in the plan.  Under the Pentegra DB Plan, contributions made by a participating employer may be used to provide benefits to employees of other participating employers because assets contributed by an employer are not segregated in a separate account or restricted to provide benefits only to employees of that employer.  In addition, in the event a participating employer is unable to meet its contribution requirements, the required contributions for the other participating employers could increase proportionately.  If an employee transfers employment to the FHLBNY, and the employee was a participant in the Pentegra Benefit Plan with another employer, the FHLBNY is responsible for the entire benefit.  At the time of transfer, the former employer will transfer assets to the FHLBNY’s plan, in the amount of the liability for the accrued benefit.

The Pentegra DB Plan operates on a fiscal year from July 1 through June 30, and files one Form 5500 on behalf of all employers who participate in the plan.  The Employer Identification Number is 13-5645888 and the three-digit plan number is 333.

The Pentegra DB Plan’s annual valuation process includes calculating the plan’s funded status, and separately calculating the funded status of each participating employer.  The funded status is defined as the market value of assets divided by the funding target (100 percent of the present value of all benefit liabilities accrued at that date).  As permitted by ERISA, the Pentegra DB Plan accepts contributions for the prior plan year up to eight and a half months after the asset valuation date.  As a result, the market value of assets at the valuation date (July 1) may increase by any subsequent contributions designated for the immediately preceding plan year ended June 30.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The following table presents multiemployer plan disclosure for the three years ended December 31, (dollars in thousands):

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015 (d)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net pension cost charged to compensation and benefit expense for the year ended December 31

 

$

7,455

 

$

7,947

 

$

18,201

 

Contributions allocated to plan year ended June 30

 

$

7,409

(a)

$

8,344

 

$

17,651

 

Pentegra DB Plan funded status as of July 1 (b)

 

111.30

%

104.12

%

106.89

%

FHLBNY’s funded status as of July 1 (c)

 

115.79

%

114.86

%

115.08

%


(a)Contributions in 2017 and 2016 were not more than 5% of the total contribution made to the multi-employer plan by all participants for the most recent Form 5500 files by the plan.  The most recent Form 5500 available for the Pentegra DB Plan is for the plan year ended June 30, 2016.

(b)

Funded status is based on actuarial valuation of the Pentegra DB Plan, and includes all participants allocated to plan years and known at the time of the preparation of the actuarial valuation. The funded status may increase because the plan’s participants are permitted to make contributions through March 15 of the following year. Funded status remains preliminary until the Form 5500 is filed no later than April 15, 20182021 for the plan year ended June 30, 2017.2020. For information with respect to contributions expensed by the FHLBNY, see previous Table — Retirement Plan Expenses Summary. Contributions include minimum required under ERISA that are prepaid for the fiscal plan year that ends at June 30 in the following year, and as a result contributions may not equal amounts expensed.

(c)(b)Based on cash contributions made through December 31, 20172020 and allocated to the DB Plan year(s). The funded status may increase because the FHLBNY is permitted to make contributioncontributions through March 15 of the following year.

(d)A catch up contribution was made in 2015 for the DB Plan.

Benefit Equalization Plan (BEP)

The BEP restores defined benefits for those employees who have had their qualified defined benefits limited by IRS regulations.  The method for determining the accrual expense and liabilities of the plan is the Projected Unit Credit Accrual Method.  Under this method, the liability of the plan is composed mainly of two components, Projected Benefit Obligation (“PBO”) and Service Cost accruals.  The total liability is determined by projecting each person’s expected plan benefits.  These projected benefits are then discounted to the measurement date.  Finally, the liability is allocated to service already worked (PBO) and service to be worked (Service Cost).  There were no plan assets (this is an unfunded plan) that have been designated for the BEP plan.

The accrued pension costs for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated benefit obligation

 

$

51,065

 

$

43,673

 

Effect of future salary increases

 

12,067

 

10,068

 

Projected benefit obligation

 

63,132

 

53,741

 

Unrecognized net (loss)/gain

 

(27,976

)

(22,331

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accrued pension cost

 

$

35,156

 

$

31,410

 

Components of the projected benefit obligation for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Projected benefit obligation at the beginning of the year

 

$

53,741

 

$

46,982

 

Service cost

 

888

 

743

 

Interest cost

 

2,093

 

1,904

 

Benefits paid

 

(1,788

)

(1,704

)

Actuarial loss/(gain) (a)

 

8,198

 

5,816

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Projected benefit obligation at the end of the year

 

$

63,132

 

$

53,741

 

Benefit Equalization Plan (BEP)

The BEP restores defined benefits for those employees who have had their qualified defined benefits limited by IRS regulations. The method for determining the accrual expense and liabilities of the plan is the Projected Unit Credit Accrual Method. Under this method, the liability of the plan is composed mainly of two components, Projected Benefit Obligation (PBO) and Service Cost accruals. The total liability is determined by projecting each person’s expected plan benefits. These projected benefits are then discounted to the measurement date. Finally, the liability is allocated to service already worked (PBO) and service to be worked (Service Cost). There were no plan assets (this is an unfunded plan) that have been designated for the BEP plan.

The accrued pension costs for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Accumulated benefit obligation $82,022  $67,274 
Effect of future salary increases  13,256   11,032 
Projected benefit obligation  95,278   78,306 
Unrecognized prior service (cost)/credit  (851)  (1,548)
Unrecognized net (loss)/gain  (43,051)  (31,954)
         
Accrued pension cost $51,376  $44,804 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Components of the projected benefit obligation for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Projected benefit obligation at the beginning of the year $78,306  $63,107 
Service cost  1,567   1,265 
Interest cost  2,348   2,544 
Benefits paid  (2,601)  (2,011)
Actuarial loss/(gain) (a)  15,658   11,853 
Plan amendments  -   1,548 
Projected benefit obligation at the end of the year $95,278  $78,306 

 

The measurement date used to determine projected benefit obligation for the BEP plan was December 31 in each of the two years.

 


(a)Actuarial loss of $8.2$15.7 million in 20172020 was primarily due to decline in discount rate and unfavorable changeschange in demographic experience, and decrease in the discount rate.  Unfavorable changes were partly offset by gain due to changefavorable changes in mortality assumptions.  Actuarial loss of $5.8 million in 2016 wasprimarily due to decrease in the discount rate, and change in mortality assumptions, partly offset by unfavorable changes in demographic experience.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Amounts recognized in AOCI for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Net loss/(gain) $43,051  $31,954 
Prior service cost/(credit)  851   1,548 
Accumulated other comprehensive loss/(gain) $43,902  $33,502 

Changes in the BEP plan assets were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Fair value of the plan assets at the beginning of the year $-  $- 
Employer contributions  2,601   2,011 
Benefits paid  (2,601)  (2,011)
Fair value of the plan assets at the end of the year $-  $- 

Components of the net periodic pension cost for the defined benefit component of the BEP were as follows (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Service cost $1,567  $1,265  $1,095 
Interest cost  2,348   2,544   2,155 
Amortization of unrecognized net loss  4,561   2,879   3,545 
Amortization of unrecognized past service cost  697   -   - 
Net periodic benefit cost -Defined Benefit BEP  9,173   6,688   6,795 
Benefit Equalization plans - Thrift and Deferred
incentive compensation plans
  1,277   925   43 
Total $10,450  $7,613  $6,838 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Other changes in benefit obligations recognized in AOCI were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
New (gain)/loss during the year $15,658  $11,853 
Recognized prior service credit/(cost)  (697)  - 
New past service (credit)/cost  -   1,548 
Recognized gain/(loss)  (4,561)  (2,879)
         
Total recognized in other comprehensive loss/(income) $10,400  $10,522 
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income    $ 19,573     $ 17,210  

The net transition obligation (asset), prior service cost (credit), and the estimated net loss (gain) for the BEP plan that are expected to be amortized from AOCI into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are shown in the table below (in thousands):

  December 31, 2021 
Expected amortization of net loss/(gain) $5,909 
Expected amortization of past service cost/(credit) $697 

Key assumptions and other information for the actuarial calculations to determine benefit obligations for the BEP plan were as follows (dollars in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019  December 31, 2018 
Discount rate (a)  2.26%  3.05%  4.10%
Salary increases  4.50%  4.50%  4.50%
Amortization period (years)  6   5   6 
Benefits paid during the period $(2,601) $(2,011) $(1,824)

 

Amounts recognized in AOCI for the BEP plan were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss/(gain)

 

$

27,976

 

$

22,331

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss/(gain)

 

$

27,976

 

$

22,331

 

Changes in the BEP plan assets were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair value of the plan assets at the beginning of the year

 

$

 

$

 

Employer contributions

 

1,788

 

1,704

 

Benefits paid

 

(1,788

)

(1,704

)

Fair value of the plan assets at the end of the year

 

$

 

$

 

Components of the net periodic pension cost for the defined benefit component of the BEP were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

Service cost

 

$

888

 

$

743

 

$

739

 

Interest cost

 

2,093

 

1,904

 

1,790

 

Amortization of unrecognized net loss

 

2,554

 

1,966

 

2,272

 

Amortization of unrecognized past service (credit)/cost

 

 

(47

)

(53

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net periodic benefit cost -Defined Benefit BEP

 

5,535

 

4,566

 

4,748

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Benefit Equalization plans - Thrift and Deferred incentive compensation plans (introduced in 2017)

 

170

 

 

 

Total

 

$

5,705

 

$

4,566

 

$

4,748

 

Other changes in benefit obligations recognized in AOCI were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss/(gain)

 

$

8,198

 

$

5,816

 

Amortization of net (loss)/gain

 

(2,554

)

(1,966

)

Amortization of prior service credit/(cost)

 

 

47

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recognized in other comprehensive loss/(income)

 

$

5,644

 

$

3,897

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income

 

$

11,179

 

$

8,463

 

The net transition obligation (asset), prior service cost (credit), and the estimated net loss (gain) for the BEP plan that are expected to be amortized from AOCI into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are shown in the table below (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Expected amortization of net loss/(gain)

 

$

3,551

 

Key assumptions and other information for the actuarial calculations to determine benefit obligations for the BEP plan were as follows (dollars in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Discount rate (a)

 

3.47

%

3.96

%

4.13

%

Salary increases

 

4.50

%

4.50

%

4.50

%

Amortization period (years)

 

6

 

7

 

7

 

Benefits paid during the period

 

$

(1,788

)

$

(1,704

)

$

(1,689

)


(a)(a)The discount rates were based on the Citigroup Pension Liability Index at December 31, adjusted for duration in each of the three years.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Future BEP plan benefits to be paid were estimated to be as follows (in thousands):

Years  Payments 
2021  $3,202 
2022   3,414 
2023   3,638 
2024   3,833 
2025   4,216 
2026-2030   23,801 
      
Total  $42,104 

The net periodic benefit cost for 2021 is expected to be $10.7 million ($9.2 million in 2020).

155

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Postretirement Health Benefit Plan

The Retiree Medical Benefit Plan (the Plan) is for retired employees and for employees who are eligible for retirement benefits.  The Plan is unfunded.  The Plan, as amended, is offered to active employees who have completed 10 years of employment service at the FHLBNY and attained age 55 as of January 1, 2015.

Assumptions used in determining the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (APBO) included a discount rate assumption of 2.18%.

Components of the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for the postretirement health benefits plan for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2019 (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation at the beginning of the year $10,610  $12,826 
Service cost  58   72 
Interest cost  320   406 
Actuarial loss/(gain)  1,054   (2,228)
Plan participant contributions  208   220 
Actual benefits paid  (939)  (738)
Retiree drug subsidy reimbursement  53   52 
Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation at the end of the year $11,364  $10,610 

Changes in postretirement health benefit plan assets (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Fair value of plan assets at the beginning of the year $-  $- 
Employer contributions  731   518 
Plan participant contributions  208   220 
Actual benefits paid  (939)  (738)
Fair value of plan assets at the end of the year $-  $- 

Amounts recognized in AOCI for the postretirement benefit obligation (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Net (gain)/loss $(373) $(1,509)
Accumulated other comprehensive (gain)/loss $(373) $(1,509)

Components of the net periodic benefit cost for the postretirement health benefit plan were as follows (in thousands):

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
Service cost (benefits attributed to service during the period) $58  $72  $87 
Interest cost on accumulated postretirement health benefit obligation  320   406   465 
Amortization of (gain)/loss  (81)  (451)  64 
Amortization of prior service (credit)/cost  -   (257)  (1,761)
Net periodic postretirement health benefit expense/(income) $297  $(230) $(1,145)


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Other changes in benefit obligations recognized in AOCI were as follows (in thousands):

  December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Net loss/(gain) $1,054  $(2,228)
Amortization of net gain/(loss)  81   451 
Amortization of prior service credit/(cost)  -   257 
         
Total recognized in other comprehensive income $1,135  $(1,520)
         
Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income $1,432  $(1,750)

The measurement date used to determine benefit obligations was December 31 in each of the two years.

Key assumptions and other information to determine current year’s obligation for the postretirement health benefit plan were as follows:

  Years ended December 31,
  2020 2019 2018
Weighted average discount rate (a)  2.18%  3.04%  4.09%
          
Health care cost trend rates:         
    Assumed for next year         
Pre 65  6.50%  6.75%  6.75%
Post 65  4.95%  5.00%  4.90%
Pre 65 Ultimate rate  4.50%  4.50%  4.50%
Pre 65 Year that ultimate rate is reached  2028  2028  2025/2026
Post 65 Ultimate rate  4.50%  4.50%  4.50%
Post 65 Year that ultimate rate is reached  2028  2028  2025/2026
Alternative amortization methods used to amortize         
    Prior service cost   Straight - line   Straight - line   Straight - line
Unrecognized net (gain) or loss   Straight - line   Straight - line   Straight - line

 

Future BEP plan benefits to be paid were estimated to be as follows (in thousands):

Years

 

Payments

 

 

 

 

 

2018

 

$

1,959

 

2019

 

2,152

 

2020

 

2,320

 

2021

 

2,582

 

2022

 

2,819

 

2023-2027

 

17,107

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

28,939

 

The net periodic benefit cost for 2018 is expected to be $6.8 million ($5.5 million in 2017).

(a)Postretirement Health Benefit Plan

The Retiree Medical Benefit Plan (the Plan) is for retired employees and for employees who are eligible for retirement benefits.  The Plan is unfunded.  The Plan, as amended, is offered to active employees who have completed 10 years of employment service at the FHLBNY and attained age 55 as of January 1, 2015.

The net periodic benefit costs in 2017, 2016 and 2015 were immaterial credits to expense, benefitting from amortization of gains from plan amendments in the first quarter of 2014 that resulted in a reduction of $8.8 million in plan obligations.  The gains will be amortized over an actuarially determined period, effectively reducing net periodic benefit cost in each period.

Assumptions used in determining the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation (“APBO”) included a discount rate assumption of 3.42%.

A percentage point increase in the assumed healthcare trend rates would have resulted in an increase in postretirement benefit expense by $50.1 thousand in 2017 and $49.5 thousand in 2016; it would also have resulted in an increase in Benefit obligations by $1.5 million at December 31, 2017 and $1.3 million at December 31, 2016.  A percentage point decrease in the assumed healthcare trend rates would have resulted in a decrease in postretirement benefit expense by $43.3 thousand in 2017 and $42.7 thousand in 2016, and a decrease in Benefit obligations by $1.3 million and $1.1 million at the two dates.

Components of the accumulated postretirement benefit obligation for the postretirement health benefits plan for the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation at the beginning of the year

 

$

15,238

 

$

14,320

 

Service cost

 

100

 

119

 

Interest cost

 

629

 

598

 

Actuarial loss/(gain)

 

1,665

 

712

 

Plan participant contributions

 

203

 

277

 

Actual benefits paid

 

(776

)

(846

)

Retiree drug subsidy reimbursement

 

61

 

58

 

Accumulated postretirement benefit obligation at the end of the year

 

$

17,120

 

$

15,238

 

Changes in postretirement health benefit plan assets (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair value of plan assets at the beginning of the year

 

$

 

$

 

Employer contributions

 

573

 

569

 

Plan participant contributions

 

203

 

277

 

Actual benefits paid

 

(776

)

(846

)

Fair value of plan assets at the end of the year

 

$

 

$

 

Amounts recognized in AOCI for the postretirement benefit obligation (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prior service (credit)/cost

 

$

(2,019

)

$

(3,780

)

Net loss/(gain)

 

4,790

 

4,070

 

Accumulated other comprehensive loss/(gain)

 

$

2,771

 

$

290

 

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The net transition obligation (asset), prior service cost (credit), and estimated net loss (gain) for the postretirement health benefit plan are expected to be amortized from AOCI into net periodic benefit cost over the next fiscal year are shown in the table below (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2018

 

 

 

 

 

Expected amortization of net loss/(gain)

��

$

764

 

Expected amortization of prior service (credit)/cost

 

$

(1,761

)

Components of the net periodic benefit cost for the postretirement health benefit plan were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service cost (benefits attributed to service during the period)

 

$

100

 

$

119

 

$

125

 

Interest cost on accumulated postretirement health benefit obligation

 

629

 

598

 

551

 

Amortization of loss/(gain)

 

946

 

868

 

1,058

 

Amortization of prior service (credit)/cost

 

(1,761

)

(1,761

)

(1,761

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net periodic postretirement health benefit (income) (a)

 

$

(86

)

$

(176

)

$

(27

)


(a)Plan amendments in a prior year reduced plan obligations by $8.8 million, and the resulting gain is being amortized over an actuarially determined period, reducing net periodic benefit costs.

Other changes in benefit obligations recognized in AOCI were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net loss/(gain)

 

$

1,665

 

$

712

 

Amortization of net (loss)/gain

 

(946

)

(868

)

Amortization of prior service credit/(cost)

 

1,761

 

1,761

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recognized in other comprehensive income

 

$

2,480

 

$

1,605

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recognized in net periodic benefit cost and other comprehensive income

 

$

2,394

 

$

1,429

 

The measurement date used to determine benefit obligations was December 31 in each of the two years.

Key assumptions and other information to determine current year’s obligation for the postretirement health benefit plan were as follows:

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Weighted average discount rate (a)

 

3.42%

 

3.88%

 

3.94%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Health care cost trend rates:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Assumed for next year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pre 65

 

7.10%

 

6.65%

 

7.00%

 

Post 65

 

4.95%

 

6.00%

 

6.25%

 

Pre 65 Ultimate rate

 

4.50%

 

4.50%

 

4.50%

 

Pre 65 Year that ultimate rate is reached

 

2026

 

2023

 

2024/2023

 

Post 65 Ultimate rate

 

4.50%

 

4.50%

 

4.50%

 

Post 65 Year that ultimate rate is reached

 

2026

 

2023

 

2024/2023

 

Alternative amortization methods used to amortize

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Prior service cost

 

Straight - line

 

Straight - line

 

Straight - line

 

Unrecognized net (gain) or loss

 

Straight - line

 

Straight - line

 

Straight - line

 


(a)The discount rates were based on the Citigroup Pension Liability Index adjusted for duration in each of the periods in this report.

Future postretirement health benefit plan expenses to be paid were estimated to be as follows (in thousands):

Years  Payments 
2021  $661 
2022   737 
2023   759 
2024   743 
2025   710 
2026-2030   3,307 
      
Total  $6,917 

The postretirement health benefit plan accrual for 2021 is expected to be a cost of $0.3 million ($0.3 million in 2020).

157

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 17.            Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

The FHLBNY, consistent with the Finance Agency’s regulations, may enter into interest-rate swaps, swaptions, and interest-rate cap and floor agreements to manage its interest rate exposure inherent in otherwise unhedged assets and funding positions. We are not a derivatives dealer and do not trade derivatives for short-term profit. 

The contractual or notional amount of derivatives reflects the involvement of the FHLBNY in the various classes of financial instruments, and serve as a basis for calculating periodic interest payments or cash flows. Notional amount of a derivative does not measure the credit risk exposure, and the maximum credit exposure is substantially less than the notional amount. The maximum credit risk is the estimated cost of replacing interest-rate swaps, forward agreements, mandatory delivery contracts for mortgage loans and purchased caps and floors (derivatives) in a gain position if the counterparty defaults and the related collateral, if any, is of insufficient value to the FHLBNY.

Derivatives are instruments that derive their value from underlying asset prices, indices, reference rates and other inputs, or a combination of these factors. The FHLBNY executes derivatives with swap dealers and financial institution swap counterparties as negotiated contracts, which are usually referred to as over-the-counter (OTC) derivatives.

The following table presents the FHLBNY’s derivative activities based on notional amounts (in thousands):

Derivative Notionals

  Hedging Instruments Under ASC 815 
  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Interest rate contracts        
   Interest rate swaps $127,077,867  $107,837,925 
   Interest rate caps  800,000   800,000 
   Mortgage delivery commitments  9,777   44,768 
Total interest rate contracts notionals $127,887,644  $108,682,693 


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements 

Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities — Net Presentation

The table below presents the gross and net derivatives receivables by contract type and amount for those derivatives contracts for which netting is permissible under U.S. GAAP as Derivative instruments nettable. Derivatives receivables have been netted with respect to those receivables as to which the netting requirements have been met, including obtaining a legal analysis with respect to the enforceability of the netting (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
  

Derivative

Assets

  

Derivative

Liabilities

  

Derivative

Assets

  

Derivative

Liabilities

 
Derivative instruments - nettable                
Gross recognized amount                
Uncleared derivatives $232,355  $913,215  $241,501  $365,397 
Cleared derivatives  205,505   211,259   367,202   352,576 
Total gross recognized amount  437,860   1,124,474   608,703   717,973 
Gross amounts of netting adjustments and cash collateral                
Uncleared derivatives  (197,385)  (849,880)  (104,011)  (333,471)
Cleared derivatives  (203,835)  (203,835)  (266,850)  (352,092)
Total gross amounts of netting adjustments and cash collateral  (401,220)  (1,053,715)  (370,861)  (685,563)
Net amounts after offsetting adjustments and cash collateral $36,640  $70,759  $237,842  $32,410 
                 
Uncleared derivatives $34,970  $63,335  $137,490  $31,926 
Cleared derivatives  1,670   7,424   100,352   484 
Total net amounts after offsetting adjustments and cash collateral $36,640  $70,759  $237,842  $32,410 
                 
Derivative instruments - not nettable                
Uncleared derivatives (a) $29  $1  $105  $1 
Total derivative assets and total derivative liabilities                
Uncleared derivatives $34,999  $63,336  $137,595  $31,927 
Cleared derivatives  1,670   7,424   100,352   484 
Total derivative assets and total derivative liabilities presented in the Statements of Condition (b) $36,669  $70,760  $237,947  $32,411 
                 
Non-cash collateral received or pledged (c)                
Can be sold or repledged                
Security pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (d) $630,372  $-  $251,177  $- 
Cannot be sold or repledged                
Uncleared derivatives securities received  (20,687)  -   (115,238)  - 
Total net amount of non-cash collateral received or repledged $609,685  $-  $135,939  $- 
Total net exposure cash and non-cash (e) $646,354  $70,760  $373,886  $32,411 
                 
Net unsecured amount - Represented by:                
Uncleared derivatives $14,312  $63,336  $22,357  $31,927 
Cleared derivatives  632,042   7,424   351,529   484 
Total net exposure cash and non-cash (e) $646,354  $70,760  $373,886  $32,411 

 

Future postretirement health benefit plan expenses to be paid were estimated to be as follows (in thousands):

Years

 

Payments

 

 

 

 

 

2018

 

$

904

 

2019

 

954

 

2020

 

1,007

 

2021

 

1,037

 

2022

 

1,070

 

2023-2027

 

5,472

 

Total

 

$

10,444

 

The postretirement health benefit plan accrual for 2018 is expected to be a credit of $0.3 million (a credit of $0.1 million in 2017).

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York(a)

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 16.Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

General — The FHLBNY accounts for its hedging activities in accordance with ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging (formerly SFAS 133).  As a general rule, hedge accounting is permitted where the FHLBNY is exposed to a particular risk, such as interest-rate risk that causes changes in the fair value of an asset or liability or variability in the expected future cash flows of an existing asset, liability or a forecasted transaction that may affect earnings.

Derivative contracts hedging the risks associated with the changes in fair value are referred to as Fair value hedges, while contracts hedging the risks affecting the expected future cash flows are called Cash flow hedges.  For more information, see Derivatives in Note 1. Significant Accounting Polices and Estimates.

The FHLBNY, consistent with the Finance Agency’s regulations, may enter into interest-rate swaps, swaptions, and interest-rate cap and floor agreements to manage its interest rate exposure inherent in otherwise unhedged assets and funding positions.  We are not a derivatives dealer and do not trade derivatives for short-term profit.

Typically, we execute derivatives under three hedging strategies — by designating them as a fair value or cash flow hedge of an underlying financial instrument or a forecasted transaction that qualifies for hedge accounting treatment; by acting as an intermediary; or by designating the

Not nettable derivative as an asset-liability management hedge (i.e. an “economic hedge”).

For fair value hedges, in which derivatives hedge the fair values of assets and liabilities, changes in the fair value of derivatives are recorded in Other income in the Statements of Income, together with fair values of the hedged item related to the hedged risk.  These amounts are expected to, and generally do, offset each other.

For cash flow hedges, in which derivatives hedge the variability of cash flows related to floating- and fixed-rate assets, liabilities or forecasted transactions, the accounting treatment depends on the effectiveness of the hedge.  To the extent these derivatives are effective in offsetting the variability of hedged cash flows, the effective portion of the changes in the derivatives’ fair values will not be included in current earnings, but is reported in AOCI.  These changes in fair value will be included in earnings of future periods when the hedged cash flows impact earnings.  To the extent these cash flow hedges are not effective, changes in their fair values are immediately recorded in Other income in the Statements of Income.

When designating a derivative in an economic hedge, it is after considering the operational costs and benefits of executing a hedge that would qualify for hedge accounting.  When entering into such hedges that do not qualify for hedge accounting, changes in fair value of the derivatives is recorded in earnings with no offsetting fair value adjustments for the hedged asset, liability, or firm commitment.  As a result, an economic hedge introduces the potential for earnings variability.  Economic hedges are an acceptable hedging strategy under the FHLBNY’s risk management program, and the strategies comply with the Finance Agency’s regulatory requirements prohibiting speculative use of derivatives.

Principal hedging activities are summarized below:

Consolidated Obligations

The FHLBNY may manage the risk arising from changing market prices and volatility of a Consolidated obligation debt by matching the cash inflows on the derivative with the cash outflow on the Consolidated obligation debt.

Fair value hedges — In a typical transaction, fixed-rate Consolidated obligations are issued by the FHLBNY and we would concurrently enter into a matching interest rate swap in which the counterparty pays to the FHLBNY fixed cash flows designed to mirror, in timing and amounts, the cash outflows the FHLBNY pays to the holders of the Consolidated obligations.

When such a transaction qualifies for hedge accounting, it is treated as a “Fair value hedge” under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.  By electing to use fair value hedge accounting, the carrying value of the debt is adjusted for changes in the benchmark interest rate, with any such changes in fair value recorded in current earnings.  The interest-rate swap that hedges the interest rate risk of the debt is also recorded on the balance sheet at fair value, with any changes in fair value reflected in earnings.

Cash flow hedges — The FHLBNY also hedges variable cash flows resulting from rollover (re-issuance) of 3-month Consolidated obligation discount notes.  Variable cash flows from those liabilities are converted to fixed-rate cash flows by entering into receive-variable, pay-fixed interest rate swaps.  We also hedge the variability of cash flows of anticipated issuance of fixed-rate debt to changes in the benchmark rate.

When such a transaction qualifies for hedge accounting, the hedge is accounted for under the provisions of a “Cash flow hedge”.  The interest-rate swaps are recorded at fair values on the balance sheet as a derivative asset or liability, with the offset in AOCI.  Changes in fair values of the hedging derivatives are reflected in AOCI to the extent the hedges are effective.  Hedge ineffectiveness, if any, is recorded in current earnings.  Fair values of swaps in the cash flow hedge programs are reclassified from AOCI to earnings as an interest expense at the same time as when the interest expense from the discount note or the anticipated debt impacts interest expense.  Since efforts are made to match the terms of the derivatives to those of the hedged forecasted cash flows as closely as possible, the amount of hedge ineffectiveness is not significant.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The two Cash flow strategies are described below:

·                  Cash flow hedges of “Anticipated Consolidated Bond Issuance” — The FHLBNY enters into interest-rate swaps to hedge the anticipated issuance of debt, and to “lock in” the interest to be paid for the cost of funding.

The swaps are terminated upon issuance of the debt instrument, and gains or losses upon termination are recorded in AOCI.  Gains and losses are reclassified to earnings in the periods in which earnings are affected by the variability of the cash flows of the debt that was issued.

·                  Cash flow hedges of “Rolling Issuance of Discount Notes” — The FHLBNY executes long-term pay-fixed, receive-variable interest rate swaps as hedges of the variable quarterly interest payments on the discount note borrowing program.  In this program, we issue a series of discount notes with 91-day terms over periods typically up to 15 years.  We will continue issuing new 91-day discount notes over the terms of the swaps as each outstanding discount note matures.  The interest rate swaps require a settlement every 91 days, and the variable rate, which is based on the 3-month LIBOR, is reset immediately following each payment.  The swaps are expected to eliminate the risk of variability of cash flows for each forecasted discount note issuance every 91 days.  The fair values of the interest rate swaps are recorded in AOCI and ineffectiveness, if any, is recorded in earnings.  Amounts recorded in AOCI are reclassified to earnings in the same periods in which interest expenses are affected by the variability of the cash flows of the discount notes.

Economic hedges of Consolidated obligation debt — When we issue variable-rate Consolidated obligation bonds indexed to 1-month LIBOR, the U.S. Prime rate, or the Federal funds rate, we will generally execute interest-rate swaps (“basis swaps”) to hedge the basis risk of the variable rate debt to 3-month LIBOR, the FHLBNY’s preferred funding base.  The basis swaps are designated as economic hedges of the floating-rate bonds.  The choice of an economic hedge is made because the FHLBNY has determined that the operational cost of designating the hedges under accounting standards for derivatives and hedge accounting would outweigh the accounting benefits.  In this economic hedge, only the interest rate swap is carried at fair value, with changes in fair values recorded though earnings.

Consolidated obligation debt elected under the Fair Value Option — An alternative to hedge accounting, which permits the debt to be carried at the benchmark (LIBOR) fair value, is to elect debt under the FVO.  Once the irrevocable election is made upon issuance of the debt, the entire change in fair value of the debt is reported in earnings.  We have elected to carry certain fixed-rate Consolidated bonds and certain discount notes under the FVO.  For more information, see Fair Value Option Disclosures in Note 17.  Fair Values of Financial Instruments.  Typically, we would also execute interest rate swaps (to convert the fixed-rate cash flows of the FVO debt to variable-rate cash flows), and changes in the fair values of the swaps would also be recorded in earnings, creating a natural offset to the debt’s fair value changes through earnings.  The interest rate swap would be designated as an economic hedge of the debt.

Advances

We offer a wide array of advances structures to meet members’ funding needs.  These advances may have maturities up to 30 years with fixed or adjustable rates and may include early termination features or options.  We may use derivatives to adjust the repricing and/or options characteristics of advances to more closely match the characteristics of its funding liabilities.

Fair value hedges — In general, whenever a member executes a longer-term fixed rate advance, or a fixed or variable-rate advance with call or put or other embedded options, we will simultaneously execute a derivative transaction, generally an interest rate swap, with terms that offset the terms of the fixed rate advance, or terms of the advance with embedded put or call options or other options.  When such instruments are conceived, designed and structured, our control procedures require the identification and evaluation of embedded derivatives, as defined under accounting standards for derivatives and hedging activities.

When a fixed-rate advance is hedged, the combination of the fixed rate advance and the derivative transaction effectively creates a variable rate asset, indexed to LIBOR.  With a putable advance borrowed by a member, we would purchase from the member a put option that is embedded in the advance.  We may hedge a putable advance by entering into a cancellable interest rate swap in which we pay to the swap counterparty fixed-rate cash flows, and in return the swap counterparty pays us variable-rate cash flows.  The swap counterparty can cancel the swap on the put date, which would normally occur in a rising rate environment, and we can terminate the advance and extend additional credit to the member on new terms.  We also offer callable advances to members, which is a fixed-rate advance borrowed by a member.  Within the structure of the advance, the FHLBNY sells to the member an embedded call option that enables the member to terminate the advance at pre-determined exercise dates.  The call option is embedded in the advance.  We hedge such advances by executing interest rate swaps with cancellable option features that would allow us to terminate the swaps also at pre-determined option exercise dates.

Advances elected under the Fair Value Option — We have elected to carry certain advances under the FVO.  Once the irrevocable election is made upon issuance of the advance, the entire change in fair value of the advance is reported in earnings, and provides a natural economic offset when a Consolidated obligation debt is elected under the FVO.

Economic hedges of variable rate capped advances — We offer variable rate advances with an embedded option that caps the interest rate payable by the borrower.  The FHLBNY would typically offset the risk presented by the embedded cap by executing a matching standalone cap.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Mortgage Loans

Mortgage loans are fixed-rate MPF loans held-for-portfolio, and the FHLBNY manages the interest rate and prepayment risk associated with mortgages through debt issuance, without the use of derivatives.  Firm commitments to purchase or deliver mortgage loans are accounted for as a derivative.

Firm Commitment Strategies — Mortgage delivery commitments are considered derivatives under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.  We account for them as freestanding derivatives, and record the fair values of mortgage loan delivery commitments on the balance sheet with an offset to Other income (loss) as Net realized and unrealized gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities.  Fair values were not significant for all periods in this report.

Member Intermediation

To meet the hedging needs of its members, the FHLBNY acts as an intermediary between the members and the other counterparties.  This intermediation allows smaller members to access the derivatives market.  The derivatives used in intermediary activities do not qualify for hedge accounting, and fair value changes are recorded in earnings.  Since the FHLBNY mitigates the fair value exposure of these positions by executing identical offsetting transactions, the net impact in earnings is not significant.  The notional principal of interest rate swaps executed as intermediary activity were $193.0 million and $129.0 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  The FHLBNY’s exposure with respect to the transactions with members was fully collateralized.

Other Economic Hedges

The derivatives in economic hedges are considered freestanding and changes in the fair values of the swaps are recorded through income.  In general, economic hedges comprised of (1) interest rate caps to hedge balance sheet risk, specifically interest rate risk arising from certain capped floating rate investment securities, (2) interest rate swaps that had previously qualified as hedges under the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging, but had been subsequently de-designated from hedge accounting as they were assessed as being not highly effective hedges, (3) interest rate swaps in economic hedges of advances and debt elected under the FVO, and (4) interest rate swaps in economic hedges of securities in the trading/liquidity portfolio.

Credit Risk Due to Non-performance by Counterparties

The contractual or notional amount of derivatives reflects the involvement of the FHLBNY in the various classes of financial instruments, and serves as a basis for calculating periodic interest payments or cash flows.  Notional amount of a derivative does not measure the credit risk exposure, and the maximum credit exposure is substantially less than the notional amount.  The maximum credit risk is the estimated cost of replacing interest-rate swaps, forward agreements, mandatory delivery contracts for mortgage loans and purchased caps and floors (“derivatives”) in a gain position if the counterparty defaults and the related collateral, if any, is of insufficient value to the FHLBNY.

Derivatives are instruments that derive their value from underlying asset prices, indices, reference rates and other inputs, or a combination of these factors.  The FHLBNY executes derivatives with swap dealers and financial institution swap counterparties as negotiated contracts, which are usually referred to as over-the-counter (“OTC”) derivatives.

The majority of OTC derivative contracts at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were cleared derivatives.  The contracts are transacted bilaterally with executing swap counterparties, then cleared and settled through a derivative clearing organizations (“DCOs”) as mandated under the Dodd-Frank Act.  When transacting a derivative for clearing, the FHLBNY utilizes a designated clearing agent, the Futures Clearing Merchant (“FCM”) that acts on behalf of the FHLBNY to clear and settle the interest rate exchange transaction through the DCO.  Once the transaction is accepted for clearing by the FCM, acting in the capacity of an intermediary between the FHLBNY and the DCO, the original transaction between the FHLBNY and the executing swap counterparty is extinguished, and is replaced by an identical transaction between the FHLBNY and the DCO.  The DCO becomes the counterparty to the FHLBNY.  However, the FCM remains as the principal operational contact and interacts with the DCO through the life cycle events of the derivative transaction on behalf of the FHLBNY.

The FHLBNY also transacts derivative contracts that are executed and settled bilaterally with counterparties, rather than settling the transaction with a DCO.  Such bilateral derivative transactions have not yet been mandated for clearing under the Dodd-Frank Act, typically because the transactions are complex and their ongoing pricing and settlement mechanisms have not yet been operationalized by the DCOs.

Credit risk on bilateral OTC — uncleared derivative contracts — For derivatives that are not eligible for clearing with a DCO under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FHLBNY is subject to credit risk as a result of non-performance by swap counterparties to the derivative agreements.  The FHLBNY enters into master netting arrangements and bilateral security agreements with all active derivative counterparties that provide for delivery of collateral at specified levels to limit the net unsecured credit exposure to these counterparties.  The FHLBNY makes judgments on each counterparty’s creditworthiness, and makes estimates of the collateral values in analyzing counterparty non-performance credit risk.  Bilateral agreements consider the credit risks and the agreement specifies thresholds to post or receive collateral with changes in credit ratings.  When the FHLBNY has more than one derivative transaction outstanding with the counterparty, and a legally enforceable master netting agreement exists with the counterparty, the net exposure (less collateral held) represents the appropriate measure of credit risk.  The FHLBNY conducts all its bilaterally executed derivative transactions under ISDA master netting agreements.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Credit risk on OTC cleared derivative transactions — The FHLBNY’s derivative transactions that are eligible for clearing are subject to mandatory clearing rules under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) as provided under the Dodd-Frank Act.  If a derivative transaction is listed as eligible for clearing, the FHLBNY must abide by the CFTC rules to clear the transaction through a DCO.  The FHLBNY’s cleared derivatives are also initially executed bilaterally with a swap dealer (the executing swap counterparty) in the OTC market.  The clearing process requires all parties to the derivative transaction to novate the contracts to a DCO, which then becomes the counterparty to all parties, including the FHLBNY, to the transaction.

The enforceability of offsetting rights incorporated in the agreements for the cleared derivative transactions has been analyzed by the FHLBNY to establish the extent to which supportive legal opinion, obtained from counsel of recognized standing, provides the requisite level of certainty regarding the enforceability of these agreements.  Further analysis was performed to reach a view that the exercise of rights by the non-defaulting party under these agreements would not be stayed, or avoided under applicable law upon an event of default including bankruptcy, insolvency or similar proceeding involving the DCO or the FHLBNY’s clearing agents or both.  Based on the analysis of the rules, and legal analysis obtained, the FHLBNY has made a determination that it has the right of setoff that is enforceable under applicable law that would allow it to net individual derivative contracts executed through a specific clearing agent, the FCM, to a designated DCO, so that a net derivative receivable or payable will be recorded for the DCO; that exposure (less margin held) would be represented by a single amount receivable from the DCO, and that amount be the appropriate measure of credit risk.  This policy election for netting cleared derivatives is consistent with the policy election for netting bilaterally settled derivative transactions under master netting agreements.

For all cleared derivative contracts that have not matured, “Variation margin” is exchanged between the FHLBNY and the FCM, acting as agents on behalf of DCOs.  Variation margin is determined by the DCO and fluctuates with the fair values of the open contracts.  When the aggregate contract value of open derivatives is “in-the-money” for the FHLBNY (gain position), the FHLBNY would receive variation margin from the DCO.  If the value of the open contracts is “out-of-the-money” (liability position), the FHLBNY would post variation margin to the DCO.  At December 31, 2017, our analysis concluded that variation margin exchanged with the DCOs - Chicago Mercantile Exchange (“CME”) and London Clearing House (“LCH”) were the daily settlement values of the derivative contracts, and not as collateral, and a direct reduction of the fair values of the open contracts.  At December 31, 2016, variation margin was considered collateral on open derivative contracts.  The adoption of variation margin as a settlement had no impact on the net amounts of derivative balances reported in the Statements of Condition at December 31, 2017.

The FHLBNY is also required to post an initial margin on open derivative contracts to the DCO through an FCM.  Initial margin is determined by the DCO and fluctuates with the volatility of the FHLBNY’s portfolio of cleared derivatives; volatility is measured by the speed and severity of market price changes of the portfolio.  Initial margin is considered as collateral, and if exchanged in cash, it would be netted against the fair values of open derivative contracts after applying variation margin.  Non-cash margins are not netted on the Statements of Condition.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities — Net Presentation

The following table presents the gross and net derivatives receivables by contract type and amount for those derivatives contracts for which netting is permissible under U.S. GAAP (“Derivative instruments Nettable”) (in thousands).  Derivatives receivables have been netted with respect to those receivables as to which the netting requirements have been met, including obtaining a legal analysis with respect to the enforceability of the netting.  Where such a legal analysis has not been either sought or obtained, the receivables were not netted, and were reported as Derivative instruments Not Nettable.

The table also presents security collateral, which are not permitted to be offset, but which would be eligible for offsetting to the extent an event of default occurred and a legal opinion supporting enforceability of the netting and collateral rights has been obtained.  See footnote (c) to the table.

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Derivative 
Assets

 

Derivative 
Liabilities

 

Derivative 
Assets

 

Derivative 
Liabilities

 

Derivative instruments - Nettable

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gross recognized amount

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

$

207,922

 

$

103,901

 

$

207,462

 

$

230,084

 

Cleared derivatives

 

672,494

 

221,976

 

518,962

 

213,719

 

Total derivatives fair values

 

880,416

 

325,877

 

726,424

 

443,803

 

Variation Margin (Note 1)

 

(465,803

)

 

 

 

Total gross recognized amount

 

$

414,613

 

$

325,877

 

$

726,424

 

$

443,803

 

Gross amounts of netting adjustments and cash collateral

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

(95,190

)

(57,594

)

(94,742

)

(85,199

)

Cleared derivatives

 

(206,691

)

(206,691

)

(302,867

)

(213,719

)

Total gross amounts of netting adjustments and cash collateral

 

$

(301,881

)

$

(264,285

)

$

(397,609

)

$

(298,918

)

Net amounts after offsetting adjustments

 

$

112,732

 

$

61,592

 

$

328,815

 

$

144,885

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

$

112,732

 

$

46,307

 

$

112,720

 

$

144,885

 

Cleared derivatives

 

 

15,285

 

216,095

 

 

Total net amounts after offsetting adjustments - Nettable

 

$

112,732

 

$

61,592

 

$

328,815

 

$

144,885

 

Derivative instruments - Not Nettable

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Delivery commitments (a)

 

10

 

15

 

60

 

100

 

Total derivative assets and total derivative liabilities presented in the Statements of Condition (b)

 

$

 112,742

 

$

 61,607

 

$

 328,875

 

$

 144,985

 

Non-cash collateral received or pledged (c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Can be sold or repledged

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Security pledged as initial margin for cleared derivatives (d)

 

$

239,064

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Cannot be sold or repledged

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

(103,036

)

 

(104,470

)

 

Delivery commitments (a)

 

 

 

(60

)

 

Total non-cash collateral

 

$

136,028

 

$

 

$

(104,530

)

$

 

Total net amount (e)

 

$

248,770

 

$

61,607

 

$

224,345

 

$

144,985

 

Net unsecured amount - Represented by:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bilateral derivatives

 

$

9,706

 

$

46,322

 

$

8,250

 

$

144,985

 

Cleared derivatives

 

239,064

 

15,285

 

216,095

 

 

Total net amount (e)

 

$

248,770

 

$

61,607

 

$

224,345

 

$

144,985

 


(a)Derivative instruments without legal right of offset, and were synthetic derivatives representing forward mortgage delivery commitments of 45 business days or less. Amounts were not material, and it was operationally not practical to separate receivablereceivables from payables, andpayables; net presentation was adopted. No cash collateral was involved with the mortgage delivery commitments.

(b)Total net amount represents net unsecured amounts ofAmounts represented Derivative assets and liabilities that were recorded in the Statements of Condition. At December 31, 2017, the asset balance primarily represented the aggregate credit support thresholds for uncleared derivatives waived under ISDA Credit Support and Master netting agreements between the FHLBNY and derivative counterparties; the liability balance represented excess variation margin received.  At December 31, 2016, the asset balance represented uncollateralized exposures on uncleared derivatives, and initial margins posted inDerivative cash by the FHLBNY on cleared derivatives transactions.  In the Statements of Condition, derivative balances arewere not netted with non-cash collateral received or pledged, since legal ownership of the non-cash collateral remains with the pledging counterparty (see footnote c(c) below).

(c)Non-CashNon-cash collateral received or pledged — For bilateralcertain uncleared derivatives, certain counterparties have pledged U.S. treasuryTreasury securities to the FHLBNY as collateral. Also includesAmounts also included non-cash mortgage collateral on derivative positions with member counterparties where we acted as an intermediary, who have pledged mortgage related collateral.intermediary. For certain cleared derivatives, we have also pledged marketable securities to collateralizesatisfy initial margin requirements under the CFTC rules.or collateral requirements.

(d)SecuritiesAmounts represented securities pledged to Derivative Clearing Organization (DCO) to fulfill our initial margin obligations on cleared derivatives. Securities pledged may be sold or repledged if the FHLBNY defaults on ourits obligations under rules established by the CFTC.

(e)RepresentsAmounts represented net exposure after applying non-cash collateral pledged to and by the FHLBNY. Since legal ownership and control over the securities are not transferred, the net exposure represented in the table above is for information only and is not reported as such in the Statements of Condition.

Note on variation margin — For all cleared derivative contracts that have not matured, “Variation margin” is exchanged between the FHLBNY and the Future Commission Merchant (FCM), acting as agents on behalf of DCOs. Variation margin is determined by the DCO and fluctuates with the fair values of the open contracts. When the aggregate contract value of open derivatives is “in-the-money” for the FHLBNY (gain position), the FHLBNY would receive variation margin from the DCO. If the value of the open contracts is “out-of-the-money” (liability position), the FHLBNY would post variation margin to the DCO. At December 31, 2020, the FHLBNY posted $732.9 million in cash as settlement variation margin to FCMs. At December 31, 2019, the FHLBNY posted $100.1 million in cash as settlement variation margin to FCMs. As noted, variation margin is not considered as collateral, rather as the daily settlement amounts of outstanding derivative contracts.

159

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Fair Value of Derivative Instruments

The following tables represent outstanding notional balances and estimated fair values of the derivatives outstanding at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019 (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
  

Notional Amount

of Derivatives

  

Derivative

Assets

  

Derivative

Liabilities

 
Fair value of derivative instruments (a)            
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments under ASC 815 interest rate swaps  $ 69,885,821    $ 380,504    $ 1,088,253  
Total derivatives in hedging relationships under ASC 815  69,885,821   380,504   1,088,253 
             
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments            
Interest rate swaps  56,304,046   35,555   34,989 
Interest rate caps  800,000   44   - 
Mortgage delivery commitments  9,777   29   1 
Other (b)  888,000   21,757   1,232 
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments  58,001,823   57,385   36,222 
             
Total derivatives before netting and collateral adjustments $127,887,644   437,889   1,124,475 
Netting adjustments      (291,135)  (291,135)
Cash collateral and related accrued interest      (110,085)  (762,580)
Total netting adjustments and cash collateral      (401,220)  (1,053,715)
Total derivative assets and total derivative liabilities     $36,669  $70,760 
Security collateral pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (c)     $630,372     
Security collateral received from counterparty (c)      (20,687)    
Net security      609,685     
Net exposure     $646,354     

  December 31, 2019 
  Notional Amount
of Derivatives
  Derivative
Assets
  Derivative
Liabilities
 
Fair value of derivative instruments (a)            
Derivatives designated as hedging instruments under ASC 815 interest rate swaps  $ 59,361,080    $ 414,480    $ 550,758  
Total derivatives in hedging relationships under ASC 815  59,361,080   414,480   550,758 
             
Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments            
Interest rate swaps  47,404,845   179,784   162,702 
Interest rate caps  800,000   50   - 
Mortgage delivery commitments  44,768   105   1 
Other (b)  1,072,000   14,389   4,513 
Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments  49,321,613   194,328   167,216 
             
Total derivatives before netting and collateral adjustments $108,682,693   608,808   717,974 
Netting adjustments      (342,911)  (342,911)
Cash collateral and related accrued interest      (27,950)  (342,652)
Total netting adjustments and cash collateral      (370,861)  (685,563)
Total derivative assets and total derivative liabilities     $237,947  $32,411 
Security collateral pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (c)     $251,177     
Security collateral received from counterparty (c)      (115,238)    
Net security      135,939     
Net exposure     $373,886     

 

Note 1(a)For cleared derivatives, variation margin is exchanged daily between the DCOs and the FHLBNY.  Generally, variation margin represents mark to market gains and losses on derivative contracts.  At December 31, 2017, we held $465.8 million in variation margin (“VM”) in cash posted by DCOs.  At December 31, 2017, in accordance with our interpretation of the rules of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”), we have classified VM as settlement values of cleared derivatives and not as collateral.  At December 31, 2016, VM held by the FHLBNY was $321.1 million, which amount was classified as collateral.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

FHLBNY Asset balances The gross derivative exposure at December 31, 2017, as represented by derivatives in fair value gain/asset positions for the FHLBNY, before netting and offsetting cash collateral, was $414.6 million (after applying $465.8 million of VM received; see Note 1 in table above).  At December 31, 2016, the comparable exposure balance was $726.4 million.  Fair value amounts that were netted as a result of master netting agreements, or as a result of a determination that netting requirements had been met (including obtaining a legal analysis supporting the enforceability of the netting for cleared OTC derivatives), were $301.9 million and $397.6 million at December 31, 2017 and 2016.  The net exposures after offsetting adjustments and cash collateral were $112.7 million and $328.9 million at those dates.

FHLBNY Liability balances Derivative counterparties are also exposed to credit losses resulting from potential non-performance risk of the FHLBNY with respect to derivative contracts, and their exposure, due to a potential default or non-performance by the FHLBNY, is measured by derivatives in a fair value loss position from the FHLBNY’s perspective (and a gain position from the counterparty’s perspective).  At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, net fair values of derivatives in unrealized loss positions were $61.6 million and $145.0 million, after posting cash collateral to the exposed counterparties at the two dates.

Other exposures Initial margin requirements under the rules of the CFTC were satisfied by the FHLBNY by pledging $239.1 million in U. S. Treasury securities at December 31, 2017; the FHLBNY and the DCOs were also exposed to the extent of the failure to timely deliver VM, which is typically exchanged one day following the execution of a cleared derivative, and we have concluded the credit exposure was not significant for the FHLBNY at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

The FHLBNY is also exposed to the risk of derivative counterparties failing to return cash collateral on uncleared transactions deposited with counterparties, and initial margin deposited with DCOs (on cleared transactions) due to counterparty bankruptcy or other similar scenarios.  If such an event were to occur, the FHLBNY would be forced to replace derivatives by executing similar derivative contracts with other counterparties.  To the extent that the FHLBNY receives cash from the replacement trades that is less than the amount of cash deposited with the defaulting counterparty, the FHLBNY’s cash pledged as a deposit is exposed to credit risk of the defaulting counterparty.  Derivative counterparties, including the DCO, holding the FHLBNY’s cash as posted collateral and pledged securities, were analyzed from a credit performance perspective, and based on credit analysis and collateral requirements, the management of the FHLBNY does not anticipate any credit losses on its derivative agreements.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Offsetting of Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities

The following tables represent outstanding notional balances and estimated fair values of the derivatives outstanding at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Notional Amount
of Derivatives

 

Derivative
Assets

 

Derivative
Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair value of derivative instruments (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives designated in hedging relationships

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps-fair value hedges

 

$

69,376,576

 

$

818,764

 

$

219,171

 

Interest rate swaps-cash flow hedges

 

2,379,000

 

22,169

 

48,717

 

Total derivatives in hedging instruments

 

71,755,576

 

840,933

 

267,888

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

40,327,013

 

32,655

 

52,448

 

Interest rate caps or floors

 

2,695,000

 

893

 

 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

12,952

 

10

 

15

 

Other (b)

 

386,000

 

5,935

 

5,541

 

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

43,420,965

 

39,493

 

58,004

 

Total derivatives before netting, collateral adjustments and variation margin

 

$

115,176,541

 

880,426

 

325,892

 

Variation margin

 

 

 

(465,803

)

 

Total derivatives before netting and collateral adjustments

 

 

 

414,623

 

325,892

 

Netting adjustments and cash collateral (c)

 

 

 

(301,881

)

(264,285

)

Total derivative assets and liabilities in the Statements of Condition

 

 

 

$

112,742

 

$

61,607

 

Security collateral pledged as initial margin to Derivative Clearing Organization (d)

 

 

 

$

239,064

 

 

 

Security collateral received from counterparty (d)

 

 

 

(103,036

)

 

 

Net security

 

 

 

$

136,028

 

 

 

Net exposure

 

 

 

$

248,770

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Notional Amount
of Derivatives

 

Derivative
Assets

 

Derivative
Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fair value of derivative instruments (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives designated in hedging relationships

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps-fair value hedges

 

$

63,333,846

 

$

670,694

 

$

344,126

 

Interest rate swaps-cash flow hedges

 

1,934,000

 

17,719

 

68,793

 

Total derivatives in hedging instruments

 

65,267,846

 

688,413

 

412,919

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

26,125,822

 

27,993

 

26,405

 

Interest rate caps or floors

 

2,698,000

 

5,214

 

 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

28,447

 

60

 

100

 

Other (b)

 

258,000

 

4,804

 

4,479

 

Total derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

29,110,269

 

38,071

 

30,984

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total derivatives before netting and collateral adjustments

 

$

94,378,115

 

726,484

 

443,903

 

Netting adjustments and cash collateral (c)

 

 

 

(397,609

)

(298,918

)

Net after cash collateral reported on the Statements of Condition

 

 

 

$

328,875

 

$

144,985

 

Security collateral received from counterparty (d)

 

 

 

(104,470

)

 

 

Net exposure

 

 

 

$

224,405

 

 

 


(a)

All derivative assets and liabilities with swap dealers and counterparties are executed under collateral agreements; derivative instruments executed bilaterally are subject to legal right of offset under master netting agreements.

(b)The Other category comprised of interest rate swaps intermediated for member, and notional amounts represent purchases by the FHLBNY from dealers and an offsetting purchase from us by the member.members.

(c)Netting adjustments and cash collateral in Derivative assets included cash posted by counterparties to the FHLBNY of $48.7 million and $354.7 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  Netting adjustments in Derivative liabilities included cash posted by the FHLBNY to derivative counterparties of $11.1 million and $256.0 million at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  At December 31, 2016, variation margin on cleared derivatives were accounted as cash collateral and included in the netting adjustments.  At December 31, 2017, variation margin was considered as a settlement of the fair value of the open derivative contract.

(d)

Non-cash security collateral is not permitted to be offset on the balance sheet, but would be eligible for offsetting in an event of default. Amounts represent U.S. Treasury securities pledged to and received from counterparties as collateral at December 31, 2017.

Earnings Impact of Derivatives2020 and Hedging Activities

The FHLBNY carries all derivative instruments on the Statements of Condition at fair value as Derivative Assets and Derivative Liabilities.  If derivatives meet the hedging criteria under hedge accounting rules, including effectiveness measures, changes in fair value of the associated hedged financial instrument attributable to the risk being hedged (benchmark interest-rate risk, which is LIBOR for the FHLBNY) may also be recorded so that some or all of the unrealized fair value gains or losses recognized on the derivatives are offset by corresponding unrealized gains or losses on the associated hedged financial assets and liabilities.  The net differential between fair value changes of the derivatives and the hedged items represents hedge ineffectiveness.  The net ineffectiveness from hedges that qualify under hedge accounting rules is recorded as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives andDecember 31, 2019.

160

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Accounting for Derivative Hedging

The FHLBNY accounts for its hedging activities in accordance with ASC 815, Derivatives and Hedging. As a general rule, hedge accounting is permitted where the FHLBNY is exposed to a particular risk, typically interest-rate risk that causes changes in the fair value of an asset or liability or variability in the expected future cash flows of an existing asset, liability or a forecasted transaction that may affect earnings. Derivative contracts hedging the risks associated with the changes in fair value are referred to as Fair value hedges, while contracts hedging the risks affecting the expected future cash flows are called Cash flow hedges. Derivative not designated under a qualifying ASC 815 hedge relationship and designated as an asset/liability management hedge are classified as an economic hedge”. For more information, see Note 1. Critical Accounting Policies and Estimates in this Form 10-K.

In 2017, the FASB issued ASU 2017-12, Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities (Topic 815). We adopted the guidance prospectively effective January 1, 2019, and adoption primarily impacted the FHLBNY’s accounting for derivatives designated as cash flow hedges and fair value hedges. Other than to elect the amendments under ASU 2017-12, which expanded the strategies that qualify for hedge accounting and simplified the application of hedge accounting, no other changes were made to hedge accounting strategies.

FASB’s ASU 2018-16, Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes (Topic 815), added the OIS rate based on SOFR as an approved U.S. benchmark rate to facilitate the LIBOR to SOFR transition. The other interest rates in the United States that are eligible benchmarks under Topic 815 are interest rates on direct Treasury obligations of the U.S. government (UST), the London Interbank Offered Rate (LIBOR) swap rate, the Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate based on the Fed Funds Effective Rate, and the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) Municipal Swap Rate. The FHLBNY’s interest rate benchmarks are LIBOR, the overnight SOFR index and the overnight Fed funds index.

Fair value hedge gains and losses

Gains and Losses on Fair value hedges under ASC 815 are summarized below (in thousands):

  Gains (Losses) on Fair Value Hedges 
  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
  

Recorded in

Interest

Income/Expense

  

Recorded in

Interest

Income/Expense

  

Recorded in

Other

Income (Loss)

 
Gains (losses) on derivatives in designated and qualifying fair value hedges:            
Interest rate hedges $(978,281) $(447,416) $(43,845)
             
Gains (losses) on hedged item in designated and qualifying fair value hedges:            
Interest rate hedges $977,118  $446,278  $43,342 

Gains (losses) represent changes in fair values of derivatives and hedged items due to changes in the designated benchmark interest rates, the risk being hedged. Beginning in 2019, gains and losses on ASC 815 hedges are recorded in the same line in the Statements of income as the hedged assets and hedged liabilities. Prior to the adoption of ASU 2017-12 (on January 1, 2019), gains and losses on derivatives and hedged items were recorded in Other income (loss).

161

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Cumulative Basis Adjustment

Upon electing to apply ASC 815 fair value hedge accounting, the carrying value of the hedged item is adjusted to reflect the cumulative impact of changes in the hedged risk. The hedge basis adjustment, whether arising from an active or de-designated hedge relationship, remains with the hedged item until the hedged item is derecognized from the balance sheet.

The tables below present the carrying amount of FHLBNY’s assets and liabilities under active ASC 815 qualifying fair value hedges at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, as well as the hedged item’s cumulative hedge basis adjustments, which were included in the carrying value of assets and liabilities in active hedges. The tables also present unamortized cumulative basis adjustments from discontinued hedges where the previously hedged item remains on the FHLBNY’s Statements of condition (in thousands):

  December 31, 2020 
     

Cumulative Fair Value Hedging Adjustment

Included in the Carrying Amount of Hedged

Items Gains (Losses)

 
  

Carrying Amount of

Hedged

Assets/Liabilities (a)

  

Active Hedging

Relationship

  

Discontinued

Hedging

Relationship

 
Assets:            
Hedged advances $38,275,533  $1,324,615  $- 
Hedged AFS debt securities (a)  1,162,366   44,052   - 
De-designated advances (b)  -   -   1,331 
  $39,437,899  $1,368,667  $1,331 
             
Liabilities:            
Hedged consolidated obligation bonds $20,639,825  $(514,436) $- 
Hedged consolidated obligation discount notes  7,583,549   (321)  - 
De-designated consolidated obligation bonds (b)  -   -   (132,450)
 $28,223,374  $(514,757) $(132,450)

  December 31, 2019 
     

Cumulative Fair Value Hedging Adjustment

Included in the Carrying Amount of Hedged

Items Gains (Losses)

 
  

Carrying Amount of

Hedged

Assets/Liabilities (a)

  

Active Hedging

Relationship

  

Discontinued

Hedging

Relationship

 
Assets:            
Hedged advances $40,722,558  $298,818  $- 
Hedged AFS debt securities (a)  547,807   11,593   - 
De-designated advances (b)  -   -   345 
  $41,270,365  $310,411  $345 
Liabilities:            
Hedged consolidated obligation bonds $11,366,044  $(377,000) $- 
Hedged consolidated obligation discount notes  3,493,297   105   - 
De-designated consolidated obligation bonds (b)  -   -   (139,605)
  $14,859,341  $(376,895) $(139,605)

(a)Carrying amounts represent amortized cost adjusted for cumulative fair value hedging basis. For AFS securities in a fair value partial-term hedge, changes in the fair values due to changes in the benchmark rate were recorded as an adjustment to amortized cost and an offset to interest income from the hedged AFS securities.
(b)Basis valuation adjustments of de-designated (discontinued hedging relationships) on advances and debt were reported in the same line as the carrying amounts of hedged assets/liabilities. At December 31, 2020, par amounts of de-designated advances were $1.2 billion; par amounts of de-designated CO bonds were approximately $1.5 billion; par amounts of de-designated CO discount notes were approximately $0.1 billion. At December 31, 2019, par amounts of de-designated advances were not material; par amounts of de-designated CO bonds were approximately $1.3 billion. Cumulative fair value hedging adjustments for active and discontinued hedging relationships will remain on the balance sheet until the items are derecognized.

162

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Cash flow hedge gains and losses

The following tables present derivative instruments used in cash flow hedge accounting relationships and the gains and losses recorded on such derivatives (in thousands):

  

Derivative Gains (Losses) Recorded in Income and Other

Comprehensive Income/Loss

 
  December 31, 2020 
  

Amounts Reclassified
from AOCI to
Interest Expense (b)

  

Amounts

Reclassified

from AOCI to

Other Income

(Loss) (c)

  

Amounts

Recorded

in OCI (d)

  Total
Change in
OCI for
Period
 
Interest rate contracts (a) $(1,352) $        -  $(114,040) $(112,688)

  Derivative Gains (Losses) Recorded in Income and Other
Comprehensive Income/Loss
 
  December 31, 2019 
  

Amounts Reclassified
from AOCI to
Interest Expense (b)

  

Amounts

Reclassified

from AOCI to

Other Income

(Loss) (c)

  

Amounts

Recorded

in OCI (d)

  Total
Change in
OCI for
Period
 
Interest rate contracts (a) $(613) $              -  $(111,888) $(111,275)

  Derivative Gains (Losses) Recorded in Income and Other
Comprehensive Income/Loss
 
  December 31, 2018 
  

Amounts Reclassified
from AOCI to
Interest Expense (b)

  

Amounts

Reclassified

from AOCI to

Other Income

(Loss) (c)

  

Amounts

Recorded

in OCI (d)

  Total
Change in
OCI for
Period
 
Interest rate contracts (a) $180  $   (278) $36,816  $36,636 

(a)Amounts represent cash flow hedges of CO debt hedged with benchmark interest rate swaps indexed to LIBOR. Beginning January 1, 2019 post implementation of ASU 2017-12, the FHLBNY includes the gain and loss on the hedging derivatives in the same line in the Statements of Income.  If derivatives do not qualify forincome as the hedging criteria under hedge accounting rules, but are executed as economic hedges of financial assets or liabilities under a FHLBNY-approved hedge strategy, only the fair value changes of the derivatives are recorded as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities in Other income (loss) in the Statements of Income.  The FHLBNY has elected to measure certain debt under the accounting designation for the fair value option (“FVO”), and has executed interest rate swaps as economic hedges of the debt.  While changes in fair values

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

of the interest rate swap and the debt elected under the FVO are both recorded in earnings within Other income (loss), they are recorded as separate line items: Changes in the fair value of the swaps are recorded as a Net realized and unrealized gain (loss) on derivatives and hedging activities; changes in the fair value of debt and advances elected under the FVO are recorded as an Unrealized (losses) or gains from Instruments held at fair value.

Components of net gains/(losses) on Derivatives and hedging activities as presented in the Statements of Income are summarized below (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Gains (Losses)
on Derivative

 

Gains (Losses)
 on Hedged 
Item

 

Earnings 
Impact

 

Effect of Derivatives
on Net Interest
 Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

229,452

 

$

(228,468

)

$

984

 

$

(146,111

)

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

(16,422

)

16,433

 

11

 

15,714

 

Net gains (losses) related to fair value hedges

 

213,030

 

(212,035

)

995

 

$

(130,397

)

Cash flow hedges

 

388

 

 

 

388

 

$

(30,918

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

5,742

 

 

 

5,742

 

 

 

Caps or floors

 

(4,331

)

 

 

(4,331

)

 

 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

570

 

 

 

570

 

 

 

Swaps economically hedging instruments designated under FVO

 

4,295

 

 

 

4,295

 

 

 

Accrued interest-swaps

 

(2,470

)

 

 

(2,470

)

 

 

Net gains related to derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

3,806

 

 

 

3,806

 

 

 

Price alignment - cleared swaps settlement to market

 

(3,250

)

 

 

(3,250

)

 

 

Net gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

$

213,974

 

$

(212,035

)

$

 

1,939

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Gains (Losses)
on Derivative

 

Gains (Losses)
on Hedged
Item

 

Earnings
Impact

 

Effect of Derivatives on Net Interest
Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

295,080

 

$

(293,720

)

$

1,360

 

$

(392,473

)

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

(55,503

)

56,385

 

882

 

91,243

 

Net gains (losses) related to fair value hedges

 

239,577

 

(237,335

)

2,242

 

$

(301,230

)

Cash flow hedges

 

58

 

 

 

58

 

$

(34,908

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps (a)

 

1,889

 

 

 

1,889

 

 

 

Caps or floors

 

253

 

 

 

253

 

 

 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

(530

)

 

 

(530

)

 

 

Swaps economically hedging instruments designated under FVO

 

6,231

 

 

 

6,231

 

 

 

Accrued interest-swaps (a)

 

(11,864

)

 

 

(11,864

)

 

 

Net (losses) related to derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

(4,021

)

 

 

(4,021

)

 

 

Net gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

$

 

235,614

 

$

(237,335

)

$

(1,721

)

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

Gains (Losses) 
on Derivative

 

Gains (Losses) 
on Hedged 
Item

 

Earnings 
Impact

 

Effect of Derivatives on Net Interest 
Income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

429,007

 

$

(434,946

)

$

(5,939

)

$

(888,800

)

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

(1,071

)

9,939

 

8,868

 

218,299

 

Net gains (losses) related to fair value hedges

 

427,936

 

(425,007

)

2,929

 

$

(670,501

)

Cash flow hedges

 

(284

)

 

 

(284

)

$

(36,162

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest rate swaps (a)

 

(1,375

)

 

 

(1,375

)

 

 

Caps or floors

 

(2,640

)

 

 

(2,640

)

 

 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

(137

)

 

 

(137

)

 

 

Swaps economically hedging instruments designated under FVO

 

(9,712

)

 

 

(9,712

)

 

 

Accrued interest-swaps (a)

 

23,776

 

 

 

23,776

 

 

 

Net gains related to derivatives not designated as hedging instruments

 

9,912

 

 

 

9,912

 

 

 

Net gains (losses) on derivatives and hedging activities

 

$

437,564

 

$

(425,007

)

$

12,557

 

 

 


(a)Prior year numbers have been reclassified to conform to the classification adopted in 2017.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Cash Flow Hedges

The effect of interest rate swapschange in cash flow hedging relationships was as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

AOCI

 

 

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

 

 

Recognized in
AOCI
 (c) 

 

Location:
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Amount
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Ineffectiveness
Recognized in
Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds (a)

 

$

30

 

Interest Expense

 

$

(1,141

)

$

388

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes (b)

 

25,970

 

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

$

26,000

 

 

 

$

(1,141

)

$

388

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

AOCI

 

 

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

 

 

Recognized in
AOCI
 (c) 

 

Location:
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Amount
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Ineffectiveness
Recognized in
Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds (a)

 

$

5,982

 

Interest Expense

 

$

(2,127

)

$

58

 

Consolidated obligation discount notes (b)

 

35,910

 

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

$

41,892

 

 

 

$

(2,127

)

$

58

 

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

AOCI

 

 

 

Gains/(Losses)

 

 

 

Recognized in
AOCI
 (c) 

 

Location:
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Amount
Reclassified to
Earnings 
(c)

 

Ineffectiveness
Recognized in
Earnings

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds (a)

 

$

(2,699

)

Interest Expense

 

$

(2,773

)

$

(284

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes (b)

 

(4,444

)

Interest Expense

 

 

 

 

 

$

(7,143

)

 

 

$

(2,773

)

$

(284

)


flows on the hedged item.

(a)(b)CashAmounts represent amortization of gains (losses) related to closed cash flow hedges of anticipated issuance of Consolidated obligation bonds

Changes in period recognized in AOCI — Amounts reported typically represent fair value gains and losses recorded in AOCI under this CO bonds cash flow hedge strategythat were reclassified during the periods, including hedging contracts open at period end dates.  Open swap contracts (notional amounts) under this hedging strategy totaled $30.0 million at December 31, 2017, compared to $95.0 million and $35.0 million at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.  Contracts executed during the periods resulted in the recognition in AOCI of net unrecognized gains of $30 thousand, compared to net unrecognized gains of $6.0 million in 2016 and net unrecognized losses of $2.7 million in 2015.  Fair values recorded in AOCI were adjusted for any hedge ineffectiveness on the contracts.  When a cash flow hedge is closed, the fair value gain or loss on the derivative is recorded in AOCI, and is amortized and reclassified to interest expense with an offset to the cumulative balance in AOCI (See “Amount Reclassified to Earnings” in the table above).  The balance in AOCI at December 31, 2017 was $3.5 million, representing cumulative net unrecognized gains from hedges of anticipatory issuance strategy, compared to net unrecognized gains of $2.3 at December 31, 2016 and net unrecognized losses of $5.8 million at December 31, 2015.

Amount Reclassified to Earnings — Amounts represented amortization of unrecognized losses from previously closed CO bond cash flow hedging contracts that were recorded as a yield adjustment to interest expense with an offset to reduce the unamortized balance in AOCI.

Ineffectiveness Recognized in Earnings — Ineffectiveness arising from CO bond cash flow hedges executed under this strategy was a net gain of $388 thousand in 2017, compared to a net gain of $58 thousand in 2016 and a net loss of $284 thousand in 2015.  Ineffectiveness is recorded in earnings as a gain or loss from derivative activities in Other income, while the effective portion is recorded in AOCI.  Amounts recordedadjustment. Losses reclassified represent losses in AOCI are subsequently reclassified prospectivelythat were amortized as a yield adjustmentan expense to debt expenseinterest expense. If debt is held to maturity, losses in AOCI will be relieved through amortization. It is expected that over the termnext 12 months, $1.5 million of the debt.

(b)Hedges of discount notes in rolling issuances

Changes in period recognized in AOCI — Amounts represented year-over-year change in the fair values of open swap contracts in this CO discount note cash flow hedging strategy (Rolling issuances of discount notes).  Open swap contracts under this strategy were notional amounts of $2.3 billion at December 31, 2017, compared to $1.8 billion and $1.6 billion at December 31, 2016 and December 31, 2015.  The year-over-year fair values changes recorded in AOCI were net unrealized gains of $26.0 million at December 31, 2017, net unrealized gains of $35.9 million at December 31, 2016, and net unrealized losses of $4.4 million at December 31, 2015.  The cash flow hedges mitigated exposure to the variability in future cash flows over a maximum period of 15 years.

Cumulative unamortized balance in AOCI — The balance in AOCI of cumulative net unrecognized losses in CO discount note rolling issuances strategy was $23.3 million at December 31, 2017, comparedAOCI will be recognized as yield adjustments to net unrecognized lossesdebt interest expense.

(c)Subsequent to the adoption of $49.3 million and $85.2 million at December 31, 2016 and 2015. For more information, see Rollforward table below.

(c)Ineffectiveness recognized in earnings — The effective portionASU 2017-12, hedge ineffectiveness (as defined under ASC 815) is reclassified only if the original transaction would not occur by the end of the fair values of open contracts is recorded in AOCI.  Ineffectiveness is recorded in Other income asspecified time period or within a component of derivatives and hedging gains and losses.

141



Table of Contents

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Cash Flow Hedges — Fair Value Changes in AOCI Rollforward Analysis (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Rollover Hedge
Program

 

Anticipatory Hedge
Program

 

Rollover Hedge
Program

 

Anticipatory Hedge 
Program

 

Beginning balance

 

$

(49,312

)

$

2,294

 

$

(85,222

)

$

(5,815

)

Changes in fair values

 

25,970

 

(1,780

)

35,910

 

 

Amount reclassified

 

 

1,141

 

 

2,127

 

Fair Value - closed contract

 

 

1,802

 

 

4,202

 

Fair Value - open contract

 

 

8

 

 

1,780

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ending balance

 

$

(23,342

)

$

3,465

 

$

(49,312

)

$

2,294

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Notional amount of swaps outstanding

 

$

2,349,000

 

$

30,000

 

$

1,839,000

 

$

95,000

 

two-month period thereafter. There were no material amounts that were reclassified into earnings as a result of the discontinuancedue to discontinuation of cash flow hedges becausehedges. Reclassification would occur if it became probable that the original forecasted transactions would not occur by the end of the originally specified time period or within a two-month period thereafter.

(d)Amounts represent changes in the fair values of open interest rate swap contracts in cash flow hedges of CO debt, primarily those hedging the rolling issuance of CO discount notes.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Economic Hedges

FHLBNY often uses economic hedges when hedge accounting would be too complex or operationally burdensome. Derivatives that are economic hedges are carried at fair value, with changes in value included in Other income (loss), a line item, which is below Net interest income. For hedges that either do not meet the ASC 815 hedging criteria or for which management decides not to apply ASC 815 hedge accounting, the derivative is recorded at fair value on the balance sheet with the associated changes in fair value recorded in earnings, while the “hedged” instrument continues to be carried at amortized cost. Therefore, current earnings are affected by the interest rate shifts and other factors that cause a change in the swap’s value, but for which no offsetting change in value is recorded on the hedged instrument. Economic hedges are an acceptable hedging strategy under the FHLBNY’s risk management program, and the strategies comply with the Finance Agency’s regulatory requirements prohibiting speculative use of derivatives.

Gains and losses on economic hedges are presented below (in thousands):

  Gains (Losses) on Economic Hedges 
  Recorded in Other Income (Loss) 
  Years ended December 31, 
  2020(a)  2019(a)  2018(b) 
Gains (losses) on derivatives designated in economic hedges            
Interest rate hedges $(153,396) $(40,833) $(39,584)
Caps  (6)  (596)  (268)
Mortgage delivery commitments  1,693   709   (145)
Total gains (losses) on derivatives in economic hedges $(151,709) $(40,720) $(39,997)

(a)Valuation changes and accrued interest on the swaps (also referred to as swap interest settlement) on derivatives not eligible for hedge accounting under ASC 815 continue to be reported in Other income (loss) in the Statements of income, and total derivative gains (losses) in the table above will reconcile to the line item – “Derivative gains (losses)” in Other income in the Statements of income.
(b)The table above reports valuation changes of derivatives in economic hedges (not qualifying under ASC 815). Gains and losses reported in the table above for 2018 will not agree with the line item “Derivative gains (losses)” in the Statements of Income which included the impact of both ASC 815 qualifying hedges and derivatives not qualifying. As permitted under the ASU 2017-12, prior year presentations in the Statements of income has not been reclassified to reporting classifications under ASU 2017-12.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

It is expected that over the next 12 months, $0.1 million of the unrecognized loss in AOCI will be recognized as a yield adjustment (expense) to debt interest expense.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New YorkNote

Notes to Financial Statements 18.

Note 17.

Fair Values of Financial Instruments.

The fair value amounts recorded on the Statements of Condition or presented in the note disclosures have been determined by the FHLBNY using available market information and best

Estimated Fair Values — Summary Tables — Carrying values, the estimated fair values and the levels within the fair value hierarchy were as follows (in thousands): 

  December 31, 2020 
     Estimated Fair Value    
Financial Instruments 

Carrying

Value

  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3 (a)  

Netting
Adjustment and

Cash Collateral

 
Assets                        
Cash and due from banks $1,896,155  $1,896,155  $1,896,155  $-  $-  $- 
Interest-bearing deposits  685,000   685,002   -   685,002   -   - 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  4,650,000   4,649,989   -   4,649,989   -   - 
Federal funds sold  6,280,000   6,279,989   -   6,279,989   -   - 
Trading securities  11,742,965   11,742,965   11,740,801   2,164   -   - 
Equity Investments  80,369   80,369   80,369   -   -   - 
Available-for-sale securities  3,435,945   3,435,945   -   3,435,945   -   - 
Held-to-maturity securities  12,873,646   13,529,181   -   12,345,026   1,184,155   - 
Advances  92,067,104   92,315,784   -   92,315,784   -   - 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net  2,899,712   3,002,883   -   3,002,883   -   - 
Accrued interest receivable  189,454   189,454   -   189,454   -   - 
Derivative assets  36,669   36,669   -   437,889   -   (401,220)
Other financial assets  133   133   -   -   133   - 
Liabilities                        
Deposits  1,752,963   1,752,974   -   1,752,974   -   - 
Consolidated obligations                        
Bonds  69,716,298   70,610,339   -   70,610,339   -   - 
Discount notes  57,658,838   57,663,523   -   57,663,523   -   - 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  2,991   2,991   2,991   -   -   - 
Accrued interest payable  117,982   117,982   -   117,982   -   - 
Derivative liabilities  70,760   70,760   -   1,124,475   -   (1,053,715)
Other financial liabilities  32,378   32,378   32,378   -   -   - 

  December 31, 2019 
     Estimated Fair Value    
Financial Instruments 

Carrying

Value

  Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3 (a)  

Netting
Adjustment and

Cash Collateral

 
Assets                        
Cash and due from banks $603,241  $603,241  $603,241  $-  $-  $- 
Securities purchased under agreements to resell  14,985,000   14,984,909   -   14,984,909   -   - 
Federal funds sold  8,640,000   8,639,966   -   8,639,966   -   - 
Trading securities  15,318,809   15,318,809   15,315,592   3,217   -   - 
Equity Investments  60,047   60,047   60,047   -   -   - 
Available-for-sale securities  2,653,418   2,653,418   -   2,653,418   -   - 
Held-to-maturity securities  15,234,482   15,456,606   -   14,223,919   1,232,687   - 
Advances  100,695,241   100,738,675   -   100,738,675   -   - 
Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net  3,173,352   3,190,109   -   3,190,109   -   - 
Accrued interest receivable  312,559   312,559   -   312,559   -   - 
Derivative assets  237,947   237,947   -   608,808   -   (370,861)
Other financial assets  293   293   -   -   293   - 
                         
Liabilities                        
Deposits  1,194,409   1,194,419   -   1,194,419   -   - 
Consolidated obligations                        
Bonds  78,763,309   78,980,672   -   78,980,672   -   - 
Discount notes  73,959,205   73,961,316   -   73,961,316   -   - 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  5,129   5,129   5,129   -   -   - 
Accrued interest payable  156,889   156,889   -   156,889   -   - 
Derivative liabilities  32,411   32,411   -   717,974   -   (685,563)
Other financial liabilities  45,388   45,388   45,388   -   -   - 

The fair value amounts recorded on the Statements of Condition or presented in the table above have been determined by the FHLBNY using available market information and our reasonable judgment of appropriate valuation methods.

 

Estimated Fair Values — Summary Tables(a)

The carrying values, estimated fair values and the levels within the fair value hierarchy were as follows (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Netting

 

Financial Instruments

 

Carrying Value

 

Total

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3 (a)

 

Adjustment and
Cash Collateral

 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and due from banks

 

$

127,403

 

$

127,403

 

$

127,403

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell

 

2,700,000

 

2,700,008

 

 

2,700,008

 

 

 

Federal funds sold

 

10,326,000

 

10,325,920

 

 

10,325,920

 

 

 

Trading securities

 

1,641,568

 

1,641,568

 

1,284,669

 

356,899

 

 

 

Available-for-sale securities

 

577,269

 

577,269

 

48,642

 

528,627

 

 

 

Held-to-maturity securities

 

17,824,533

 

17,906,773

 

 

16,575,243

 

1,331,530

 

 

Advances

 

122,447,805

 

122,401,759

 

 

122,401,759

 

 

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net

 

2,896,976

 

2,886,189

 

 

2,886,189

 

 

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

226,981

 

226,981

 

 

226,981

 

 

 

Derivative assets

 

112,742

 

112,742

 

 

414,623

 

 

(301,881

)

Other financial assets

 

682

 

682

 

 

 

682

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

1,196,055

 

1,196,027

 

 

1,196,027

 

 

 

Consolidated obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

99,288,048

 

99,130,116

 

 

99,130,116

 

 

 

Discount notes

 

49,613,671

 

49,609,537

 

 

49,609,537

 

 

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

19,945

 

19,945

 

19,945

 

 

 

 

Accrued interest payable

 

162,176

 

162,176

 

 

162,176

 

 

 

Derivative liabilities

 

61,607

 

61,607

 

 

325,892

 

 

(264,285

)

Other financial liabilities

 

84,194

 

84,194

 

84,194

 

 

 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

Estimated Fair Value

 

Netting

 

Financial Instruments

 

Carrying Value

 

Total

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3 (a)

 

Adjustment and
Cash Collateral

 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Cash and due from banks

 

$

151,769

 

$

151,769

 

$

151,769

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

Securities purchased under agreements to resell

 

7,150,000

 

7,149,882

 

 

7,149,882

 

 

 

Federal funds sold

 

6,683,000

 

6,682,915

 

 

6,682,915

 

 

 

Trading securities

 

131,151

 

131,151

 

 

131,151

 

 

 

Available-for-sale securities

 

697,812

 

697,812

 

41,718

 

656,094

 

 

 

Held-to-maturity securities

 

16,022,293

 

16,146,971

 

 

14,831,668

 

1,315,303

 

 

Advances

 

109,256,625

 

109,285,876

 

 

109,285,876

 

 

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio, net

 

2,746,559

 

2,730,328

 

 

2,730,328

 

 

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

255,000

 

254,998

 

 

254,998

 

 

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

163,379

 

163,379

 

 

163,379

 

 

 

Derivative assets

 

328,875

 

328,875

 

 

726,484

 

 

(397,609

)

Other financial assets

 

1,653

 

1,653

 

 

 

1,653

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

1,240,749

 

1,240,719

 

 

1,240,719

 

 

 

Consolidated obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bonds

 

84,784,664

 

84,702,084

 

 

84,702,084

 

 

 

Discount notes

 

49,357,894

 

49,355,575

 

 

49,355,575

 

 

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

31,435

 

31,435

 

31,435

 

 

 

 

Accrued interest payable

 

130,178

 

130,178

 

 

130,178

 

 

 

Derivative liabilities

 

144,985

 

144,985

 

 

443,903

 

 

(298,918

)

Other financial liabilities

 

67,670

 

67,670

 

67,670

 

 

 

 


(a)

Level 3 Instruments — The fair values of non-Agency private-label MBS and housing finance agency bonds were estimated by management based on pricing services. Valuations may have required pricing services to use significant inputs that were subjective because of the current lack of significant market activity; the inputs may not be market based and observable.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Fair Value Hierarchy

The FHLBNY records available-for-sale securities, derivative assets, derivative liabilities, and Consolidated obligations and advances elected under the FVO at fair value on a recurring basis.  On a non-recurring basis, when held-to-maturity securities are determined to be OTTI, the securities are written down to their fair values, when mortgage loans held-for-portfolio that are written down or are foreclosed as Other real estate owned (“REO” or “OREO”)


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Fair Value Hierarchy

The FHLBNY records trading securities, equity investments, available-for-sale securities, derivative instruments, and Consolidated obligations and advances elected under the FVO at fair values on a recurring basis. On a non-recurring basis for the FHLBNY, when mortgage loans held-for-portfolio are written down or are foreclosed as Other real estate owned (REO or OREO), they are recorded at the fair values of the real estate collateral supporting the mortgage loans.

 

The accounting standards under Fair Value Measurement defines fair value, establishes a consistent framework for measuring fair value and requires disclosures about fair value measurements. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Among other things, the standard requires the FHLBNY to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. The standard specifies a hierarchy of inputs based on whether the inputs are observable or unobservable. Observable inputs reflect market data obtained from independent sources, while unobservable inputs reflect the FHLBNY’s market assumptions.

 

These two types of inputs have created the following fair value hierarchy, and an entity must disclose the level within the fair value hierarchy in which the measurements are classified for all assets and liabilities measured on a recurring or non-recurring basis:

 

·Level 1 Inputs — Quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in an active market that the reporting entity can access on the measurement date.

·Level 2 Inputs — Inputs other than quoted prices within Level 1 that are observable inputs for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. If the asset or liability has a specified (contractual) term, a Level 2 input must be observable for substantially the full term of the asset or liability. Level 2 inputs include the following: (1) quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets; (2) quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active; (3) inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability (e.g., interest rates and yield curves that are observable at commonly quoted intervals, and volatilities).

·Level 3 Inputs — Inputs that are unobservable and significant to the valuation of the asset or liability.

 

The inputs are evaluated on an overall level for the fair value measurement to be determined. This overall level is an indication of market observability of the fair value measurement for the asset or liability. Changes in the observability of the valuation inputs may result in a reclassification of certain assets or liabilities. These reclassifications are reported as transfers in/out as of the beginning of the quarter in which the changes occur. There were no such transfers in any periods in this report.

The availability of observable inputs can vary from product to product and is affected by a wide variety of factors including, for example, the characteristics peculiar to the transaction.  To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment.  Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the FHLBNY in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized as Level 3.  In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy.  In such cases, for disclosure purposes the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.

Summary of Valuation Techniques and Primary Inputs

The fair value of a financial instrument that is an asset is defined as the price the FHLBNY would receive to sell the asset in an orderly transaction with market participants.  A financial liability’s fair value is defined as the amount that would be paid to transfer the liability to a new obligor, not the amount that would be paid to settle the liability with the creditor.  Where available, fair values are based on observable market prices or parameters, or derived from such prices or parameters.  Where observable prices are not available, valuation models and inputs are utilized.  These valuation techniques involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the instruments or markets and the instruments’ complexity.

Because an active secondary market does not exist for a portion of the FHLBNY’s financial instruments, in certain cases, fair values are not subject to precise quantification or verification and may change as economic and market factors and evaluation of those factors change.  The fair values of financial assets and liabilities reported in the tables above are discussed below:

Cash and Due from Banks — The estimated fair values approximate the recorded book balances, and are considered to be within Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy.

Federal Funds Sold and Securities Purchased under Agreements to Resell — The FHLBNY determines estimated fair values of short-term investments by calculating the present value of expected future cash flows of the investments, a methodology also referred to as the Income approach under the Fair Value Measurement standards.  The discount rates used in these calculations are the current coupons of investments with similar terms.  Inputs into the cash flow models are the yields on the instruments, which are market based and observable and are considered to be within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Investment Securities — The fair value of investment securities is estimated by the FHLBNY using pricing primarily from pricing services.  The pricing vendors typically use market multiples derived from a set of comparables, including matrix pricing, and other techniques.

Mortgage-backed securities — The FHLBNY’s valuation technique incorporates prices from up to three designated third-party pricing services at December 31, 2017.  Until March 31, 2017, the FHLBNY employed four pricing vendors; one pricing vendor merged into an existing vendor during the second quarter of 2017.  The FHLBNY’s base investment pricing methodology establishes a median price for each security using a formula that is based on the number of prices received.  If three prices are received, the middle price is used; if two prices are received, the average of the two prices is used; and if one price is received, it is used, typically subject to further validation.  Vendor prices that are outside of a defined tolerance threshold of the median price are identified as outliers and subject to additional review, including, but not limited to, comparison to prices provided by an additional third-party valuation service, prices for similar securities, and/or non-binding dealer estimates, or use of internal model prices, which are deemed to be reflective of all relevant facts and circumstances that a market participant would consider.  Such analysis is also applied in those limited instances where no third-party vendor price or only one third-party vendor price is available in order to arrive at an estimated fair value.

In its analysis, the FHLBNY employs the concept of cluster pricing and cluster tolerances.  Once the median prices are computed from the three pricing vendors, the second step is to determine which of the sourced prices fall within the required tolerance level interval to the median price, which forms the “cluster” of prices to be averaged.  This average will determine a “default” price for the security.  The cluster tolerance guidelines shall be reviewed annually and may be revised as necessary.  To be included among the cluster, each price must fall within 7 points of the median price for residential PLMBS and within 3 points of the median price for GSE-issued MBS.  The final step is to determine the final price of the security based on the cluster average and an evaluation of any outlier prices.  If the analysis confirms that an outlier is not representative of fair value and that the average of the vendor prices within the tolerance threshold of the median price is the best estimate, then the average of the vendor prices within the tolerance threshold of the median price is used as the final price.  If, on the other hand, an outlier (or some other price identified in the analysis) is determined to be a better estimate of fair value, then the outlier (or the other price as appropriate) is used as the final price.  In all cases, the final price is used to determine the fair value of the security.

The FHLBNY has also established that the pricing vendors use methods that generally employ, but are not limited to benchmark yields, recent trades, dealer estimates, valuation models, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings, and/or matrix pricing.  To validate vendor prices of PLMBS, the FHLBNY has also adopted a formal process to examine yields as an additional validation method.  The FHLBNY calculates an implied yield for each of its PLMBS using estimated fair values derived from cash flows on a bond-by-bond basis.  This yield is then compared to the implied yield for comparable securities according to price information from third-party MBS “market surveillance reports”.  Significant variances or inconsistencies are evaluated in conjunction with all of the other available pricing information.  The objective is to determine whether an adjustment to the fair value estimate is appropriate.

Based on the FHLBNY’s review processes, management has concluded that inputs into the pricing models employed by pricing services for the FHLBNY’s investments in GSE securities are market based and observable and are considered to be within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.  The valuation of the private-label securities, all designated as held-to-maturity, may require pricing services to use significant inputs that are subjective and are considered to be within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy.  This determination was made based on management’s view that the private-label instruments may not have an active market because of the specific vintage of the securities as well as inherent conditions surrounding the trading of private-label MBS, so that the inputs may not be market based and observable.  At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, no held-to-maturity private-label MBS was deemed OTTI that would have also required the OTTI security to be written down to its fair value.

Housing finance agency bonds — The fair value of housing finance agency bonds is estimated by management using information primarily from pricing services.  Because of the current lack of significant market activity, their fair values were categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy as inputs into vendor pricing models may not be market based and observable.

Grantor trusts — The FHLBNY has grantor trusts, which invest in money market, equity and fixed income and bond funds.  Investments in the trusts are classified as AFS.  Daily net asset values (“NAVs”) are readily available and investments are redeemable at short notice.  NAVs are the fair values of the funds in the grantor trusts.  Because of the highly liquid nature of the investments at their NAVs, they are categorized as Level 1 financial instruments under the valuation hierarchy.

Advances — The fair values of advances are computed using standard option valuation models.  The most significant inputs to the valuation model are (1) Consolidated obligation debt curve (“CO Curve”), published by the Office of Finance and available to the public, and (2) LIBOR swap curves and volatilities.  Both these inputs are considered to be market based and observable as they can be directly corroborated by market participants.

The FHLBNY determines the fair values of its advances by calculating the present value of expected future cash flows from the advances, a methodology also referred to as the Income approach under the Fair Value Measurement standards.  The discount rates used in these calculations are equivalent to the replacement advance rates for advances with similar terms.  In accordance with the Finance Agency’s “Advances” regulations, an advance with a maturity or repricing period greater than six months requires a prepayment fee sufficient to make a FHLBank financially indifferent to the borrower’s decision to prepay the advance.  Therefore, the fair value of an advance does not assume prepayment risk.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

The availability of observable inputs can vary from product to product and is affected by a wide variety of factors including, for example, the characteristics peculiar to the transaction. To the extent that valuation is based on models or inputs that are less observable or unobservable in the market, the determination of fair value requires more judgment. Accordingly, the degree of judgment exercised by the FHLBNY in determining fair value is greatest for instruments categorized as Level 3. In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy. In such cases, for disclosure purposes the level in the fair value hierarchy within which the fair value measurement falls is determined based on the lowest level input that is significant to the fair value measurement in its entirety.

Summary of Valuation Techniques and Primary Inputs

The fair value of a financial instrument that is an asset is defined as the price the FHLBNY would receive to sell the asset in an orderly transaction with market participants. A financial liability’s fair value is defined as the amount that would be paid to transfer the liability to a new obligor, not the amount that would be paid to settle the liability with the creditor. Where available, fair values were based on observable market prices or parameters or derived from such prices or parameters. Where observable prices are not available, valuation models and inputs are utilized. These valuation techniques involve some level of management estimation and judgment, the degree of which is dependent on the price transparency for the instruments or markets and the instruments’ complexity. Because an active secondary market does not exist for a portion of the FHLBNY’s financial instruments, in certain cases, fair values are not subject to precise quantification or verification and may change as economic and market factors and evaluation of those factors change.

For assets and liabilities carried at fair value, the FHLBNY measures fair value using the procedures set out below:


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Mortgage-backed securities classified as available-for-sale — The fair value of such securities is estimated by the FHLBNY using pricing primarily from specialized pricing services. The pricing vendors typically use market multiples derived from a set of comparables, including matrix pricing, and other techniques. The FHLBNY’s valuation technique incorporates prices from up to three designated third-party pricing services at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019. The FHLBNY’s base investment pricing methodology establishes a median price for each security using a formula that is based on the number of prices received. If three prices are received, the middle price is used; if two prices are received, the average of the two prices is used; and if one price is received, it is used, typically subject to further validation. Vendor prices that are outside of a defined tolerance threshold of the median price are identified as outliers and subject to additional review, including, but not limited to, comparison to prices provided by an additional third-party valuation service, prices for similar securities, and/or non-binding dealer estimates, or use of internal model prices, which are deemed to be reflective of all relevant facts and circumstances that a market participant would consider. Such analysis is also applied in those limited instances where no third-party vendor price or only one third-party vendor price is available in order to arrive at an estimated fair value.

The FHLBNY has also concluded that the pricing vendors use methods that generally employ, but are not limited to benchmark yields, recent trades, dealer estimates, valuation models, benchmarking of like securities, sector groupings, and/or matrix pricing.

Based on the FHLBNY’s review processes, management has concluded that inputs into the pricing models employed by pricing services for the FHLBNY’s investments in GSE securities classified as available-for-sale are market based and observable and are considered to be within Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy.

Fair values of Mortgage-backed securities deemed impaired — When a PLMBS is deemed to be impaired, it is recorded at fair value. The valuation of PLMBS may require pricing services to use significant inputs that are subjective and are considered by management to be within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy. This determination was made based on management’s view that the private-label instruments may not have an active market because of the specific vintage of the securities as well as inherent conditions surrounding the trading of private-label MBS, so that the inputs may not be market based and observable. Historically, impairments have been de minimis. The portfolio of PLMBS has declined as the FHLBNY has ceased acquiring PLMBS.

Trading Securities — The FHLBNY classifies trading securities as Level 1 of the fair value hierarchy when we use quoted market prices in active markets to determine the fair value of trading securities, such as U.S. government securities. We classify trading securities as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy when we use quoted market prices in less active markets to determine the fair value of trading securities.

Equity Investments — The FHLBNY has a grantor trust, which invest in money market, equity and fixed income and bond funds. Daily net asset values (NAVs) are readily available and investments are redeemable at short notice. NAVs are the fair values of the funds in the grantor trust. Because of the highly liquid nature of the investments at their NAVs, they are categorized as Level 1 financial instruments under the valuation hierarchy.

Advances elected under the FVO — When the FHLBNY elects the FVO designation for certain advances, the advances are recorded at their fair values in the Statements of Condition. The fair values are computed using standard option valuation models. The most significant inputs to the valuation model are (1) Consolidated obligation debt curve (CO Curve), published by the Office of Finance and available to the public, and (2) LIBOR swap curves and volatilities. Both these inputs are considered to be market based and observable as they can be directly corroborated by market participants.

The CO Curve is the primary input, which is market based and observable. Inputs to apply spreads, which are FHLBNY specific, were not material. Fair values were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy.

The FHLBNY determines the fair values of advances elected under the FVO by calculating the present value of expected future cash flows from the advances, a methodology also referred to as the Income approach under the Fair Value Measurement standards. The discount rates used in these calculations are equivalent to the replacement advance rates for advances with similar terms. In accordance with the Finance Agency’s “Advances” regulations, an advance with a maturity or repricing period greater than six months requires a prepayment fee sufficient to make a FHLBank financially indifferent to the borrower’s decision to prepay the advance. Therefore, the fair value of an advance does not assume prepayment risk.


The inputs used to determine fair value of advances elected under the FVO are as follows:

 

·CO Curve. The FHLBNY uses the CO Curve, which represents its cost of funds, as an input to estimate the fair value of advances, and to determine current advance rates. This input is considered market observable and therefore a Level 2 input.

·Volatility assumption. To estimate the fair value of advances with optionality, the FHLBNY uses market-based expectations of future interest rate volatility implied from current market prices for similar options. This input is considered a Level 2 input as it is market based and market observable.

·Spread adjustment. Adjustments represent the FHLBNY’s mark-up based on its pricing strategy. The input is considered as unobservable and is classified as a Level 3 input. The spread adjustment is not a significant input to the overall fair value of an advance.

The FHLBNY creates an internal curve, which is interpolated from its advance rates.  Advance rates are calculated by applying a spread to an underlying “base curve” derived from the FHLBNY’s cost of funds, which is based on the CO Curve, inputs to which have been determined to be market observable and classified as Level 2.  The spreads applied to the base advance pricing curve typically represent the FHLBNY’s mark-ups over the FHLBNY’s cost of funds, and are not market observable inputs, but are based on the FHLBNY’s advance pricing strategy.  Such inputs have been classified as a Level 3 input, and were considered as not significant.

To determine the appropriate classification of the overall measurement in the fair value hierarchy of an advance, an analysis of the inputs to the entire fair value measurement was performed at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  If the unobservable spread to the FHLBNY’s cost of funds was not significant to the overall fair value, then the measurement was classified as Level 2.  Conversely, if the unobservable spread was significant to the overall fair value, then the measurement would be classified as Level 3.  The impact of the unobservable input was calculated as the difference in the value determined by discounting an advance’s cash flows using the FHLBNY’s advance curve and the value determined by discounting an advance’s cash flows using the FHLBNY’s cost of funds curve.  Given the relatively small mark-ups over the FHLBNY’s cost of funds, the results of the FHLBNY’s quantitative analysis confirmed the FHLBNY’s expectations that the measurement of the FHLBNY’s advances was Level 2.  The unobservable mark-up spreads were not significant to the overall fair value of the instrument.  A quantitative threshold for the significance factor has been established at 10%, with additional qualitative factors to be considered if the ratio exceeded the threshold.

The FHLBNY has

Consolidated Obligations elected under the FVO designation for certain advances and recorded their fair values in the Statements of Condition for such advances.  The CO Curve was the primary input, which is market based and observable.  Inputs to apply spreads, which are FHLBNY specific, were not material.  Fair values were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy.

Accrued Interest Receivable and Other Assets — The estimated fair values approximate the recorded book value because of the relatively short period of time between their origination and expected realization.

Mortgage Loans (MPF Loans)

A.Principal and/or Most Advantageous Market and Market Participants MPF Loans

The FHLBNY may sell mortgage loans to another FHLBank or in the secondary mortgage market.  Because transactions between FHLBanks occur infrequently, the FHLBNY has identified the secondary mortgage market as the principal market for mortgage loans under the MPF programs.  Also, based on the nature of the supporting collateral to the MPF loans held by FHLBNY, the presentation of a single class for all products within the MPF product types is considered appropriate.  As described below, the FHLBNY believes that the market participants within the secondary mortgage market for the MPF portfolio would differ primarily whether qualifying or non-qualifying loans are being sold.

Qualifying Loans (unimpaired mortgage loans) — The FHLBNY believes that a market participant is an entity that would buy qualifying mortgage loans for the purpose of securitization and subsequent resale as a security.  Other government-sponsored enterprises (“GSEs”), specifically Federal National Mortgage Association (“Fannie Mae”) and Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“Freddie Mac”), conduct the majority of such activity in the United States, but there are other commercial banks and financial institutions that periodically conduct business in this market.  Therefore, the FHLBNY has identified market participants for qualifying loans to include (1) all GSEs, and (2) other commercial banks and financial institutions that are independent of the FHLBank System.

Non-qualifying Loans (impaired mortgage loans) — For the FHLBNY, non-qualifying loans are primarily impaired loans.  The FHLBNY believes that it is unlikely the GSE market participants would willingly buy loans that did not meet their normal criteria or underwriting standards.  However, a market exists with commercial banks and financial institutions other than GSEs where such market participants buy non-qualifying loans in order to securitize them as they become current, resell them in the secondary market, or hold them in their portfolios.  Therefore, the FHLBNY has identified the market participants for non-qualifying loans to include other commercial banks and financial institutions that are independent of the FHLBank System.

B.  Fair Value at Initial Recognition — MPF Loans

The FHLBNY believes that the transaction price (entry price) may differ from the fair value (exit price) at initial recognition because it is determined using a different method than subsequent fair value measurements.  However, because mortgage loans are not measured at fair value in the balance sheet, day one gains and losses would not be applicable.  Additionally, all mortgage loans were performing at the time of origination by the PFI and acquisition by the FHLBNY.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

The FHLBNY receives an entry price from the FHLBank of Chicago, the MPF Provider, at the time of acquisition. This entry price is based on the TBA rates, as well as exit prices received from market participants, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.  The price is adjusted for specific MPF program characteristics and may be further adjusted by the FHLBNY to accommodate changing market conditions.  Because of the adjustments, in many cases the entry price would not equal the exit price at the time of acquisition.

C. Valuation Technique, Inputs and Hierarchy

The FHLBNY calculates the fair value of the entire mortgage loan portfolio using a valuation technique referred to as the “market approach”.  Loans are aggregated into synthetic pass-through securities based on product type, loan origination year, gross coupon and loan term.

The fair values are based on TBA rates (or agency commitment rates), as discussed above, adjusted primarily for seasonality.  TBA and agency commitment rates are market observable and therefore classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.  However, many of the credit and default risk related inputs involved with the valuation techniques described above may be considered unobservable due to a variety of reasons (e.g., lack of market activity for a particular loan, inherent judgment involved in property estimates).  If unobservable inputs are considered significant, the loans would be classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.  At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, fair values were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy.

The fair values of impaired MPF are generally based on collateral values less estimated selling costs.  Collateral values are generally based on broker price opinions, and any significant adjustments to apply a haircut value on the underlying collateral value would be considered to be an unobservable Level 3 input.  The FHLBNY’s mortgage loan historical loss experience has been insignificant, and expected credit losses are insignificant.  Level 3 inputs, if any, are generally insignificant to the total measurement, and therefore the measurement of most loans may be classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.  At December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, fair values of credit impaired loans were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy as significant inputs to value collateral were also considered to be observable.  During the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, certain loans that were delinquent for 180 days or more had been charged-off, and the partially charged off loans were recorded at their fair values of $2.5 million on a non-recurring basis as a Level 2 financial instruments as significant inputs to value collateral were considered to be observable.

Consolidated Obligations — The FHLBNY estimates the fair values of Consolidated obligations elected under the FVO based on the present values of expected future cash flows due on the debt obligations. Calculations are performed by using the FHLBNY’s industry standard option adjusted valuation models. Inputs are based on the cost of comparable term debt. The FHLBNY’s internal valuation models use standard valuation techniques and estimate fair values based on the following inputs:

 

·CO Curve and LIBOR Swap Curve. The Office of Finance constructs an internal curve, referred to as the CO Curve, using the U.S. Treasury Curve as a base curve that is then adjusted by adding indicative spreads obtained from market observable sources. These market indications are generally derived from pricing indications from dealers, historical pricing relationships, recent GSE trades and secondary market activity. The FHLBNY considers the inputs as Level 2 inputs as they are market observable.

·Volatility assumption.assumptions. To estimate the fair values of Consolidated obligations with optionality, the FHLBNY uses market-based expectations of future interest rate volatility implied from current market prices for similar options. These inputs are also considered Level 2 as they are market based and observable.

The FHLBNY has No CO debt elected under the FVO designation for certain consolidated obligation debt and recorded their fair valueswere structured with options in the Statements of Condition.  The CO Curve and volatility assumptions (for debt with call options) were primary inputs, which are market based and observable.  Fair values were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy.

Derivative Assets and Liabilities The FHLBNY’s derivatives (cleared derivatives and bilaterally executed derivatives) are executedany periods in the over-the-counter market and are valued using internal valuation techniques as no quoted market prices exist for such instruments.  Discounted cash flow analysis is the primary methodology employed by the FHLBNY’s valuation models to measure the fair values of interest rate swaps.  The valuation technique is considered as an “Income approach”.  Interest rate caps and floors are valued under the “Market approach”.  Interest rate swaps and interest rate caps and floors, collectively “derivatives”, were valued in industry-standard option adjusted valuation models, which generated fair values.  The valuation models employed multiple market inputs including interest rates, prices and indices to create continuous yield or pricing curves and volatility factors.  These multiple market inputs were corroborated by management to independent market data, and to relevant benchmark indices.  In addition, derivative valuations were compared by management to counterparty valuations received as part of the collateral exchange process.  These derivative positions were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

this report.

 

Derivative Assets and Liabilities — The FHLBNY’s derivatives (cleared derivatives and bilaterally executed derivatives) are executed in the over-the-counter market and are valued using internal valuation techniques as no quoted market prices exist for such instruments. Discounted cash flow analysis is the primary methodology employed by the FHLBNY’s valuation models to measure the fair values of interest rate swaps. The valuation technique is considered as an “Income approach”. Interest rate caps and floors are valued under the “Market approach”. Interest rate swaps and interest rate caps and floors, collectively “derivatives”, were valued in industry-standard option adjusted valuation models, which generated fair values. The valuation models employed multiple market inputs including interest rates, prices, and indices to create continuous yield or pricing curves and volatility factors. These multiple market inputs were corroborated by management to independent market data, and to relevant benchmark indices. In addition, derivative valuations were compared by management to counterparty valuations received as part of the collateral exchange process. These derivative positions were classified within Level 2 of the valuation hierarchy at December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019.

Starting in mid-October 2020, interest rate swaps cleared by Central Clearing Houses, LCH and the CME, are valued by discounting forward cash flows by the SOFR index, consistent with the change to SOFR in the interest accrual calculation of margins.


The FHLBNY’s valuation model utilizes a modified Black-Karasinski methodology. Significant market based and observable inputs into the valuation model include volatilities and interest rates. The Bank’s valuation model employs industry standard market-observable inputs (inputs that are actively quoted and can be validated to external sources). Inputs by class of derivative were as follows:

 

Interest-rate related:

·LIBOR Swap Curve.
·Volatility assumption. Market-based expectations of future interest rate volatility implied from current market prices for similar options.
·Prepayment assumption (if applicable).
·Federal funds curve (FF/OIS curve).
·SOFR curve (SOFR/OIS)

 

·                              LIBOR Swap Curve.

·                              Volatility assumption.  Market-based expectations of future interest rate volatility implied from current market prices for similar options.

·                              Prepayment assumption (if applicable).

·                              Federal funds curve (OIS curve).

Mortgage delivery commitments (considered a derivative):

· TBA security prices are adjusted for differences in coupon, average loan rate and seasoning.

OIS To be announced (TBA) is the term describing forward-settling MBS trades issued by Freddie Mac, Fannie Mae, and Ginnie Mae trade in the TBA market. The FHLBNY incorporates SOFR and the overnight indexed swap (“OIS”)(FF/OIS) curves as fair value measurement inputs for the valuation of its derivatives, as SOFR the FF/OIS curves reflect the interest rates paid on cash collateral provided against the fair value of these derivatives. The FHLBNY believes using relevant SOFR and the FF/OIS curves as inputs to determine fair value measurements provides a more representative reflection of the fair values of these collateralized interest-rate related derivatives. The SOFR and the FF/OIS curve (federal funds rate curve) is an inputcurves are inputs to the valuation model.  The input for the federal funds curve ismodel and are obtained from industry standard pricing vendors andvendors; the input isinputs are available and observable over itsthe entire term structure.terms of the interest rate swaps.

 

Management considers the SOFR and the federal funds curve to be a Level 2 input.inputs. The FHLBNY’s valuation model utilizes industry standard OIS methodology. The model generates forecasted cash flows using the OIS calibrated 3-month LIBOR curve.  The modelcontractual cash flows, then discounts the cash flows by the SOFR and FF/OIS curve to generate fair values.

 

Credit risk and credit valuation adjustments

The FHLBNY is subject to credit risk in derivatives transactions due to the potential non-performance of its derivatives counterparties or a DCO.

To mitigate this risk, the FHLBNY has entered into master netting agreements and credit support agreements with its derivative counterparties for its bilaterally executed derivative contracts that provide for the delivery of collateral at specified levels at least weekly. The computed fair values of the derivatives took into consideration the effects of legally enforceable master netting agreements that allow the FHLBNY to settle positive and negative positions and offset cash collateral with the same counterparty on a net basis.

For derivative transactions executed as a cleared derivative, the transactions are fully collateralized in cash and for the most part exchanged and settled daily with the DCO. The FHLBNY has also established the enforceability of offsetting rights incorporated in the agreements for the cleared derivative transactions.

 

As a result of these practices and agreements and the FHLBNY’s assessment of any change in its own credit spread, the FHLBNY has concluded that the impact of the credit differential between the FHLBNY and its derivative counterparties and DCO was sufficiently mitigated to an immaterial level that no credit adjustments were deemed necessary to the recorded fair value of Derivative assets and Derivative liabilities in the Statements of Condition at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016.2019.

 

Deposits — The FHLBNY determines estimated fair values of deposits by calculating the present value of expected future cash flows from the deposits.  The discount rates used in these calculations are the current cost of deposits with similar terms.


 

Mandatorily Redeemable Capital Stock — The fair value of capital stock subject to mandatory redemption is generally equal to its par value as indicated by contemporaneous member purchases and sales at par value.  Fair value also includes an estimated dividend earned at the time of reclassification from equity to liabilities, until such amount is paid, and any subsequently declared dividend.  FHLBank stock can only be acquired and redeemed at par value.  FHLBank stock is not traded and no market mechanism exists for the exchange of stock outside the FHLBank System’s cooperative structure.

Accrued Interest Payable and Other Liabilities — The estimated fair values approximate the recorded book value because of the relatively short period of time between their origination and expected realization.

Control processes — The FHLBNY employs control processes to validate the fair value of its financial instruments, including those derived from valuation models.  These control processes are designed to ensure that the values used for financial reporting are based on observable inputs wherever possible.  In the event that observable inputs are not available, the control processes are designed to ensure that the valuation approach utilized is appropriate and consistently applied and that the assumptions are reasonable.  These control processes include reviews of the pricing model’s theoretical soundness and appropriateness by specialists with relevant expertise who are independent from the trading desks or personnel who were involved in the design and selection of model inputs.  Additionally, groups that are independent from the trading desk, or personnel involved in the design and selection of model inputs participate in the review and validation of the fair values generated from the valuation model.  The FHLBNY maintains an ongoing review of its valuation models and has a formal model validation policy in addition to procedures for the approval and control of data inputs.  The FHLBNY has concluded that valuation models are performing to industry standards and its valuation capabilities remain robust and dependable.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Fair Value Measurement

 

The tables below present the fair value of those assets and liabilities that are recorded at fair value on a recurring or non-recurring basis at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016,2019, by level within the fair value hierarchy.  The FHLBNY also measures certain held-to-maturity securities at fair value on a non-recurring basis when a credit loss is recognized and the carrying value of the asset is adjusted to fair value. Certain mortgage loans that were partially charged-off were recorded at their collateral values on a non-recurring basis. Other real estate owned (“ORE”)(OREO) is measured at fair value when the asset’s fair value less costs to sell is lower than its carrying amount.

 

Items Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 December 31, 2020 

 

Total

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

 

Netting
Adjustment and
Cash Collateral

 

 Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Netting
Adjustment and Cash Collateral
 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

Trading securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

GSE securities

 

$

356,899

 

$

 

$

356,899

 

$

 

$

 

U.S. treasury securities

 

1,284,669

 

1,284,669

 

 

 

 

Corporate notes $2,164  $-  $2,164  $-  $- 
U.S. Treasury securities  11,740,801   11,740,801   -   -   - 
Equity Investments  80,369   80,369   -   -   - 

Available-for-sale securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

GSE/U.S. agency issued MBS

 

528,627

 

 

528,627

 

 

 

  3,435,945   -   3,435,945   -   - 

Equity and bond funds

 

48,642

 

48,642

 

 

 

 

Advances (to the extent FVO is elected)

 

2,205,624

 

 

2,205,624

 

 

 

Derivative assets (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Interest-rate derivatives

 

112,732

 

 

414,613

 

 

(301,881

)

  36,640   -   437,860   -   (401,220)

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

10

 

 

10

 

 

 

  29   -   29   -   - 
Total recurring fair value measurement - Assets $15,295,948  $11,821,170  $3,875,998  $-  $(401,220)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Total recurring fair value measurement - assets

 

$

4,537,203

 

$

1,333,311

 

$

3,505,773

 

$

 

$

(301,881

)

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Consolidated obligations:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation:                    

Discount notes (to the extent FVO is elected)

 

$

(2,312,621

)

$

 

$

(2,312,621

)

$

 

$

 

 $(7,133,755) $-  $(7,133,755) $-  $- 

Bonds (to the extent FVO is elected) (b)

 

(1,131,074

)

 

(1,131,074

)

 

 

  (16,580,464)  -   (16,580,464)  -   - 

Derivative liabilities (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Interest-rate derivatives

 

(61,592

)

 

(325,877

)

 

264,285

 

  (70,759)  -   (1,124,474)  -   1,053,715 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

(15

)

 

(15

)

 

 

  (1)  -   (1)  -   - 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recurring fair value measurement - liabilities

 

$

(3,505,302

)

$

 

$

(3,769,587

)

$

 

$

264,285

 

Total recurring fair value measurement - Liabilities $(23,784,979) $-  $(24,838,694) $-  $1,053,715 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 December 31, 2019 

 

Total

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

 

Netting
Adjustment and
Cash Collateral

 

 Total  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3  Netting
Adjustment and Cash Collateral
 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

           

Trading securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

GSE securities

 

$

30,969

 

$

 

$

30,969

 

$

 

$

 

U.S. treasury securities

 

100,182

 

 

100,182

 

 

 

Corporate notes $3,217  $-  $3,217  $-  $- 
U.S. Treasury securities  15,315,592   15,315,592   -   -   - 
Equity Investments  60,047   60,047   -   -   - 

Available-for-sale securities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

GSE/U.S. agency issued MBS

 

656,094

 

 

656,094

 

 

 

  2,653,418   -   2,653,418   -   - 

Equity and bond funds

 

41,718

 

41,718

 

 

 

 

Advances (to the extent FVO is elected)

 

9,873,157

 

 

9,873,157

 

 

 

Derivative assets (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Interest-rate derivatives

 

328,815

 

 

726,424

 

 

(397,609

)

  237,842   -   608,703   -   (370,861)

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

60

 

 

60

 

 

 

  105   -   105   -   - 
Total recurring fair value measurement - Assets $18,270,221  $15,375,639  $3,265,443  $-  $(370,861)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Total recurring fair value measurement - assets

 

$

11,030,995

 

$

41,718

 

$

11,386,886

 

$

 

$

(397,609

)

Liabilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Consolidated obligations:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation:                    

Discount notes (to the extent FVO is elected)

 

$

(12,228,412

)

$

 

$

(12,228,412

)

$

 

$

 

 $(2,186,603) $-  $(2,186,603) $-  $- 

Bonds (to the extent FVO is elected) (b)

 

(2,052,513

)

 

(2,052,513

)

 

 

  (12,134,043)  -   (12,134,043)  -   - 

Derivative liabilities (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Interest-rate derivatives

 

(144,885

)

 

(443,803

)

 

298,918

 

  (32,410)  -   (717,973)  -   685,563 

Mortgage delivery commitments

 

(100

)

 

(100

)

 

 

  (1)  -   (1)  -   - 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total recurring fair value measurement - liabilities

 

$

(14,425,910

)

$

 

$

(14,724,828

)

$

 

$

298,918

 

Total recurring fair value measurement - Liabilities $(14,353,057) $-  $(15,038,620) $-  $685,563 

(a)Based on analysis of the nature of the risk, the presentation of derivatives as a single class is appropriate.
(b)Based on analysis of the nature of risks of Consolidated obligation bonds measured at fair value, the FHLBNY has determined that presenting the bonds as a single class is appropriate.

 



(a)  Based on analysis of the nature of the risk, the presentation of derivatives as a single class is appropriate.

(b)  Based on analysis of the nature of risks of Consolidated obligation bonds measured at fair value, the FHLBNY has determined that presenting the bonds as a single class is appropriate.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Items Measured at Fair Value on a Non-recurring Basis (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

 

 During the period ended December 31, 2020 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  Fair Value   Level 1   Level 2   Level 3 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

$

2,519

 

$

 

$

2,519

 

$

 

 $1,671  $-  $1,671  $- 

Real estate owned

 

1,071

 

 

 

1,071

 

Total non-recurring assets at fair value

 

$

3,590

 

$

 

$

2,519

 

$

1,071

 

 $1,671  $-  $1,671  $- 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

Fair Value

 

Level 1

 

Level 2

 

Level 3

 

 During the period ended December 31, 2019 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Fair Value  Level 1  Level 2  Level 3 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio

 

$

3,496

 

$

 

$

3,496

 

$

 

 $80  $-  $80  $- 

Real estate owned

 

1,089

 

 

 

1,089

 

  306   -   -   306 

Total non-recurring assets at fair value

 

$

4,585

 

$

 

$

3,496

 

$

1,089

 

 $386  $-  $80  $306 

 

Fair values of Held-to-Maturity Securities on a Nonrecurring Basis — No held-to-maturity PLMBS was determined to be OTTI at December 31, 2017.  In accordance with the guidance on recognition and presentation of other-than-temporary impairment, held-to-maturity mortgage-backed securities that are determined to be credit impaired are required to be recorded at their fair values in the Statements of Condition.  For more information, see Note 7.  Held-to-Maturity Securities.

Mr. Cummings was appointed Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer of Investors Bancorp and FHLBNY member Investors Bank effective May 22, 2018. He previously served as President and Chief Executive Officer of FHLBNY member Investors Bank and holding company Investors Bancorp effectivethese companies since January 1, 2008 and was also appointed to serve on the Boardboards of Directors of Investors Bank at that time.  He previouslythese companies on the same date.  Prior to 2008, he served as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of Investors Bank since July 2003.  Prior to joining Investors Bank, Mr. Cummings had a 26-year career with the independent accounting firm of KPMG LLP, where he had been partner for 14 years.  Immediately prior to joining Investors Bank, he was an audit partner in KPMG’s Financial Services practice in their New York City office and lead partner on a major commercial banking client.  Mr. Cummings also worked in the New Jersey community bank practice for over 20 years.  Mr. Cummings has a Bachelor’s degree in Economics from Middlebury College and a Master’s degree in Business Administration from Rutgers University.  Mr. Cummings has served as a Commissioner on the Summit Board of Recreation. He is a Trustee of The Scholarship Fund for Inner-City Children a Trustee of the Liberty Science Center, and the former Chairman of the Board of the New Jersey Bankers Association.  He is also a board member of the Independent College Fund of New Jersey and The Community Foundation of New Jersey.  He also serves as a member of the Development Leadership Council of Morris Habitat for Humanity.Jersey and St. Benedicts Prep in Newark.  Mr. Cummings is a certified public accountant.

 

Ms. Estabrook is Chairman of Elberon Development Group in Elizabeth, New Jersey and was the chief executive officer from 1984 through 2014.  It, together with its affiliated companies, owns and manages approximately 2.1 million square feet of rental property.  Most of the property is industrial with the remainder serving commercial tenants.  Elberon Development Group also engages in redevelopment projects.  Ms. Estabrook was appointed by Governor Christine Todd Whitman to the NJ Economic Development Authority Board in 1995 until 2000.  Ms. Estabrook also served as a director on the board of New Brunswick Savings Bank, Constellation Bancorp and Summit Bank, all in New Jersey.  Since 2005 and currently Ms. Estabrook serves as a Director of New Jersey American Water Company.  Ms. Estabrook is a past chairman of the New Jersey Chamber of Commerce, served on its executive committee, and chaired its nominating committee.  In 2003-2004, she was the first woman to serve in that capacity in the Chamber’s 90 plus years of existence.  She also served as a member of the Lay Board of Trustees of the Delbarton School in Morristown for 15 years including five years as chair.  Until December 2012, Ms. Estabrook was a member and Secretary of the Board of Trustees of Catholic Charities, served on its Executive Committee and its Audit Committee, and chaired its Finance Committee and Building and Facilities Committees.  She is presently on the Board of Overseers of the Weill Cornell Medical School.  She is a Trustee of RWJBarnabas Health and serves on its Nominating/Governance, Compensation and Strategic Planning/Academic Affairs Committees.  She previously served on its Audit Committee for six years.  She serves on the Board of Trustees at Monmouth Medical Center where she is on its Executive and Nominating Committees.  She also serves on the Strategic Planning Committee with regard to the hospital’s real estate needs.  Ms. Estabrook serves on the Board of Trustees of the New Jersey Performing Arts Center (NJPAC) and serves on its Operations and Finance Committee and its Business Partners Committee.  In September 2011, she became a member of the Board of Managers of the Theatre Square Development Company LLC in Newark, NJ, a proposed 245 rental unit housing project currently under construction which will include retail space and affordable housing units.  In 2015 she was named as a Director of Y Homes, Inc., an affiliate of the Gateway family YMCA.  Ms. Estabrook’s experience in, among other areas, representing community interests in housing as indicated by her background described above, supports her qualifications to serve on our Board as a public interest director and Independent Director.

Mr. Ficalora has had been the President and Chief Executive Officer and a Director of New York Community Bancorp, Inc. (“NYCB”) since its inception on July 20, 1993.  He hashad also been the President and Chief Executive Officer and a Director of FHLBNY member and NYCB primary subsidiariessubsidiary New York Community Bank (“New York Community”) and New York Commercial Bank (“New York Commercial”), both of which are FHLBNY members, since January 1, 1994 and December 30, 2005, respectively.1994.  On January 1, 2007, he was appointed Chairman of NYCB New York Community and New York CommercialCommunity (a position he previously held at NYCB from July 20, 1993 through July 31, 2001 and at New York Community from May 20, 1997 through July 31, 2001); he served as Chairman of these threetwo entities until December 2010.  Since 1965, when he joined New York Community (formerly Queens County Savings Bank), Mr. Ficalora has held increasingly responsible positions, crossing all lines of operations.  Prior to his appointment as President and Chief Executive Officer of New York Community in 1994, Mr. Ficalora served as President and Chief Operating Officer (beginning in October 1989); before that, he served as Executive Vice President, Comptroller and Secretary.  He retired from all of his positions with NYCB and New York Community on December 31, 2020, thus ending his Board service with the FHLBNY on the same date. A graduate of Pace University with a degree in business and finance, Mr. Ficalora providesprovided leadership to several professional banking organizations. In addition to previously servingHe served as a member of the Executive Committee and as Chairman of the former Community Bankers Association of New York State, Mr. Ficalora is a Director of the New York State Bankers Association and Chairman of its Metropolitan Area Division.  Additionally, he is a member of the Government Relations Administrative Committee and the American Bankers Council of the American Bankers Association, a member of the American Bankers Association’s Government Relations Council Administrative Committee, a member of the American Bankers Association Federal Home Loan Bank Committee, and was a director of the New York Bankers Association, also serving as Chairman of its Metropolitan Area Division. Mr. Ficalora also served on the Board of Trustees of Pace University, as well as a former member ofon their Board of Directors.  Mr. Ficalora serves onInvestment/Pension Committee, the Boards of Directors of the New York Community Bank Foundation, and the Richmond County Savings Foundation.Foundation, and Pentegra Retirement Trust. In addition, he was a member of the Board of


Pentegra Services, Inc. He also serves on the Pentegra Boards, which provide retirement services principally to the banking industry, andwas a former Director of Peter B. Cannell and Co., Inc., an investment advisory firm, that became a subsidiary of New York Community in 2004.  In addition, Mr. Ficalora is onand the Board of the Foreign Policy Association.  Previously, Mr. Ficalora served as a Member Director of the FHLBNY for ten years, ultimately timing out as the Vice Chairman.  Mr. Ficalora served as a member of the Board of Directors of the Thrift Institutions Advisory Council of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, D.C., and also served as a member of the Thrift Institutions Advisory Panel of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.  Mr. Ficalora has also previously served as a director of Computhrift Corporation, Chairman and board member of the New York Savings Bank Life Insurance Fund, President and Director of the MSB Fund andformer President and Director of the Asset Management Fund Large Cap Equity Institutional Fund, Inc. With respect to community activities, Mr. Ficalora has beenalso was an active participant in community affairs. He was a member of the Board of Directors of the Queens Chamber of Commerce since 1990, and has previously served as a member ofon its Executive Committee. He servesIn addition, Mr. Ficalora served on the BoardBoards of Directors of the Flushing Cemetery, the Board of Directors and the Finance and Audit Committee of theForeign Policy Association, Partnership for New York Hall of Science,City, and Flushing Cemetery; the Board of Directors, the Executive Committee, and the Development Committee of the New York-Presbyterian/Queens,Queens; the Board of Trustees, the Finance and Audit Committee, and Vice Chair of the President’s Council of the New York Hall of Science; the Advisory Council of the Queens Museum of Art, and he was a Board member of Nassau County Crime Stoppers, Inc. Mr. Ficalora was a former member of the Board of Directors of the American Bankers Association, the Thrift Institutions Advisory Council of the Federal Reserve Board in Washington, and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York Thrift Institutions Advisory Panel. He was also the former Chairman of the New York State Savings Forum for Operations Audit CommitteeControl, the former Chairman of CBANYS, as well as the former Chairman of CBANYS' Auditors and Comptrollers Forum, the former Chairman of the SBLI Fund, the former Director of Computhrift Corporation, a former Trustee of the Museum of the Moving Image, and on the Advisory Councilpast President and Director of the Queens Museum of Art.MSB Fund. In addition, Mr. Ficalora was the formerhe previously served as President of

the Queens Library Foundation and was theas Chairman of the Board and of the Administrative Committee of the Queens Borough Public Library, having served as its President.Library.

 

Mr. Ford serves as a director of FHLBNY member Crest Savings Bank, headquartered in Wildwood, New Jersey; he also served as President and CEO of the company from 1993 until his retirement on January 3, 2018. He has worked in the financial services industry in southern New Jersey for more than fifty years. Mr. Ford served as the 2003-2004 Chairman of the New Jersey League of Community Bankers. Mr. Ford served as Chairman of the Community Bank Council of the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia in 1998-1999.  He also served on the board of directors of America’s Community Bankers (“ACB”) and on ACB’s Audit and Finance & Investment Committees.  Mr. Ford served on the board of the Cape Regional Medical Center Foundation and has previously served as a director and treasurer of Habitat for Humanity, Cape May County, as Divisional Chairman of the March of Dimes for Atlantic and Cape May Counties, and as a Director of the Atlantic Cape Community College Foundation. In December 2000, he was appointed by Governor Christine Todd Whitman to the New Jersey Department of Banking & Insurance Study Commission. Mr. Ford is a graduate of Marquette University with a degree in accounting and is a member of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and the New Jersey Society of CPAs. His service on the FHLBNY’s Board ended on December 31, 2020 due to term limits.

 

Ms. Franzini,Mr. Horn  who passed away on January 25, 2017, was Presidenthas been a partner in the law firm of Franzini Consulting, LLC providing strategic assistance with real estate development projects; identifying local, state and federal incentives to fill funding gaps; and creating and enhancing lending and incentive programs for economic development organizations.  Previously sheMcCarter & English, LLP since 1990.  He has served as Chief Executive Officerthe Commissioner of Banking for the State of New Jersey and as the New Jersey State Treasurer.  He was also a member of the New Jersey Economic Development Authority (NJEDA) from January 1994 until October 2012.  As the CEO, Ms. Franzini oversaw the organization’s activities including providing financing to smallState Assembly and mid-sized businesses; administering tax incentives to retain and grow jobs; revitalizing communities through redevelopment initiatives; and supporting entrepreneurial development. Ms. Franzini managed an organization with over $500 million in assets andserved as a $28 million operating budget. Annually NJEDA provided between $600-$800 million in financial assistance to businesses, not for profits and public organizations throughout New Jersey to leverage additional private sector investment and the retention and growth of jobs.  Prior to joining the NJEDA, Ms. Franzini was an Assistant State Treasurer with the New Jersey Departmentmember of the Treasury responsible for analyzing state leases and public debt.  Before that, she was employed at the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey and with Public Financial Management.  Ms. Franzini has been recognized for her contributions to business growth and economic development in the state.  She had been recently inducted into the NJBiz Hall of Fame and the NJ Women’s Hall of Fame and was the recipient of numerous awards including the New Jersey Business & Industry Association’s Paul L. Troast Award for her commitment to improving the state’s economy; the Wharton Club of New York’s Joseph Wharton Award for Social Impact; the Pinnacle Business Advocate Award from the Chamber of Commerce Southern New Jersey; the EDANJ’s Franklin-Maddocks Award for Excellence in Economic Development; Plan Smart NJ’s Outstanding Leadership & Economic Development Achievement Awards and Monmouth University’s Kislak Real Estate Institute’s Service to the Industry Award.  Ms. FranziniAssembly Banking Committee.  In addition, Mr. Horn served on New Jersey’s Executive Commission on Ethical Standards as both its Vice Chair and Chairman, was appointed as a State Advisory Member of the Board of Directors of NJM Insurance Group, where she served on the Audit, InvestmentFederal Financial Institutions Examination Council, and Executive Committees; the NJ Business and Industry Association, where she was a member of the Executive and Finance Committees; Horizon Blue Cross NJ Foundation Board; NJ Future; andMunicipal Securities Rulemaking Board. He is counsel to the New Jersey Bankers Association, was the Co-Chair of Greater Trenton.  She also served as a Visiting Associate at Rutgers University’s Eagleton Institute of Politics.  Ms. Franzini held a Bachelor of Arts degree in Urban Studies from the University of Pennsylvania and a Master of Business Administration degree in Finance and Public Management from the Wharton Schoolchairman of the UniversityBank Regulatory Committee of Pennsylvania.  Ms. Franzini’s financial management, organizational management, project development,the Banking Law Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association, and risk management practicesis a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation. Mr. Horn’s legal and regulatory experience, as indicated by herhis background described above, supported hersupports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.

 

Mr. Hoy serves as Chairman of FHLBNY member Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company; he also served as CEO of the company through December 31, 2012.  He is also Chairman of Arrow Financial Corporation, the holding company for Glens Falls National Bank and Trust Company and FHLBNY member Saratoga National Bank and Trust Company; he served as President of the company through June 30, 2012 and CEO of the company through December 31, 2012.  He also became a director of North Country Mutual Funds in 2015.  Mr. Hoy joined Glens Falls National Bank in 1974 as a Management Trainee and became President of the Bank on January 1, 1995.  He became President of Arrow in 1996 and CEO in 1997.  Mr. Hoy is a graduate of Cornell University and has been active in various banking organizations, including serving as past President of the Independent Bankers Association of New York, past Chairman of the New York Bankers Association, and past member of the American Bankers Association Board of Directors.  Mr. Hoy served four years on active duty in the Navy as a Surface Warfare Officer on various destroyers, and retired after twenty years as a Commander in the U.S. Naval Reserve.  He has been extremely active in his community, serving on numerous Boards and leading several community fundraising efforts.  He has been recognized for his community service with the J. Walter Juckett Award from the Adirondack Regional Chambers of Commerce, the Twin Rivers Council’s Good Scout Award, the C.R. Wood Theater’s Charles R. Wood Award, the Warren County Bar Association Liberty Bell Award, and the Henry Crandall Award from the Crandall Public Library.

187

Mr. Huber is the President of Huber Advisory Services in Red Bank, New Jersey, which provides financial advisory services to clients in the healthcare and insurance industries. He served through the end of 2018 as Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Horizon Blue Cross Blue Shield of New Jersey (Horizon), which is New Jersey’s largest health insurer. He had been with Horizon since 2002 and served as Vice President of Finance before being promoted to CFO in 2012. Mr. Huber was formerly an audit partner in Arthur Andersen’s Financial Services practice in Metro New York, where he served clients in the insurance and banking industries. Mr. Huber has a Bachelor’s degree in Accounting from Lehigh University and is a CPA. Mr. Huber is the Chair of the Red Bank Redevelopment Agency and serves on the Board of Trustees of the New Jersey Symphony Orchestra. He served on the board of the New Jersey Economic Development Authority and was Chair of the Loan Committee and the Audit Committee. Mr. Huber’s auditing and accounting and financial management experience supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.

 

Mr. Kemly was appointed President and Chief Executive Officer of FHLBNY member Columbia Bank, effective December 31, 2011. Prior to his appointment, he held various positions at the bank including Controller, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Senior Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Senior Executive Vice President, Chief Operating Officer. Mr. Kemly joined Columbia Bank’s Board of Directors in 2006 and the Columbia Bank Foundation’s Board of Directors upon inception in 2004. He was named Chairman of the Columbia Bank Foundation in 2012. With nearly 40 years of experience, Mr. Kemly has served as an active member of the banking industry. He has held several leadership positions including Chairman and Board Member of the New Jersey Bankers Association, Board Member of the Bankers Cooperative Group, Board Member of the New Jersey Bankers Charitable Foundation, President of the Financial Managers Society for the New York and New Jersey Chapter, and was a member of the OCC Mutual Savings Association Advisory Committee. He presently serves as the President of Northern New Jersey Community Bankers and is a Board Member for the Commerce and Industry Association of New Jersey. As an active member of the local community, Mr. Kemly has expanded Columbia Bank’s volunteering initiative “Team Columbia”, which encourages employees to volunteer their time and give back to those in need. In conjunction with Columbia Bank’s IPO in 2018, he grew the Columbia Bank Foundation to one of the largest private giving Foundations in the state of New Jersey. Mr. Kemly has been formally recognized for his continued support by organizations including New Bridge Services, the Boys and Girls Club of Paterson, and the Passaic Community College Foundation. He previously served on the Board of Directors for New Bridge Services. Mr. Kemly holds Bachelor’s degrees in Business Administration and Psychology from Trenton State College and an MBA in Finance from Fordham University.

Mr. Kilbourne is a Managing Director of the Financial Services Volunteer Corps (FSVC), a not-for-profit, private-public partnership that helps to build sound financial systems in transition and emerging market countries. As a member of FSVC’s executive management team, he has extensive experience working to strengthen central banking capabilities, and to develop commercial banking systems and securities markets. Mr. Kilbourne is an officer of FSVC serving as Secretary of the Corporation. Mr. Kilbourne previously served as Senior Advisor to the Commissioner of New York State Homes and Community Renewal, and later as Vice President of the Financial Services Forum, a public-policy organization composed of CEOs from the largest, most diversified financial services institutions based in the United States. Mr. Kilbourne is a Trustee of the Wright Family Foundation in Schenectady, New York, and serves on the Board of Directors of the Boys and Girls Clubs of Schenectady. He is the President of the Board of Directors of Better Community Neighborhoods, Inc. based in Schenectady. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations. Mr. Kilbourne holds a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from Tufts University, and a Master’s degree in International Affairs from Georgetown University. Mr. Kilbourne’s project development and financial management experience, as indicated by his background described above, supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director and a public interest director.

Mr. Lipkin is currently serves as a Banking Officer in the Chairmancapacity of Senior Advisor at FHLBNY member Valley National Bank as well as holding company Valley National Bancorp.Bank.  He joined Valley in 1975 as a Senior Vice President and was elected a Director in 1986.  He was promoted to Executive Vice President in 1987 and elected Chairman and Chief Executive Officer in 1989.  The title of President was added in 1996; he held this title through January of 2017. He served as Chairman through April 20, 2018 and Director through December 2019. In 2013, he was elected as a Class A director to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.  Mr. Lipkin’s career in the banking industry spans 54 years.  He began his career in banking with the Comptroller of the Currency in New York/New Jersey in 1963 and was appointed Deputy Regional Administrator in 1970. Beyond his business accomplishments, Mr. Lipkin’s philanthropic contributions are widely acknowledged.  He helped raise funds for basic cancer research at the Lautenberg Center for Tumor Immunology in Jerusalem for over 15 years and was honored for his contributions in 1988 with the prestigious “Torch of Learning Award.”  Mr. Lipkin served as a Board Trustee at Beth Israel Hospital in Passaic for over 25 years.  He has been honored to receive

the Corporate Achievement Award from B’nai BrithB’rith International, the Community Service Award from NJ Citizens Action, the Emily Bissell Honor Award from the American Lung Association, the Corporate Recognition Award from the Metro Chapter of the American Red Cross, the Corporate Award from the Sunrise House Foundation and the Community Achievement Award from the Urban League of Bergen County.  Mr. Lipkin received the Corporate Excellence Award from The University of Medicine & Dentistry for his contributions to Musical Moments for MS.  He has been honored by the American Heart Association and has served as a member of the Foundation Board at William Paterson University which earned him the “Legacy Award” in 1994.  Mr. Lipkin has been a staunch supporter of Rutgers through the years as well.  He is past Chairman of the Rutgers Business School Board of Advisors, a member of the Dean’s Advisory Council, and a past member of the University’s Board of Overseers. Rutgers recognized Mr. Lipkin’s contributions with the distinguished Alumni Award from the Newark College of Arts and Sciences in 2001 and in 2006 he was elected to the Rutgers University Hall of Distinguished Alumni.  Mr. Lipkin earned a B.A. in Economics from Rutgers University and an M.B.A. in Banking & Finance from New York University.  He is a graduate of the Stonier Graduate School of Banking as well.

 


Mr. Mahon is President and Chief Executive Officer, and a Director, of Dime Community Bancshares, Inc., and its subsidiary,joined FHLBNY member Dime Community Bank Brooklyn, New York.  Prior to serving as Chief Executive Officer,(“the Bank”) in 1980. Mr. Mahon most recently served as the Bank’s Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer from February 2014 to January 2016, prior to being elevated to the Bank’s President (a title he held through early 2020) and before that asCEO (a title he held through the company’s Chief Financial Officer.end of January, 2021). In February 2021 he became Executive Chairman of the Bank’s Board. Mr. Mahon has served as a Director of the Bank since 1988. Mr. Mahon was also the CEO of the Bank’s holding company, Dime Community Bancshares (the “Company”) from January 1, 2017 through the end of January, 2021. Mr. Mahon became Executive Chairman of the Company’s Board on February 1, 2021. He has served as a director of the Company since 2002. He currently serves as a board member of the Committee for Hispanic Children and Families (“CHCF”), and was formerly a director of Southside United HDFC (“Los Sures”), a community support organization in Williamsburg, Brooklyn, and Brooklyn Legal Services Corporation A, a nonprofitnon-profit which provides legal services for low income families in Brooklyn, and of Southside United /Los Sures, which mission is maintaining and improving housing in the Williamsburg community for those of low and moderate income.Brooklyn. Mr. Mahon is a member of the Financial Managers Society, the National Investor Relations Institute and the National Association of Corporate Directors.  Prior to joining the Bank in 1980, Mr. Mahon served in similar capacity at two New York metropolitan area savings banks.  He is a graduate of Saint Peter’s University, and has an M.B.A. in finance from Rutgers University.

 

Mr. Martin is chairman, presidentChairman and chief executive officerChief Executive Officer of Provident Financial Services, Inc. and FHLBNY member Provident Bank, New Jersey’s oldest state-chartered bank.  He was first elected as Chairman in 2010, Chief Executive Officer in 2009, and served as President from 2004 through mid-2020. He has been in the banking industry for over 3435 years.  Mr. Martin previously served as president and chief executive officer of First Sentinel Bancorp, Inc., which was acquired by Provident Financial Services, Inc. in July 2004.  Beginning with First Sentinel in 1984 as controller, Mr. Martin advanced and was appointed president of First Sentinel Bancorp and its subsidiary, First Savings Bank, in 2003.  Prior to his banking career, Mr. Martin worked for Johnson & Johnson in inventory control and as a financial analyst.  Mr. Martin servespreviously served on the board of directors of the New Jersey Bankers Association.  In addition, he servesserved on the Federal Reserve Community Depository Institutions Advisory Council and the ICBA’s Large Community Bank Council.  He also dedicates much of his spare time helping to improve the community.  Mr. Martin is a vice president of The 200 Club of Middlesex County, which provides financial assistance and scholarships to families of law enforcement, fire and public safety officials.  He serves on the board of trustees and the executive committee of Elon University, and is a past president of the alumni board.  Mr. Martin volunteers at local food pantries and Habitat for Humanity build sites.  He also spends time teaching financial literacy to high school students at inner city schools.  Mr. Martin is president of The Provident Bank Foundation, which, since its founding in 2003, has provided more than $22$24 million in grants for programs focusing on community enrichment, education, and health, youth and families in New Jersey and Pennsylvania.  Mr. Martin has been honored for his philanthropic endeavors as a recipient of the New Jersey State Governor’s Jefferson Awards for Public Service, has been honored by the National MS Society, the American Jewish Committee, The Scholarship Fund for Inner-City Children, Habitat for Humanity, Boys and Girls Club of America, Project Live and Felician College.  Mr. Martin received a bachelor’s degree in accounting and business from Elon University and holds a MBA from Monmouth University.

 

Mr. Mroz has a long career in law, government, and public service. His experiences are as a regulator, lawyer, lobbyist and consultant. He is Managing Director, and Founding Member, of Haddonfield,Resolute Strategies, LLC, a regulatory and public affairs consulting business based in New Jersey was nominatedand also is affiliated with Archer Public Affair in Trenton, NJ and Washington, DC. He provides regulatory and strategic advice to clients on issues including energy markets, energy industry technologies, cybersecurity, water & wastewater policy, and infrastructure development and financing. He continues to provide public service having been appointed in July 2018 by New Jersey Governor Chris ChristieEnergy Secretary Rick Perry as a member of the U.S. Department of Energy Electric Advisory Committee, which provides advice to the Department regarding modernizing the nation’s electricity delivery infrastructure. Mr. Mroz is also Senior Advisor to Protect Our Power, a national non-profit advocacy organization seeking to advance protective measures, best practices and investments for cybersecurity, an issue on September 18, 2014which he regularly is called up to comment at educational forums and confirmed byin media interviews. He is the immediate past President of the New Jersey State Senate on September 22, 2014 to serve on New Jersey’s Board of Public Utilities (“BPU”) as that Board’s President.  His service as President and(NJBPU), serving as chairman and chief administrative officer of the agency and functioning as well as his service as memberthe chief energy officer for New Jersey. He was President of the Governor’s Cabinet, commenced onNJBPU from October 6, 2014 until January 2018, and continued through January 2018.  Mr. Mroz continues to serveremained as a Commissioner onuntil April 2018. Prior to becoming President of the BPU, which is the state agency that oversees utilities that provide natural gas, electricity, water, telecommunicationsNJBPU, he worked in private practice as a lawyer and cable television services.  Before his appointment, he was a government and public affairs consultant and lawyer.  Most recently, he was, from October 1, 2013 through October 3, 2014,lobbyist as Managing Director of Archer Public Affairs LLC, a governmental and external relations firm which is an affiliate of the law firm of Archer & Greiner.  Prior to this, he was, since July 1, 2000, the sole proprietor of a government and public affairs consulting business.  From January 1, 2007 until December 2009, he also served as President of Salmon Ventures, Ltd, a non-legal government, regulatory and public affairs consulting firm.  Mr. Mroz represented clients in New Jersey and nationally in connection with legislative, regulatory and business development affairs.  Mr. Mroz, as a governmental affairs agent, was an advocate for clients in the utility, real estate, insurance and banking industries for federal, state, and local regulatory, administrative, and legislative matters.  In his law practice, he concentrated on real estate, corporate and regulatory issues.  In this regard, Mr. Mroz was, from March 1, 2011 to October 3, 2014, Of Counsel to the law firm of Archer & Greiner.  From April 1, 2007 through the end of February 2011, he was Of Counsel to Archer & Greiner P.C., in Haddonfield, New Jersey. Previous New Jersey-related government service includes serving as the law firm of Gruccio, Pepper, DeSanto & Ruth.  Mr. Mroz has a distinguished record of community and public service.  He is the former Chief Counsel to New Jersey Governor Christine Todd Whitman, serving in that position in 1999 and 2000.  Prior to that, he served in various capacities in the Whitman Administration, including Special Counsel, Director of the Authorities, and member of the Governor’s Transition Team.  He served as County Counselfull time Solicitor for Camden County, New Jersey from 1991 to 1994.  In 2012, Mr. Mroz was appointed by New Jersey Governor Christie to serveand as commissioner ona Commissioner of the Delaware River & Bay Authority the bi-state agency which owns and, operates the Delaware Memorial Bridge, Cape May-Lewes Ferry and several airports in the New Jersey — Delaware region.  Mr. Mroz also has been active in community affairs,notably, as Chief Counsel to Governor Christine Todd Whitman after serving in the past on the board of directors for the New Jersey Alliance for Action and asvarious capacities in her Administration. He is a board member and past chairmangraduate of the Volunteers for America,University of Delaware, Valley.  Mr. Mroz also served as former counsel toand holds a J.D. from the New Jersey ConferenceVillanova School of Mayors, the Delaware River Bay Authority and the Atlantic City Hotel and Lodging Association.  Mr. Mroz’sLaw. The legal and regulatory experience of Mr. Mroz, as indicated by his background described above, supportsupports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.


Mr. Nasca is President and Chief Executive Officer of Evans Bancorp, Inc. and FHLBNY member Evans Bank, N.A., a nationally chartered bank and wholly-owned subsidiary of Evans Bancorp.  He joined the management teamEvans Bank as Director in September 2006, President in December 2006, and CEO in April 2007, bringing over 30 years of experience in the Western New York banking and financial services industry.2007.  Prior to joining Evans Bank, Mr. Nasca spent 11 years at First Niagara Financial Group serving as Executive Vice President of Strategic Initiatives, where he was integrally involved in the development of strategic plans for the organization, implementation of First Niagara’s merger and acquisition efforts and management of its enterprise-wide risk management program.  While at First Niagara, Mr. Nasca also served as President and CEO of its commercial banking subsidiary, Cayuga Bank, shortly after it was acquired by First Niagara, as well as Regional President in Central New York.  Previous to that role, he served as First Niagara’s Senior Vice President and Treasurer.   Mr. Nasca has interacted with the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York for over 30 years in his various roles pertaining to treasury management.  He earned his MBA in Finance from the State University of New York at Buffalo and a BS in Management/Marketing from Canisius College. Mr. Nasca is a member of the Board of Directors of the Independent Bankers Association of New York State, andhaving previously served as a member of the Board of Directors and President (2012 - 2013), and is a member of the New York Bankers Association, and servedserving as the Chair (2011 - 2012) and Vice-Chair (2010 - 2011) of the New York Bankers Association Service Corporation.  Mr. Nasca was a member of the Board of Directors of the New York Business Development Corporation from 20122011 to January 2015. Mr. Nasca has extensiveis also involved in his community involvementon several Boards, including serving as a board memberTrustee of the Buffalo Niagara Partnership; Lifetime Healthcare Companies Board of Directors; Univera Healthcare Advisory Board; Catholic Charities Board of Trustees,Canisius College and served as Chair of Catholic Charities’ Annual Diocesan Appeal in 2011 and Corporate Campaign Chair 2008-2010.  He is also a member of the BoardBusiness Advisory Council of Trustees of Canisius College and theits Richard J. Wehle School of Business, Advisory Board.and as a Board Member of The Lifetime Healthcare Companies (Excellus BCBS), Brothers of Mercy, Inc (Continuing Care Community), the Buffalo Urban Development Corporation and the Buffalo Niagara Partnership.

 

Ms. Raffaeli serves as CEO and Managing Director of the Hamilton White Group, LLC, and Soho Venture Partners Inc. and affiliates, an investment and advisory firm with New York State and Arizona affiliates dedicated to assisting companies to grow their businesses, pursue new markets and acquire capital.  Focusing on the financial, education and technology services marketplaces, Ms. Raffaeli brings over 30 years of experience in financial management, strategic planning, marketing, revenue-enhancement and asset redeployment to global businesses.  In addition, she has substantial experience assisting businesses with operations, technology, human resources and risk management challenges. She has worked with a variety of firms from start-ups to billion-dollar businesses, leading or assisting in maximizing the opportunities of their marketplace. While at Hamilton White, from 2004 to 2006, she was also the President and Chief Executive Officer of UNext and the Cardean Learning Group. From 1998 to 2002 she served as the President and Chief Executive Officer of Proact Technologies, Inc. and its predecessor Consumer Financial Network. During the first half of her career, Ms. Raffaeli served in a variety of traditional, large-corporate positions including the Executive Director of the Commercial Card Division of Citicorp a global, fully integrated business serving business customers with innovative payment products. She also held key executive positions in Citicorp’s Global Transaction Services and was a Senior Vice President in the Mortgage Banking Division. Ms. Raffaeli was a former Senior Vice President of Chemical Bank, now JPMorgan Chase, where she was responsible for New York retail mortgage and national telemarketing lending. Prior to that she was with Merrill Lynch, Emery Worldwide and Continental Group. Ms. Raffaeli serves on the Board of Standard Life Aberdeen PLC, a global investment and asset management company, where she serves on the Renumeration and Risk and Capital Committee. She also currently serves on two university and college boards and is Chairman of the Education Foundation. She previously served on the Board of Directors of E*Trade holding the leadership positions of Lead Director and Chairman of the Compensation Committee. She also served on the Board of American Home Financial Corporation from 1998 through 2010. She currently serves on two university and college boards and is Chairman of the Education Foundation.  Ms. Raffaeli graduated, with honors, from NYU with an MBA. Ms. Raffaeli’s financial and other management experience, as indicated by her background described above, supportsupported her qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director. Her service on the FHLBNY’s Board ended on December 31, 2020 due to term limits.

 

Mr. RedmanRomaine joinedhas served as Chairman of FHLBNY member AstoriaTompkins Trust Company (“TTC”) since May 2014 and as a Director, President and Chief Executive Officer of TTC’s holding company, Tompkins Financial Corporation (“TFC”), since January 1, 2007. He had previously served as President and Chief Executive Officer of Bank (formerly Astoria Federal Savings and Loan Association) in 1977 and during his tenure served in various accounting, investment and treasury positions, includingmember Mahopac Bank from January 1, 2003 through December 31, 2006. Prior to that appointment, Mr. Romaine was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Mahopac National Bank. In addition to his service with TTC and Chief Operating Officer, ultimately serving, beginning in July 2011,TFC, Mr. Romaine serves as Presidenta director on the boards of TTC affiliates and Chief Executive Officer and a Director of AstoriaBank members Mahopac Bank and its holding company, Astoria Financial Corporation. On October 2, 2017, Astoria Financial Corporation merged into Sterling National Bancorp and AstoriaThe Bank merged into FHLBNY member Sterling National Bank, andof Castile. Mr. Redman joined both Sterling Bancorp and Sterling National Bank’sRomaine currently serves on the Board of Directors. A Magna Cum Laude graduate ofthe New York Institute of Technology (NYIT) with a degree in accounting, Mr. Redman also servesBankers Association, and served as its Chairman from March 2016 through March 2017. His civic involvement includes recent service as a member of NYIT’s Board of Trustees. Mr. Redman has provided leadership to several professional banking organizations.  In addition to previously serving as the President of the Nassau/Suffolk Chapter of the Financial Managers Society, he is a former instructor and chapter officer of the Institute of Financial Education, a prior member of the Accounting and Tax Committee of the Community Bankers Association of New York State and a former Director of the New York State Bankers Association.  Mr. Redman is also a Director and former Chairman of the Board of Directors of the Tourette Association of America which under his leadership has helped influence legislation, furthered education and supported cutting-edge research.  His work in the community has been recognized by such organizations as St. Francis College, Variety Child Learning Center, Quality Services for the Autism Community, Queens Botanical Garden, Queens Council Boy Scouts of America, Queens Theatre in the Park, Queens Chamber of Commerce, The Safe Center LI, SCO Family of ServicesIthaca Aviation Heritage Foundation and the American Heart Association.Tompkins Cortland Community College Foundation.

 


Rev. Reed is the founder and CEO of GGT Development LLC, a company which started in May of 2009.  The strategic plan of the corporation focuses on the successful implementation of housing and community development projects, including affordable housing projects, schools, and multi-purpose facilities.  Additionally, he pastors a church which has a feeding program of more than ten thousand monthly.  He has been involved in development projects totaling more than $125 million.  He also is co-owner of Safonique, a natural laundry detergent, that is sold on the east coast in Wal-Mart, Shoprite and on Amazon.com.  As a community developer, he is engaged primarily in uplifting communities by serving the elderly, community revitalization and accessing programs that will provide a foundation for growth.  He formerly served as Chief Executive Officer of the Greater Allen Development Corporation from

July 2007 through March 2009, and previously was the Chief Financial Officer of Greater Allen AME Cathedral, located in Jamaica, Queens, New York, from 1996 to July 2007.  From 1996 to 2009, Rev. Reed was responsible for building and securing financing for over $60 million of affordable, senior, and commercial development projects.  At GGT Development LLC, Rev. Reed continues a focus on broad based neighborhood revitalization affordable housing projects, mixed use commercial/residential projects, and other development opportunities.  In 1986, Rev. Reed served as the campaign manager for Rev. Floyd H. Flake.  From 1987 to 1996, Rev. Reed served as the Congressional Chief of Staff for Congressman Flake and was involved in the legislative process and debate during the formation of FIRREA.  Prior to becoming involved in public policy, Rev. Reed managed the $6 billion liquid asset portfolio for General Motors and was a financial analyst for Chevrolet, Oldsmobile, Pontiac, Cadillac, Buick and GM of Canada.  Rev. Reed gained his initial financial experience as a banker at First Tennessee Bank in Memphis, Tennessee.  Rev. Reed earned a Masters of Business Administration from Harvard Business School, a Bachelor of Business Administration from Memphis State University and a Masters of Divinity at Virginia Union University.  He currently serves on the following organizations in the following positions: Board of Trustees, Hofstra University; Secretary/Treasurer, Outreach Project; and Board Member, Wheelchair Charities.  Rev. Reed pastors Morris Brown AME Church in Queens New York. Rev. Reed’s experience in representing community interests in housing, as indicated by his background described above, supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as a public interest director and Independent Director.

Dr. Soarieshas served as the Senior Pastor of First Baptist Church of Lincoln Gardens (“FBCLG”) in Somerset, New Jersey since November 1990.  His pastoral ministry focuses on spiritual growth, educational excellence, economic empowerment, and faith-based community development.  As a pioneer of faith-based community development, Dr. Soaries’ impact on FBCLG and the community has been tremendous. In 1992, he founded the Central Jersey Community Development Corporation (“CJCDC”), a 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that specializes in helping vulnerable neighborhoods. In 1996, the CJCDC launched Harvest of Hope Family Services Network, Inc.  This organization seeks to develop permanent solutions for foster children and parents. From 1999 to 2002, Dr. Soaries served as New Jersey’s Secretary of State, making him the first African-American male to do so.  He also served as the former chairman of the United States Election Assistance Commission, which was established by Congress to implement the “Help America Vote Act” of 2002.  In 2005, Dr. Soaries launched the dfree® dfree® Financial Freedom Movement.  The dfree® strategy teaches people how to break free from debt.  In 2011, Dr. Soaries wrote his first book: “dfree®: Breaking Free from Financial Slavery” (Zondervan), which highlights his top 12 keys to debt-free living.  Dr. Soaries currently serves as an Independent Director at Independence Realty Trust, a position he has held since February 2011.  In January 2015, he became aan Independent Director of Ocwen Financial Corporation.  He is chair of the Compensation Committees at both public companies. In July 2020, he became a Director of Uncommon Giving, a company formed to help increase charitable giving by connecting people and nonprofits. Dr. Soaries earned a Bachelor of Arts Degree from Fordham University, a Master of Divinity Degree from Princeton Theological Seminary, and a Doctor of Ministry Degree from United Theological Seminary. Dr. Soaries resides in Monmouth Junction, New Jersey with his wife, Donna, and twin sons. Dr. Soaries’ project development experience, as indicated by his background described above, supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.Director and a public interest director.

 

Mr. Vázquez was named in 2013 as Chief Financial Officer of Popular Inc. (Popular), a financial holding company composed of two principal subsidiaries: Puerto Rico’s largest bank, FHLBNY member Banco Popular de Puerto Rico (BPPR), and a US-mainland operation, Banco Popular North America (BPNA)Bank (PB).  Popular Inc. is a NASDACNASDAQ listed and SEC registered company (ticker: BPOP), presently the 41st40st largest financial holding company in the United States with assets just over $40 Billion,$65 billion, principally supervised by the Federal Reserve Bank of NY. From 2010 to 2014, Mr. Vázquez served as President of BPNA.PB. Mr. Vázquez joined Popular, Inc. as Executive Vice President in March 1997 to establish and head Popular’s first-ever Risk Management Group, which included the Credit Risk Management, Audit, Corporate Compliance, Operational Risk Management, and the Risk Management MIS Divisions.  From 2004 through 2010 he headed Popular’s Consumer Lending Group for Puerto Rico, responsible: forresponsible for: personal loans, credit cards, overdraft lines-of-credit, the mortgage origination and servicing business via Popular Mortgage; as well as the auto, marine and equipment financing business via Popular Auto.  Before joining Popular, Inc., Mr. Vázquez spent fifteen years in a variety of corporate finance, capital markets and banking positions with JP Morgan & Co. Inc. During the two years prior to his joining Popular, Inc., he was Senior Banker and Region Manager for JP Morgan’s business in Colombia, Venezuela, Central America and the Caribbean. Mr. Vázquez serves as Senior Executive Vice President of BPPR. He is also an Executive Vice President of Popular Inc.;Popular; a member of Popular Inc.’sPopular’s Senior Management Council; as welland serves as a member of itsPopular’s Credit Strategy Committee and is the head of its Asset & Liability Management Committee. In addition, he is a member of the Board of Directors of Banco Popular de Puerto Rico, Banco Popular North America,BPPR, PB, Popular Securities Inc. and Vice Chairman of the Banco Popular Foundation. He also serves on the national Advisory Board of Directors of Operation Hope, a national non-for-profit focusing on financial literacy.  Finally, he is a member of the Advisory Committee to the Dean of the School of Engineering at his alma matter, the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute.  Previously, Mr. Vázquez served as a member of the board of directors for the Puerto Rico Community Foundation, the largest community foundation in the Caribbean; where he headed the Audit and Investment Committees. He was a director of Teatro de la Opera, a non-for-profit entity dedicated to the promotion of opera. He also contributed to various educational institutions in Puerto Rico, serving as a member of the board of trustees of the Saint John’s School and a member of the Development Committee for Colegio San Ignacio de Loyola. Mr. Vázquez holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering, with an economics minor, from the Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, New York; from which he graduated on the Dean’s List and as a member and officer of Chi Epsilon, the National Civil Engineering Honor Society. He also holds a Masters in Business Administration from Harvard University’s Graduate School of Business, Boston, Massachusetts.


Ms. Weyne was the Commissioner of lnsurance for the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico from January 2013 through December 2016, appointed by former Governor Alejandro Garcia Padilla. While Commissioner, Ms. Weyne served as Vice President of the board member of the Puerto Rico State Insurance Fund Corporation and of the Puerto Rico Health Insurance Administration, and she presided over the board of the Puerto Rico Automobile Accident Compensation Administration. She was also a member of various committees of the National Association of Insurance Commissioners.Commissioners and also a member of the Association of Latin American Insurance Superintendents Association.  Ms. Weyne’s accomplishments during her 40 years of experience in the insurance sector, which started as an actuary in the Office of the Commissioner of Insurance, have included management ofpresiding a premium finance company, management of a claims adjusting firm, a managing general agent of which she later became owner, and presidencies of both life and ofdisability and property and casualty companies and the presidency of the largest bank owned insurance agency in Puerto Rico. She was also president of the first reinsurance company incorporated in Puerto Rico and served as president of two health maintenance organizations. Ms. Weyne received her bachelor’s degree in mathematics from the University of Puerto Rico.Rico, where she also taught mathematics.  Among the entities where she has served as a board member are the Puerto Rico Chamber of Commerce, the Puerto Rico Association of Insurance Companies, the Universidad Central del Caribe, and the Trust of the Supreme Court of Puerto Rico, the Puerto Rico Chapter of the World Presidents Organization as well as the Tourism Scholarship Foundation and the School of Architecture of the University of Puerto Rico.  She has also received numerous awards and recognitions such as the Top Management Award from the Sales and Marketing Association of Puerto Rico, Outstanding Woman in Business Award from the Puerto Rico Chamber of Commerce, Outstanding Woman Award from the Girl Scouts of America, and Successful Woman of the Year Award from El Nuevo Dia Newspaper.  She was also named National Judge for the Ernst & Young Entrepreneur of the Year Award program.  Presently, Ms. Weyne is a consultant and serves as a member of the advisory board of Rafael J. Nido, Inc,Inc., and as a member of the board of directors of Friends of El Yunque Foundation and of MMM Foundation. Ms. Weyne’s organizational and financial management experience, as indicated by her background described above, supports her qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.

Information about our Executive Officers

 

The following sets forth the executive officers of the FHLBNY who served during 20172020 and as of the date of this annual report. We have determined that our executive officers are those officers who are members of our internal Management Committee. All officers are “at will” employees and do not serve for a fixed term.

 

Management

Management

Age as of

Employee of

Committee

Executive Officer

Position held as of 3/20/18

19/21

3/20/2018

19/2021

Bank Since

Member Since

José R. González

President & Chief Executive Officer

63

66

10/15/13

10/15/13

Eric P. Amig

Stephen C. Angelo

Senior Vice President, & Head of Bank Relations

Chief Audit Officer

59

53

02/01/93

09/22/08

01/01/09

07/12/16

Stephen C. Angelo

Edwin Artuz

Senior Vice President, & Chief Audit Officer

50

09/22/08

07/12/16

Edwin Artuz

Senior Vice President & Head of Corporate Services and Director of Diversity and Inclusion

56

59

03/01/89

01/01/13

Melody J. Feinberg

Senior Vice President, & Chief Risk Officer

55

58

10/17/11

01/01/15

G. Robert Fusco *

Adam Goldstein

Senior Vice President, CIO & Head of Enterprise Services

Chief Business Officer

59

47

03/02/87

07/14/97

05/01/09

03/20/08

Adam Goldstein

Kevin M. Neylan

Senior Vice President, & Chief BusinessFinancial Officer

44

63

07/14/97

04/30/01

03/20/08

03/31/04

Paul B. Héroux

Deborah Cynthia R. Palladino

Senior Vice President, & Chief Banking Operations Officer

Head of Affordable Housing and Community Investment

59

64

02/27/84

06/01/10

03/31/04

10/01/19

Kevin M. Neylan

Michael L. Radziemski

Senior Vice President, & Chief FinancialInformation Officer

60

59

04/30/01

07/15/19

03/31/04

01/01/20

Philip A. Scott

Senior Vice President, & Chief Capital Markets Officer

59

62

08/28/06

09/03/14

Jonathan R. West

Michael A. Volpe*

Senior Vice President, &Head of Bank Operations

5312/22/8610/01/19
Jonathan R. WestSenior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer

61

64

05/01/15

05/01/15

 


*Left employment 1/8/93;7/25/98; rehired 5/10/93.23/06.

 

Mr. González was appointed President and CEO of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York on April 2, 2014. Mr. González joined the FHLBNY on October 15, 2013, as Executive Vice President.  Mr. González served as Vice Chairman of the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY from 2008 through 2013, and as an elected industry director from 2004 through 2013.  Prior to joining the FHLBNY, he served as Senior Executive Vice President, Banking & Corporate Development for OFG Bancorp (formerly Oriental Financial Group, Inc.). Mr. González has also been a member of the Board of Directors of the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions since July 2014. OnFrom August 31, 2016 to August 31, 2020, Mr. González wasserved as one of the eight directors appointed by President Barack Obama to serve as one of the eight directors of the Oversight Board created by the Puerto Rico Oversight, Management, and Economic Stability Act (“PROMESA”) of 2016. Mr. González was a member of the Board of Directors of Santander BanCorp (“Santander”), a bank holding company, from 2000 to 2010.  From 2002 to 2008, he was Vice Chairman of the Board, President and CEO of Santander.  After joining Santander in 1996 as President and CEO of its securities broker dealer, Mr. González was named Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the holding company in 2001. Mr. González began his career in banking in the early 1980s as Vice President, Investment Banking, for Credit Suisse First Boston (“CSFB”) and, from 1989 through 1995, served as President and CEO of CSFB’s Puerto Rico operations.  He served as President and CEO of the Government Development Bank for Puerto Rico, a government instrumentality that acts as the Commonwealth’s fiscal agent, from 1986 to 1989.  He is a past President of both the Puerto Rico Bankers Association and the Securities Industry Association of Puerto Rico. Mr. González holds a B.A. in Economics from Yale University and M.B.A. and Juris Doctor degrees from Harvard University.

 


Mr. Amig joined us as Director of Bank Relations in February 1993.  In January of 2009 he was named Senior Vice President and Head of Bank Relations.  From January 1985 through January 1993, he was a senior officer at the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development; during this time he served as Special Assistant to the Deputy Secretary from 1990 to 1993.  Mr. Amig has also served as a legislative aide to the President Pro Tempore of the Pennsylvania Senate and was the Executive Director of the Federal/State Relations Committee of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives.  Mr. Amig received his undergraduate degree in Political Science from Albright College (Reading, PA).

Mr. Angelo joined the Bank as Chief Audit Officer in September 2008.  In this role, he oversees the activities of the Internal Audit Department, which provides independent, objective assurance and consulting services designed to add value and improve the Bank’s operations, and heoperations. He is also responsible for providing support to the Audit Committee of the Bank’s Board of Directors, in connection with matters related to internal controls.  Mr. Angelo was appointed to the Management Committee in July 2016.  Mr. Angelo holds an M.B.A. in Finance and a B.S. in Accounting, both from New York University’s Stern School of Business.  He is a Certified Public Accountant and is a member of the AICPAAmerican Institute of CPAs and NYSSCPAthe New York State Society of CPAs as well as the Institute of Internal Auditors.  Mr. Angelo began his career as an associate auditor with Coopers & Lybrand, and then held positions of increasing responsibilities in internal audit roles at Bankers Trust Company and Bear, Stearns & Co.

 

Mr. Artuz has served as Head of Corporate Services and Director of Diversity & Inclusion since July 1, 2014.  In August 1, 2000, he was named Director of Human Resources; he was named as a Senior Vice President on January 1, 2013.  Mr. Artuz directs the management of the Bank’s Office of Minority and Women Inclusion in the areas of Human Resources, Procurement and education and outreach to ensure that regulatory requirements are met and exceeded.  Mr. Artuz also provides overall leadership, strategic direction, and oversight for all of the Bank’s human resources activities and operations.  These activities and operations include the areas of employment, compensation, benefits, employee relations, employee and organizational training and development, performance management, succession planning, employee communications, and external and internal Human Resources information systems services.  Mr. Artuz has the significant responsibility of providing support to the Compensation & Human Resources Committee of the Bank’s Board of Directors in connection with matters related to executive compensation and benefits.  Mr. Artuz also provides strategic direction and leadership to the organization’s Corporate Real Estate departments to ensure efficient and effective management of the firm’s physical resources.  From January 1996 through December 1996, Mr. Artuz served as

Assistant Vice President, Administrative Services and from January 1997 through July 2000, Mr. Artuz served as Vice President, Administrative Services.  In this capacity, Mr. Artuz managed the Human Resources function as well as each of the following: Purchasing; Telecommunications; Facilities; Mailroom Services; Security; Reception; Insurance; and Record Retention.  Mr. Artuz holds a graduate degree from New York University in Human Resources Management and an undergraduate degree in History from the College of Staten Island.  Prior to joining the Bank in 1989, Mr. Artuz held positions at Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom; Dillon, Read & Co.; and the Dime Savings Bank of New York.

 

Ms. Feinberg has served as Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer since March 1, 2017.  Ms. Feinberg previously served as Senior Vice President and Acting Chief Risk Officer from July 8, 2016 through February 28, 2017, and Senior Vice President and Deputy Chief Risk Officer from January 1, 2015 through July 7, 2016.  In her current role, Ms. Feinberg oversees the Bank’s Enterprise-wide Risk Management practice.practice and serves as the Bank’s Compliance Officer.  This role encompasses Financial Risk Management;Management and Credit Policy and Review; Credit and Collateral Risk Analytics; Credit Risk; Collateral Risk; Model Risk; Operational Risk Management; Model Risk Management;Risk; Technology Risk; and Compliance.  She is a member of the Bank’s Management Committee and serves on many of the FHLBNY’s internal committees, including chairing the Enterprise Risk Committee. She also serves as the primary contact for the Bank’s regulator, the Federal Housing Financing Agency. Ms. Feinberg joined the Bank in October 2011 as the Director of Finance.  In that capacity, she was responsible for all aspects of the Bank’s finance functions, including advisory on business initiatives, funding and investment decisions, capital planning, tax and regulatory issues, etc.  Ms. Feinberg began her career as a CPA with Ernst & Young, and then held positions of increasing responsibilities in accounting and finance roles at three investment banks, namely, JP Morgan Chase, HSBC and Goldman Sachs over the course of 18 years.  She earned an M.B.A. in Finance from Drexel University and a B.S. in Accounting from The College of New Jersey, both Magna Cum Laude.  She is a graduate of the RMA Wharton Advanced Risk Management Program and holds a PRMIA Market, Liquidity, and Asset Liability Management Certification.  She is a member of the NYSCPA, AICPA and AICPA.the PRMIA Market, Liquidity and Asset Liability Management Risk Leader Group.

 

Mr. Fusco was named Chief Information Officer (“CIO”) in 2008 and took on the additional role of Head of Enterprise Services in 2009.  In that role, Mr. Fusco directsdirected and overseesoversaw all of the Bank’s technology functions and Bank programs for information security, project management, records management, vendor management and business continuity.  He iswas also Chairman of the Bank’s internal Operational Risk Committee.Committee from 2011 through 2019.  Mr. Fusco has been with the Bank since March 1987.  During his 30-year33 year tenure, he has held various management positions in Information Technology, including IT Director starting in 2000 and Chief Technology Officer starting in 2006.  Mr. Fusco received an undergraduate degree from the State University of New York at Stony Brook.  He has earned numerous post-graduate technical and management certifications throughout his career, and is a graduate of the American Bankers Association National Graduate School of Banking.  Prior to joining the Bank, Mr. Fusco held positions at Citicorp and the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. Mr. Fusco retired from the Bank at the end of the first quarter of 2020. As part of the transition plan, he relinquished the CIO position at the end of 2019 and served as the Special Advisor to the CEO until his retirement.

 


Mr. Goldstein was named Chief Business Officer in December of 2015.  In this role, he leads the sales, marketingSales, Marketing, Membership and researchResearch activities for all business lines.  In addition, he manages the Bank’sFHLBNY’s Mortgage Partnership Finance® Program, Mortgage Asset Program and Member Service Desk.  Mr. Goldstein previously served as the Head of Sales, Business Development and Marketing.  Mr. Goldstein joined us in June 1997 and has held a number of key positions in our Sales and Marketingbusiness areas.  He has been a member of the Bank’sFHLBNY’s Management Committee since 2008.  He serves on many of the FHLB System Committees and is the Chairman of the GSIB Task Force. He also serves on many of the FHLBNY’s internal Committees and created the Products, Services and Membership Committee.  He is a co-sponsor leading the FHLBNY’s Strategic Planning process, where he assists with the development and implementation of the strategic plan and new initiatives. He leads the In-District Regulatory outreach efforts. He speaks at a variety of trade conventions and conferences and also provides training for regulatory agencies and bond investors. In addition to an undergraduate degree from the SUNY College at Oneonta and an M.B.A. in Financial Marketing from SUNY Binghamton University, Mr. Goldstein has received post-graduate program certifications in Business Excellence from Columbia University, in Management Development from Cornell University, in Management Practices from New York University, and in Finance from The New York Institute of Finance.Finance and in Management Excellence from the Harvard University School of Business.  He is also a trustee on the Board of the Kennedy Child Study Center and Chairman of their Audit Committee.

 

Mr. Héroux was named Chief Bank Operations Officer and Community Investment Officer in December 2015.  In this role, he oversees several functions, including Credit and Correspondent Services, Collateral Services and Community Investment/Affordable Housing Operations.  Prior to this, he was Head of Member Services from 2004 to 2015.  Mr. Héroux joined the Bank in 1984 as a Human Resources Generalist and served as the Director of Human Resources from 1988 to 1990.  During his tenure, he has held other key positions including Chief Credit Officer and Director of Financial Operations.  He received an undergraduate degree from St. Bonaventure University and is a graduate of the Columbia Senior Executive Program as well as the ABA Stonier National Graduate School of Banking.  Prior to joining us, Mr. Héroux held positions at Merrill Lynch & Co. and E.F. Hutton & Co.

Mr. Neylan became Chief Financial Officer on March 30, 2012.  Mr. Neylan is responsible for overseeing the Bank’s Accounting, Management Reporting and Strategic Planning and Asset Liability Modeling and Strategy functions.  He has held several positions with strategic planning, finance and administrative responsibilities since joining us in April 2001.  Immediately prior to becoming the CFO, Mr. Neylan was the Head of Strategy and Finance, and served as the Head of Strategy and Business Development from January 2009 through December 2011.  Mr. Neylan had approximately twenty years of experience in the financial services industry prior to joining the Bank, and was previously a partner in the financial services consulting group of one of the Big Four accounting firms.  He holds ana M.S. in corporate strategy from the MIT Sloan School of Management and a B.S. in management from St. John’s University (NY).

 

Ms. Palladino was named Senior Vice President and Head of Affordable Housing and Community Investment in October 2019 and is responsible for oversight of the Bank’s affordable housing and community lending programs and initiatives. Ms. Palladino previously served as Vice President and Director of Collateral and Affordable Housing Services from July 2016 through September 2019. Prior to that, she served as Vice President holding the functional titles of Director of Collateral Analytical Services (February 2012 – June 2016) and Director of Loan Review Analysis (June 2010 – January 2012). Ms. Palladino joined the Bank in June of 2010. Prior to joining the Bank, Ms. Palladino held various management positions at GMAC Mortgage Corporation and Home Savings of America. She holds an M.B.A. in Finance from Long Island University and a B.A. in Communications from William Smith College. 

Mr. Radziemski was named Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer on January 1, 2020. In this role, he directs and oversees several functions including Information Technology, Information Security, Business Continuity Planning, Vendor Management, and Records Management. Mr. Radziemski joined the FHLBNY in July 2019 as Deputy Chief Information Officer. Prior to joining the FHLBNY, he spent over 30 years working in information technology in the financial services industry, including senior technology leadership roles at Bankers Trust, MetLife, CitiGroup, and Lord, Abbett & Co., LLC (Lord Abbett). His last full-time role before joining the FHLBNY was as Chief Information Officer at Lord Abbett, from March 2003 until July 2016. After Lord Abbett, he did management consulting work as a Partner for Fortium Partners from July of 2017 until joining the FHLBNY. He received a B.Sc. in Operations Research and Industrial Engineering from Cornell University, and a M.S. in Industrial Engineering from Stanford University.

Mr. Scott was named Chief Capital Markets Officer in September 2014, after serving as Director of Trading in the Capital Markets department, managing debt issuance and advance positions.department.  He is responsible for all facets of balance sheet management including the Bank’s investments portfolio, advances position, funding,liquidity and debt issuance.  He has served as the FHLBank representative to the Federal Reserve-sponsored committee on Libor replacement, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee, also known as “ARRC”, since 2017.  Mr. Scott joined the Bank’s Capital Markets department in August of 2006, following 23 years of experience in the markets and on Wall Street where he was a trader and desk manager for interest rate products at Citibank, Deutsche Bank, and Credit Lyonnais.  He received a Bachelor’s Degree in Economics from Tufts University and holds a Master’s degree in Finance and Economics from the Kellogg School of Management at Northwestern University.

194

Mr. Volpe was named Senior Vice President and Head of Bank Operations in October 2019. In this role, he directs and oversees several functions, including Credit and Collateral Operations, Correspondent Services, Custody and Pledging Services, Business Process and Project Support, and Electronic Payments. Mr. Volpe previously served as First Vice President and Director of Bank Operations from January 2019 through September 2019. Prior to that, he served as Vice President beginning in October 2006, holding several functional titles during that time, including Director of Bank Operations (December 2018); Director of Member Services Operations (April 2015 – November 2018); Director of Collateral and Correspondent Services (February 2012 – April 2015); and Director of Collateral Operations (October 2006 – January 2012). He joined the FHLBNY in January 1989 and later took an eight year hiatus, from 1998 to 2006, where he held various positions at The Bank of New York. He received a B.S. in Finance and M.B.A. in International Finance from St. John’s University (NY), and is also a graduate of the ABA Stonier Graduate School of Banking.

Mr. West assumed the role of Senior Vice President, Chief Legal Officer for the Bank on May 1, 2015.  Mr. West left the Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis (FHLBI) on December 31, 2014 having served as its Executive Vice President - Chief Operating Officer - Business Operations since July 30, 2010.  He was appointed by the FHLBI’s Board to serve as Acting Co-President - CEO from April through July 2013.  From 1994 to 2010, Mr. West served as Senior Vice President - Administration, General Counsel, Corporate Secretary & Ethics Officer, having started with the FHLBI in July 1985 as Associate Legal Counsel.  From 1983 to 1985, Mr. West was an Associate with the Indianapolis, Indiana law firm of White & Raub and practiced in the areas of insurance and corporate law.  Mr. West is a Phi Beta Kappa, B.A. with Distinction graduate in political science and psychology from Indiana University’s College of Arts and Sciences, and earned an M.B.A from Indiana University Kelley School of Business and a J.D. from Indiana University School of Law - Indianapolis.  Mr. West is licensed to practice law in the state of Indiana and is registered to serve as In-House Counsel in the state of New York.  Mr. West is a Member of the American Bar Association, and serves on its business law committee and its derivatives, futures and securitizations section.


Section 16 (a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance

 

In accordance with correspondence from the Office of Chief Counsel of the Division of Corporation Finance of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission dated August 26, 2005, Directors, officers and 10% stockholders of the Bank are exempted from Section 16 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with respect to transactions in or ownership of Bank capital stock.Audit Committee

 

Audit Committee

The Audit Committee of our Board of Directors is primarily responsible for overseeing the services performed by our independent registered public accounting firm and internal audit department, evaluating our accounting policies and its system of internal controls and reviewing significant financial transactions. For the period from January 1, 20172020 through the date of the filing of this annual report on Form 10-K, the members of the Audit Committee included: Jay M. FordKevin Cummings (Chair), Kevin CummingsDavid R. Huber (Vice Chair), Joseph R. Ficalora, (commencing January 1, 2018), Caren Franzini (through January 25, 2017), James W. Fulmer (through December 31, 2017),Jay M. Ford, Thomas L. Hoy, Thomas J. Kemly, Charles E. Kilbourne, III, Christopher P. Martin, (commencing January 1, 2018), Monte N. Redman, Larry E. Thompson (through December 31, 2017), and Ángela Weyne (commencing September 21, 2017).Ángela Weyne.

  

Audit Committee Financial Expert

 

Our Board of Directors has determined that Kevin CummingsDavid R. Huber of the FHLBNY’s Audit Committee qualifies as an “audit committee financial expert” under Item 407 (d) of Regulation S-K but was not considered “independent” as the term is defined by the rules of the New York Stock Exchange.S-K.

 

Code of Ethics

 

It is the duty of the Board of Directors to oversee the Chief Executive Officer and other senior management in the competent and ethical operation of the FHLBNY on a day-to-day basis and to assure that the long-term interests of the shareholders are being served.  To satisfy this duty, the directors take a proactive, focused approach to their position, and set standards to ensure that we are committed to business success through maintenance of the highest standards of responsibility and ethics.  In this regard, the Board has adopted a Code of Business Conduct and Ethics (“Code”)(Code) that applies to all employees as well as the Board. The Code is posted on the Corporate Governance Section of the FHLBNY’s website at http://www.fhlbny.com. We intend to disclose changes to or waivers from the Code by filing a Form 8-K and/or by posting such information on our website.

ITEM 11.EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION.


Item 11.Executive Compensation.

 

Compensation Discussion and Analysis

I.Introduction

This section describes and analyzes the Bank’s 2020 compensation program for our “named executive officers” (“NEOs”). Our NEOs include our chief executive officer, chief financial officer and our other most highly compensated executive officers who were serving as executive officers on December 31, 2020. The Bank’s named executive officers during 2020 are identified as: 1) José R. González (President and Chief Executive Officer); 2) Kevin M. Neylan (Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer); 3) Melody J. Feinberg (Senior Vice President and Chief Risk Officer); 4) Michael Radziemski (Senior Vice President and Chief Information Officer); and 5) Philip A. Scott (Senior Vice President and Chief Capital Markets Officer).

a)Compensation & Human Resources Committee Oversight of Compensation

The Bank’s compensation philosophy and objectives are to attract, motivate, and retain high caliber of diverse financial services executives capable of achieving strategic business initiatives, enhancing business performance and increasing shareholder value. In this regard, it is the role of the Compensation & Human Resources Committee (“C&HR Committee”) of the Board of Directors (“Board”) to:

1.Review and recommend to the Board changes regarding our compensation and benefits programs for employees and retirees;

2.Review and approve individual performance ratings and related merit increases for our Chief Executive Officer and for the other Management Committee members (which Committee includes all the NEOs) of the Bank;

3.Review salary adjustments and benefits for our Chief Executive Officer and for the other Management Committee members;

4.Review and approve annually the Bank’s Incentive Compensation Plan (“Incentive Plan”), year-end Incentive Plan results and Incentive Plan award payouts for Management Committee members;

5.Advise the Board on compensation, benefits and human resources matters affecting Bank employees;

6.Review and discuss with Bank management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) to be included in our Form 10-K and determine whether to recommend to the Board that the CD&A be included in the Form 10-K; and

7.Review and monitor compensation arrangements for our executives so that we continue to retain, attract, motivate and align quality management consistent with the investment rationale and performance objectives contained in our annual business plan and budget, subject to the direction of the Board.

The Board has delegated to the C&HR Committee the authority to approve fees and other retention terms for: i) any compensation and benefits consultant to be used to assist in the evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer’s compensation, and ii) any other advisors that it shall deem necessary to assist it in fulfilling its duties. The Charter of the C&HR Committee is available in the Corporate Governance section of our web site located at www.fhlbny.com.

 

IntroductionThe role of Bank management (including Executive Officers) with respect to compensation is limited to administering Board-approved programs and providing proposals for the consideration of the C&HR Committee. No member of management serves on the Board or any Board committee.


Regulatory Oversight of Executive Compensation

 

AboutThe Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Finance Agency”) has oversight authority over FHLBank executive officer compensation. Section 1113 of the Bank’s MissionHousing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 requires that the Director of the Finance Agency prohibit a FHLBank from paying compensation to its executive officers that is not reasonable and comparable to that paid for employment in similar businesses involving similar duties and responsibilities. Pursuant to the foregoing, the Finance Agency requires the FHLBanks to provide information to the Finance Agency for review and non-objection concerning all compensation actions relating to the respective FHLBanks' executive officers. This information, including studies of comparable compensation, must be provided to the Finance Agency at least 30 days in advance of any planned FHLBank action with respect to the payment of compensation to executive officers. In addition, the FHLBanks are required to provide at least 60 days' advance notice to the Finance Agency of any arrangement that provides for incentive awards to executive officers. Under the supervision of our Board of Directors, we provide this information to the Finance Agency as required.

In addition to these rules, the Finance Agency previously issued Advisory Bulletin 2009-AB-02 regarding principles for FHLBank executive compensation as to which the FHLBanks and the Office of Finance are expected to adhere in setting executive compensation policies and practices.  These principles consist of the following:

Executive compensation must be reasonable and comparable to that offered to executives in similar positions at other comparable financial institutions;
Executive incentive compensation should be consistent with sound risk management and preservation of the par value of the FHLBank's capital stock;
A significant percentage of an executive's incentive-based compensation should be tied to longer-term performance and outcome indicators;
A significant percentage of an executive's incentive-based compensation should be deferred and made contingent upon performance over several years; and
The FHLBank's Board of Directors should promote accountability and transparency in the process of setting compensation.

In evaluating an FHLBank's compensation, the FHFA Director will consider the extent to which an executive's compensation is consistent with these advisory bulletin principles. Our Board is of the view that we have incorporated these principles into our development, implementation, and review of compensation policies and practices for executive officers, as described below. We are prohibited by regulations from offering equity-based compensation. Our total compensation program takes into account the existence of these other types of compensation by offering a defined benefit and defined contribution plan to help effectively compete for and retain talent.

On December 22, 2020, the FHFA issued confidential guidance concerning the factors the regulator considers relevant in its oversight of executive compensation-related determinations under its regulations and guidance. Pursuant to this guidance, the FHFA has not approved the proposed 2021 base salary merit increases for NEOs. Due to concerns regarding the reasonableness and market comparability of the compensation benchmarks used by the FHFA, the C&HRC and the Board of Directors with the advice of our independent compensation consultants, did not agree with certain aspects of the FHFA’s guidance and its conclusions. The Board is complying with the regulator’s position, but does not agree with this override of the Board’s business judgment. The Board believes the FHFA’s guidance with regard to benchmarking may significantly impair the Board’s supervisory responsibility and ability to hire and retain qualified senior management.

The Bank is exempt from SEC proxy rules and as such does not provide shareholder advisory “say on pay” votes regarding executive compensation.

b)About the Bank’s Mission

 

The mission of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“Bank”, or “we”, “us” or “our”) is to advance housing opportunity and local community development by maximizing the capacity of its community-based member-lenders to servesupporting members in serving their markets.

We meet our mission by providing our members with access to economical wholesale credit and technical assistance through our credit products, mortgage finance programs, housing and community lending programs and correspondent services to increase the availability of home financing to families of all income levels.

 

Achieving the Bank’s Mission

We operate in a very competitive market for talent. Without the capability to attract, motivate and retain talented diverse employees, the ability to fulfill our mission would be in jeopardy. All employees, and particularly senior and middle management, are frequently required to perform multiple tasks requiring a variety of skills. Our employees not only have the


appropriate talent and experience to execute our mission, but they also possess skill sets that are difficult to find in the marketplace. In this regard, as of December 31, 2017, we employed 308 employees, a relatively small workforce for a New York City-based financial institution that had, as of that date, $158.9 billion in assets.  Exempt employees constituted 94% of all employees as of year-end 2017.

 

Compensation & Human Resources Committee Oversight of Compensation

Compensation is a key element in attracting, motivating and retaining talent. In this regard, it is the role of the Compensation & Human Resources Committee (“C&HR Committee”) of the Board of Directors (“Board”) to:

1.              Review and recommend to the Board changes regarding our compensation and benefits programs for employees and retirees;

2.              Review and approve individual performance ratings and related merit increases for our Chief Executive Officer and for the other Management Committee members (which Committee includes all Named Executive Officers of the Bank (the “NEOs”));

3.              Review salary adjustments for Chief Executive Officer and for the other Management Committee members;

4.              Review and approve annually the Bank’s Incentive Compensation Plan (“Incentive Plan”), year-end Incentive Plan results and Incentive Plan award payouts for Management Committee members;

5.              Advise the Board on compensation, benefits and human resources matters affecting Bank employees;

6.              Review and discuss with Bank management the Compensation Discussion and Analysis (“CD&A”) to be included in our Form 10-K and determine whether to recommend to the Board that the CD&A be included in the Form 10-K; and

7.              Review and monitor compensation arrangements for our executives so that we continue to retain, attract, motivate and align quality management consistent with the investment rationale and performance objectives contained in our annual business plan and budget, subject to the direction of the Board.

c)Our Compensation Policy

 

The Board has delegated to the C&HR Committee the authority to approve fees and other retention terms for: i) any compensation and benefits consultant to be used to assist in the evaluation of the Chief Executive Officer’s compensation; and ii) any other advisors that it shall deem necessary to assist it in fulfilling its duties. The Charter of the C&HR Committee is available in the Corporate Governance section of our web site located at www.fhlbny.com.  The role of Bank management (including Executive Officers) with respect to compensation is limited to administering Board-approved programs and providing proposals for the consideration of the C&HR Committee. No member of management serves on the Board or any Board committee.

Regulatory Oversight of Executive Compensation

The Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Finance Agency”) has oversight authority over FHLBank executive officer compensation. Section 1113 of the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 requires that the Director of the Finance Agency prohibit an FHLBank from paying compensation to its executive officers that is not reasonable and comparable to that paid for employment in similar businesses involving similar duties and responsibilities. In connection with this statutory responsibility, the Finance Agency issued, effective February 27, 2014, final rules on executive compensation and golden parachute payments relating to the regulator’s oversight of such compensation and payments.

In addition to these rules, the Finance Agency previously issued Advisory Bulletin 2009-AB-02 regarding principles for FHLBank executive compensation as to which the FHLBanks are expected to adhere in setting executive compensation policies and practices.  The Finance Agency also previously issued certain protocols for the review of proposed FHLBank compensation actions pertaining to Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”).

The Bank is exempt from SEC proxy rules and as such does not provide shareholder advisory “say on pay” votes regarding executive compensation.

How We Stay Competitive in the Labor Market

The September 2015 Board-approved Compensation Policy acknowledges and takes into account our compensation philosophy, business environment and factors to remain competitive in the labor market. The major componentsIn September 2018, the Board-approved an updated Compensation Policy as a result of the Compensation Policy,2018 Total Rewards Study discussed in Section II below, which is currentlywas in effect for all compensation decisions effective January 2020 through December 2020 include the following:

 

·                  The Bank will focus on Regional/Commercial Banks $20B+ in assets within the Metro New York Market (where available) as the “Primary Peer Group” for benchmarking at the 50th percentile of the market total compensation (base pay + incentive compensation) for establishing competitive pay levels.

·The Bank will focus on Regional/Commercial Banks $20B+ in assets within the Metro New York Market (where available) as the “Primary Peer Group” for benchmarking at the 50th percentile of the market total compensation (base pay + short term incentive compensation) for establishing competitive pay levels.

 

·                  The Bank will use other Federal Home Loan Banks as a “Secondary Peer Group” for benchmarking at the 75th percentile of the market total compensation for establishing competitive pay levels.

·Bank Management Committee members and all Bank Officers will be matched against ‘level-for-level’ jobs and the publicly available proxy data. Other FHLBanks will be used as a “Secondary Peer Group” and benchmarking will be targeted at the 75th percentile of total compensation for establishing competitive pay levels.

 

·                  Use publicly available data from Regional/Commercial Banks $5-20B in assets for the five NEOs at the 50th percentile of market total compensation (base pay + incentive compensation) for establishing competitive pay levels.

·Use publicly available data from Regional/Commercial Banks $20-65B in assets for the Bank Management Committee members (including NEOs) at the 50th percentile of market total compensation (base pay + short term incentive compensation) for establishing competitive pay levels.

 

·                  For jobs within Risk Management and Capital Markets and other specialty areas not in ready supply within the Regional Banks, the Bank will use a customized peer group of Banks with $50B+ in assets including Bulge Bracket banks (i.e. investment banks) at the 25th and 50th percentile to reflect realistic recruiting pressures in the Metro New York market.

·For jobs within Risk Management and Capital Markets and other specialty areas not in ready supply within the Regional Banks, the Bank will use a customized peer group of Banks with $50B+ in assets including Bulge Bracket banks (i.e. large and global financial firms) at the 25th and 50th percentile to reflect realistic recruiting pressures in the Metro New York market.

 

·                  Bank Management Committee members will be matched one position level down versus Commercial/Regional Banks, and Officers and below will be matched against ‘like-for-like’ jobs versus other Federal Home Loan Banks and the publically available proxy data.

·A commitment to conduct detailed cash compensation benchmarking for approximately one-third of officer positions each year.

 

·                  A commitment to conduct detailed cash compensation benchmarking for approximately one-third of officer positions each year.

·                  A commitment to evaluate the value of total compensation delivered to employees including base pay, incentive compensation, retirement and health and welfare benefits (“Total Rewards Study”) in determining market competitiveness every third year.

·A commitment to evaluate the value of total compensation delivered to employees including base pay, incentive compensation, retirement and health and welfare benefits (“Total Rewards Study”) in determining market competitiveness every third year. 

 

Additional factors that we take into account to remain competitive in our labor market include, but are not limited to:

 

·                  Geographical area — The New York metropolitan area is a highly-competitive market for talent in the financial disciplines;

·Geographical area — The New York metropolitan area is a highly-competitive market for talent in the financial disciplines;

 

·                  Cost of living — The New York metropolitan area has a high cost of living that may require compensation premiums for some positions, particularly at more junior levels; and

·Cost of living — The New York metropolitan area has a high cost of living that may require compensation premiums for some positions, particularly at more junior levels; and

 

·                  Availability of/demand for talent — Recruiting critical positions with high market demand typically requires a recruiting premium to entice an individual to change firms.

·Availability of/demand for talent — Recruiting critical positions with high market demand typically requires a recruiting premium to entice an individual to change firms.

 

The Total Compensation Program

II.The Total Compensation Program

 

In response to the challenging economic environment in which we operate, compensation and benefits consist of the following components: (a) cash compensation (i.e., base salary, and, for exempt employees, “variable” or “at risk” short-term incentive compensation opportunities available under the Bank’s Incentive Compensation Plan, hereinafter referred as  the “IC Plan”)); (b) retirement-related benefits (i.e., the Qualified Defined Benefit Plan (“DB Plan”); the Qualified Defined Contribution Plan (“DC Plan”); the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Component of the Amended and Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution Benefit Equalization Plan (“DB BEP”), the Nonqualified Defined Contribution Component of the Amended and Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Defined Benefit and Defined Contribution


Benefit Equalization Plan (“DC BEP”), and the Nonqualified Deferred Incentive Compensation Plan (“NDICP”); and (c) health and welfarelife and disability insurance programs and other benefits which are listed in Section IV C below. These components, along with certain benefits described in the next paragraph, comprised the elements of our total compensation program in effect during 2016 or approved in 2016 and became effective on January 1, 2017, and are discussed in detail in Section IV below.

This CD&A provides information relatedavailable to the total compensation program provided to our NEOs for 2017 — that is, our Principal Executive Officer (“PEO”), Principal Financial Officer (“PFO”) and the three most highly-compensated executive officers other than the PEO and PFO. The information includes, among other things, the objectives of the total compensation program and the elements of compensation provided to our NEOs. These compensation programs are not exclusive to the NEOs; they also apply to employees, as explained throughout the CD&A.

I. Objectives of the total compensation programall employees.

 

The objectives of the total compensation program (described above) are to help motivate employees to achieve consistent and superior results, taking into account prudent risk management, over a long period of time. We also provide a program that allows us to compete for and retain talent that otherwise might be lured away.

 

a)2018 Total Rewards Study Results

In accordance with the Board-approved Compensation Policy, we evaluate the value of total compensation delivered to employees including base pay, incentive compensation, retirement and health and welfare benefits in determining market competitiveness every third year afterin the date we complete the final implementationcontext of Board-approved total compensation program design changes.

2012 Total Rewards Study Resultsrecruitment and retention.

 

In November 2012,July 2018, the C&HR Committee engaged Aon Consulting, Inc.a benefits and compensation consultant, Willis Towers Watson (“Aon”Towers”), to perform a broad and comprehensive review of the Bank’s Compensation Policy and Total Rewards Studyprogram for all employees including NEOs, and present recommendations to the C&HR Committee. The result ofBank conducted a competitive bid process with experienced compensation and benefits consulting firms that resulted in the C&HR Committee engaging Towers as the compensation and benefits consultant to perform the review.

For the compensation component, the compensation and benefits consultant used job-level market data from proprietary Financial Services surveys and jobs from five designated tiers, including NEOs and Management Committee members. Specific Bank peer groups were included in the Total Rewards Study was submitted tobased on their available data and alignment with the C&HR Committee and the Board in September 2013 and indicated the following:2018 Board-approved Compensation Policy set forth above.

 

·                  When compared toFor the Bank’s peer group, total compensation for NEOs was aligned with regional commercial banks;

·                  Employees not identified as NEOs were not aligned with peers in regional commercial banks, however, aligned with other Home Loan Banks; and

·                  When compared to the Bank’s peer group, the Bank’s employee health and welfare benefits were deemed “Significantly Above Market”.

As a result,component, Towers used their Benefits/Value (“BenVal”) methodology to determine the Board approvedvalue of benefit programs which assigned an initial set of changes to the Bank’s healthcare plans effective January 1, 2014 for all employees. Changes included increasing employee-paid premiums, co-insurance payments and deductibles to help align with the market benchmarks.

In February 2014, upon further recommendation by Aon, the Board also approved additional changes to the Bank’s retirement plans implemented beginning July 1, 2014. Changesactuarial value to the Bank’s benefits plans include:

·                  The Qualified Defined Benefit Plan formula for Non-Grandfathered employees hired on or after July 1, 2014 was reduced from 2.0% to 1.5% of the employee’s highest 5-consecutive-year average earnings for new employees  (please refer to the “(i) Qualified Defined Benefit Plan” section under the heading “Retirement Benefits” below for further information);

·                  “Earnings” under the Qualified Defined Benefit Plan is defined as base salary only; short-term incentivesprograms and overtime are excluded (please refer to the “(i) Qualified Defined Benefit Plan” section under the heading “Retirement Benefits” below for further information);

·                  Required employee contribution to generate full Qualified Defined Contribution Plan employer match increased from 3% to 4% (please refer to the “(iii) Qualified Defined Contribution Plan” sections under the heading “Retirement Benefits” below for further information); and

·                  Elimination of the current waiting period of five years of service to receive the Qualified Defined Contribution Plan employer match; permitting all employees with less than five years of service to receive the maximum employer match, as outlined above (please refer to the “(iii) Qualified Defined Contribution Plan” sections under the heading “Retirement Benefits” below for further information).

The Board also approved further changes to the Bank’s current healthcare plan and retiree medical plan effective January 1, 2015 for all employees as described below:

·                  Retiree Medical benefits were eliminated for employees who are not age 55 and have 10 years of employment service as of January 1, 2015  (please refer to the “Retiree Medical” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information);

·                  The current Defined Dollar Plan subsidy was reducedprograms offered by 50% for all service earned after December 31, 2014 for employees eligible to remainother employers included in the plan (please refer to the “Retiree Medical” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information);

·                  The annual Cost of Living Adjustment was eliminated (please refer to the “Retiree Medical” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information);

·                  Employees at the First Level Officer and Assistant Vice President rank contributing more to the cost of the plan than Non-Officers; and employees at the Vice President and above level contributing more to the cost of the plan than employees at the First Level Officers and Assistant Vice President rank (please refer to the “Medical and Dental” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information);

·                  Establishment of a new High Deductible Health Plan (“HDHP”) (please refer to the “Medical and Dental” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information); and

·                  Adding a Health Saving Account (“HSA”) which replaced the Bank’s previous Healthcare Flexible Spending Account (please refer to the “Flexible Spending Accounts” section under the heading “Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits” below for further information).Total Rewards Study.

 

A representative list of the peer group that was used in the AonTowers healthcare and welfare component of the benefits study in 20132018 is set forth in the table below.  Please see Section IV.A.1 below for a list of the peer group used for compensation other than with respect to healthcare and welfare benefits.  For the firms listed below that had multiple lines of business, the Bank benchmarked total compensation against the wholesale banking functions at those companies.

 

American Express.CIBCPNC Financial Services Group, Inc.
Banco Santander New YorkCisco Systems, Inc.RBC Bank - US

AllyBank of America Corporation

BMO Financial Group

BNY Mellon

Citigroup Inc.

ING

Intuit Inc.

State Street Corporation

JP MorganTD Bank

 

Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston

Fifth Third Processing Solutions

Capital One
M&T Bank Corporation

 

PNC Financial

b)

Federal Home Loan Bank of Dallas

G.E. Capital

Standard Bank

Federal Home Loan Bank of Des Moines

BMO Financial Group
ING

Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta

Federal Home Loan Bank of Indianapolis

2020 Compensation Benchmarking

II. The total compensation program is designed to reward for performance and employee longevity, to balance risk and returns, and to compete with compensation programs offered by our competitors

The total compensation program is designed to attract, retain and motivate employees and to reward employees based on overall performance achievement as compared to the goals and individual employee performance. We also strive to ensure that our employees are compensated fairly and consistent with employees in our peer group.

All of the elements of the total compensation program are available to all employees, including NEOs, except with respect to: 1) the IC Plan; 2) the DB BEP; 3) the DC BEP; and 4) the NDICP.

All exempt (non-hourly) employees are eligible to receive annual incentive awards through participation in the Incentive Plan. These awards are based on a combination of performance results and individual performance results. The better the Bank and/or the employee perform, the higher the employee’s potential award is likely to be, up to a predetermined limit. In addition, the better the employee’s performance, the greater the employee’s annual salary increase is likely to be, up to a predetermined limit. Participation in the Deferred Incentive Compensation Plan is mandatory for members of the Bank’s Management Committee which include NEOs.

We are prohibited by law from offering equity-based compensation, and we do not currently offer long-term incentives. However, many of the firms in our peer groups do offer these types of compensation. Our total compensation program takes into account the existence of this other types of compensation by offering a defined benefit and defined contribution plan to help effectively compete for talent. Senior and mid-level employees are generally long-tenured and would not want to endanger their pension benefits to achieve a short-term financial gain.

We do not structure any of our compensation plans in a way that inappropriately encourages risk taking. As described in Section IV.A.2. below, the rationale for having the equally-weighted Bank wide goals of Return and Risk within the Incentive Plan is to motivate management to take a balanced approach to managing risks and returns in the course of managing the business, while at the same time ensuring that we fulfill our mission.  In addition, Incentive Plan participants employed in the Risk Management Group have a higher weighting on the “Risk” component of the Business Effectiveness goal category than Incentive Plan participants that are not employed in the Risk Management Group.  Risk Management Group participants have a 40% weighting on the “Return” Goal portion and the remaining at 30% for a total Business Effectiveness weighting of 70%.

In addition, the DB and DC Plans are designed to reward employees for continued strong performance over their careers — that is, the longer an employee works at the Bank, the greater the benefit the employee is likely to accumulate. This combined with the compensation philosophy and the structure of the compensation programs helps to ensure that the compensation paid to employees at termination of employment is aligned with the interest of our shareholders.

III. The elements of total compensation

Please refer to the introduction section under the heading “The Total Compensation Program” for an explanation of the components that make up our total compensation program.

IV. Explanation of why we provide each element of total compensation

Our Compensation Policy

The Compensation Policy was established to help identify the Bank’s peer group that it competes against for talent; to benchmark jobs; and serve as the basis for analyzing the competitiveness of compensation and benefit programs to help ensure alignment with the marketplace.

In September 2011, the Committee approved the use of a multi-level approach to compensation benchmarking that was proposed by compensation consultant McLagan for use during the review of the Bank’s total compensation program that was initiated in 2012. The Committee approved the use of (1) Commercial Banks (former “bulge bracket” investment banks were specifically excluded and data for the Metro New York area was used where available); (2) Federal Home Loan Banks; and (3) Publicly-available proxy data for banks with assets between $5B and $20B.

McLagan also used salary rank from the proxies from publicly-traded banks. Salary rank compares a firm’s top paid incumbents against the market’s top paid incumbents regardless of position. Per the Bank’s Compensation Policy, McLagan used median data as the initial benchmark statistic for commercial banks and proxy benchmarks and the high quartile (75th percentile) is used for the Federal Home Loan Bank system benchmarks.

Beginning in 2014, the Bank began to experience the impact of the improvement in the economy and financial markets with an increase in turnover for certain positions in risk management, information technology and other areas. The Bank continues to be challenged in attracting replacements who meet our job requirements and that would accept a position within the Bank’s compensation structure. The Bank’s compensation structure is based on its history as a Government Sponsored Enterprise even though some Bank positions require skill sets similar to those required in Wall Street firms. In addition, as a wholesale bank the Bank manages large and complex risks with a small employee population within one of the most expensive geographic locations in the United States.

In certain cases, the Bank discovered that our current pay scales for a position were not allowing us to recruit the talent that we needed.  As a result, McLagan was engaged to explore options that would help with the retention and recruitment of employees in high demand areas and to help ensure that our compensation structure is not negatively affected by these atypical hiring pay packages.

In alignment with McLagan’s recommendations, the Board approved changes to our Compensation Policy in September 2015.  The Board-approved Compensation Policy is outlined above.  Please refer to the Introduction section under the heading “How We Stay Competitive in the Labor Market” for an explanation of the Bank’s Board-approved Compensation Policy.

It should be noted that, due to the fact that we conduct detailed cash compensation benchmarking for only one-third of the officer positions on an annual basis with respect to cash compensation, the effectiveness of the benchmarking program can be demonstrated only once every three years. However, NEOs are benchmarked every year.

Compensation Benchmarking

Compensation consultant McLagan began reporting directly to the C&HR Committee in 2011. In September 2011, the Bank’s benchmarking methodology was refined and approved by the C&HR Committee for future use during the Total Rewards Studies. Since 2012, McLagan has benchmarked NEO cash compensation for the purpose of supporting annual merit salary increases and incentive compensation payments, as required by the Finance Agency. As a result, the C&HR Committee has utilized such information to calculate NEO compensation.

Please refer to the introduction section under the heading “Finance Agency Oversight of Executive Compensation” for an explanation of how the Finance Agency provides oversight of executive compensation.

The following is an explanation of why we provide each element of compensation.

A. Cash Compensation

1. Base Pay

The goal of offering competitive base pay is to make the Bank successful in attracting, motivating and retaining the talent needed to execute the business strategies.

In addition to the benchmarking process provided for in the Compensation Policy as described above, a performance-based merit increase program exists for all employees, including NEOs, that have a direct impact on base pay. Generally, employees receive merit increases on an annual basis. Such merit increases are based upon the achievement of a performance rating of “Outstanding,” “Exceeds Requirements,” or “Meets Requirements” on individual performance evaluations. Merit guidelines are determined each year and distributed to managers. These guidelines establish the maximum merit increase percentage permissible for employee performance during that year. In November of 2017, the C&HR Committee determined that merit-related officer base pay increases for 2018 would be 2.50% for officers rated “Meets Requirements”; 3.25% for officers rated “Exceeds Requirements”; and 4.25% for officers rated “Outstanding” for their performance in 2017.

To comply with the Finance Agency requirement that the FHLBanks submit all compensation actions involving a NEO to the Finance Agency for review at least four weeks in advance of any planned board of directors’ decision with respect to those actions, we submitted the proposed merit increase percentages for 2018 performance for the NEOs in November of 2017.  In addition, to help support the proposed merit increases, the Finance Agency required that a compensation benchmarking analysis be submitted.  The analysis was performed by McLagan and indicated that the salary increases for the NEOs were consistent with the factors included within the Board-approved Compensation Policy described above in the “Introduction” section under the heading “How We Stay Competitive in the Labor Market”.

The peer groups in establishing competitive market pay were: 1) Commercial Banks including former “bulge bracket” investment banks (global investment banks were specifically excluded); 2) Federal Home Loan Banks; and 3) Publicly-available proxy data for banks with assets between $10B and $20B. Please refer to the Introduction Section under the heading “How We Stay Competitive in the Labor Market” for an explanation of the components that make up our Compensation Policy.

McLagan also used salary rank from the proxies from publicly-traded banks. Salary rank compares a firm’s top paid incumbents against the market’s top paid incumbents regardless of position.

Per the Bank’s Compensation Policy, McLagan used median data as the initial benchmark statistic for commercial banks and proxy benchmarks and the high quartile is used for the Federal Home Loan Bank system benchmarks. Higher/lower benchmark statistics were used to account for larger/smaller responsibilities. The value of retirement plans and other benefits, including the defined benefit pension plans were not represented in this analysis and will be addressed in the total compensation review, as discussed in the Introduction Section under the heading “How We Stay Competitive in the Labor Market”.

 

For the year 2017, McLagan2020, Towers used for compensation benchmarking analysis purposes the Compensation Policy that was approved by the Boardas of September 2018 for all NEO compensation decisions in September 2015effect beginning January 2020 (details of which are provided above). Please refer to the introduction section under the heading “The Total Compensation Program” for an explanation of the components that make up our total compensation program.

 

We received a “non-objection” letter from the Finance Agency with respect to the payment of merit increases (effective January 1, 2017)2020) for the NEOs, which letter was based upon the results of compensation benchmarking analysis of McLagan.by Towers.

 

A representative list of the peer group that was used in the compensation benchmarking analysis, excluding all healthcare and welfare benefits analysis, is set forth in the table below.

Market Data Participants — Commercial Banks and FHLBanks used for 2017 market pay analysis:

 

ABN AMRO

c)Market Data Participants — Commercial Banks used for 2020 market pay analysis:

 

Associated Bank

DZCommerce Bancshares

Umpqua Bank

MUFG Securities

AgriculturalCIBC Bank Of China

USA

Iberia Bank

Fannie Mae

National AustraliaWebster Bank

AIB

City National Bank

Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta

Natixis

Ally Financial Inc.

Federal Reserve Bank of Boston

New York Community Bank

Australia & New Zealand Banking Group

Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago

Nord/LB

Banco Bilbao Vizcaya Argentaria

Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland

Nordea Bank

Banco Itaú Unibanco

Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City

Norinchukin Bank, New York Branch

Bank Hapoalim

Federal Reserve Bank of Minneapolis

Northern Trust Corporation

Bank of America Merrill Lynch

Federal Reserve Bank of New York

People’s United Bank National Assoc

Bank of New York Mellon

Comerica
Synovus


In addition, the FHLBanks were included in the 2020 compensation benchmarking analysis.

 

Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond

d)

PNC Bank

Bank of Nova Scotia

Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco

Rabobank

Bank of the West

Federal Reserve Bank of St Louis

Regions Financial Corporation

Bank of Tokyo - Mitsubishi UFJ

Fifth Third Bank

Royal Bank of Canada

Bayerische Landesbank

First Citizens Bank

Santander Bank, NA

BBVA Compass

First Republic Bank

Societe Generale

BMO Financial Group

FNB Omaha

Standard Chartered Bank

BNP Paribas

Freddie Mac

State Street Corporation

BOK Financial Corporation

GE Capital

Sumitomo Mitsui Banking Corporation

Branch Banking & Trust Co.

Hancock Bank

Sumitomo Mitsui Trust Bank

Brown Brothers Harriman

HSBC

SunTrust Banks

Capital One

Huntington Bancshares, Inc.

SVB Financial Group

Charles Schwab & Co.

IndustrialServices Provided by Compensation and Commercial Bank of China

Synchrony Financial

China Construction Bank

ING

Synovus

CIBC World Markets

Intesa Sanpaolo

TCF National Bank

CIT Group

Investors Bancorp, Inc

TD Ameritrade

Citi Global Consumer Group

JP Morgan Commercial Bank

TD Securities

Citigroup

JP Morgan Corporate Sector

Texas Capital Bank

Citizens Financial Group

JPMC Consumer & Community Banking

The PrivateBank

City National Bank

KBC Bank

U.S. Bancorp

Comerica

KeyCorp

UMB Financial Corporation

Commerzbank

Landesbank Baden-Wuerttemberg

Umpqua Holding Corporation

Commonwealth Bank of Australia

Lloyds Banking Group

UniCredit Bank AG

Crédit Agricole CIB

M&T Bank Corporation

Valley National Bank

Credit Industriel et Commercial — N.Y.

Macquarie Bank

Webster Bank

Cullen Frost Bankers, Inc

Mizuho Bank

Wells Fargo Bank

DBS Bank

Mizuho Capital Markets

Westpac Banking Corporation

DnB Bank

Mizuho Trust & Banking Co. (USA)

Zions Bancorporation

Benefits Consultant 

2. IC Plan

 

a) OverviewCompensation in the aggregate paid to compensation and benefits consultants Towers and McLagan Partners, Inc. (“McLagan”) in 2020 was $182,773. Regarding compensation consulting, payments made to Towers were in the amount of $153,348. McLagan also provided services for 2020 NEO compensation benchmarking services in the amount of $29,425. The Bank also engaged Towers for insurance placement services and, through insurance commissions, compensated Towers for these additional services unrelated to compensation consulting in the amount of $807,181 in 2020. The Board reviewed Towers’ compensation and benchmarking data and recommendations during the course of 2020. While the C&HR Committee has concluded that no conflict of interest was created by management's engagement of Towers or McLagan for the referenced additional services, any potential conflicts of interest were mitigated through multiple safeguards and constraints, including Board oversight of the 2017 IC PlanBank’s compensation and benefits consultants; and comprehensive Finance Agency regulations and monitoring of our compensation, corporate governance, and safety and soundness.

 

III.IC Plan

a)Overview of the 2020 IC Plan

The objective of the Bank’s 20172020 IC Plan is to motivate employees to take actions that support the Bank’s strategies and lead to the attainment of the Bank’s business plan and fulfillment of its mission. The 20172020 IC Plan is also intended to help retain employees by affording them the opportunity to share in the Bank’s performance results. The 20172020 IC Plan seeks to accomplish these objectives by linking annual cash payout award opportunities to Bank performance and to individual performance. All salaried exempt and non-exempt employees are eligible to participate in the 20172020 IC Plan. Awards under the 20172020 IC Plan were calculated based upon performance during 20172020 and paid to participants on March 13, 2018.  We received a “non-objection” from the Finance Agency to pay the Plan awards to NEOs, subject to the deferral feature for Management Committee participants discussed below.  The 2017 IC Plan was developed in accordance with regulations issued by and other guidance received from the Finance Agency.5, 2021. 

 

When employees are individually evaluated, they receive one of fivefour performance ratings: “Outstanding”; “Exceeds Requirements”; “Meets Requirements”; “Needs Improvement”; or “Unsatisfactory”.  “Below Requirements. Incentive Compensation Plan awards are only paid to participants who have attained at least a specified threshold rating within the “Meets Requirements” categoryrating on their individual performance evaluations and do not have any unresolved disciplinary matters. Also, Incentive Plan participants that were rated as “Exceeds Requirements” or “Outstanding” on their 2017 individual performance evaluations receive an additional 3% or 6%, respectively, of their base salary in the form of a separate cash award.  In September 2015, the C&HR Committee approved the elimination of the additional 3% or 6% separate cash award, beginning with the 2016 IC Plan year.  At the same time, the C&HR Committee approved increases in the incentive compensation opportunity levels for participants of the Bank’s IC Plan up to the rank of Assistant Vice President.

 

b) Bankwide Performance Goals

b)Bankwide Performance Goals

 

Bankwide performance goals, which are approved by the Board of Directors, are established to address the Bank’s business operations, mission and to help management focus on what it needs to succeed. Actual results of each goal are compared against the three benchmarks (threshold, target and maximum) that were established for the Incentive Plan year. The Incentive Compensation Plan participant receives a payout based on the benchmark level that is met for each goal.

 

We believe that employees at higher ranks have a greater impact on the achievement of Bankwide goals than employees at lower ranks. Therefore, employees at higher ranks have a greater weighting placed on the Bankwide performance component of their Incentive Plan award opportunities as opposed to the individual performance component.  For the Chief Executive Officer and the other Management Committee members (a group that includes all of the NEOs), the overall incentive compensation opportunity is weighted 90% on Bankwide performance goals and 10% on individual performance goals. There are differences among the NEOs with regard to their individual performance goals; however, these differences do not have a material impact on the amount of incentive compensation payout.opportunities.

 

The actual results for each goal may fall between two benchmark levels. When this happens, the payout figures are interpolated for results that fall between the two applicable ranges; either threshold and target, or target and maximum. For example, if the actual results fall between target and maximum, the Incentive Plan participant will receive the payout for achieving target plus an additional amount for the excess over target. This calculation is performed for each Bankwide goal. For each goal, there is no payout if the actual result does not reach the threshold, and the payout is capped at maximum.

 


The 20172020 Incentive Compensation Opportunity is summarized as follows:

RankIncentive Compensation Opportunity
President – Chief Executive Officer

50% (Threshold)

80% (Target)

100% (Maximum)

Other NEOs

30% (Threshold)

50% (Target)

75% (Maximum)

The 2020 Bankwide goals are organized into threefour broad categories and are presented in the charts below. These charts contain:

 

·                  a description of each of the goals and their respective weightings as a percentage of the Bankwide goals;

A description of each of the goals and their respective weightings as a percentage of the Bankwide goals;

 

·                  an explanation of each Bankwide goal measure and how each goal meets its stated purpose; and

An explanation of each Bankwide goal measure and how each goal meets its stated purpose; and

 

Actual results of each goal along with the Bankwide goal benchmarks (threshold, target and maximum) that were established.

·1.     actual results of each goal along with the Bankwide goal benchmarks (threshold, target and maximum) that were established.

(i) Business EffectivenessFinancial/Return Goal 4.5

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)

 

How Goal
Meets Stated
Purpose

 

Weighting

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Results

 

BUSINESS EFFECTIVENESS (1)

 

 

 

70% of
Bankwide
Goal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Return Component- Dividend Capacity as forecasted in the 2017 business plan. Dividend Capacity is calculated as net income, divided by average capital stock. The Bank’s goal is to reward management for financial results that are generally controllable by management. Therefore, we adjust net income to eliminate the impact of items such as unrealized fair value changes on derivatives and associated hedged instruments. In addition, the target is adjusted due to changes in market interest rates during the year.

 

Earnings provide value for shareholders through the ability to add to retained earnings and to pay a dividend.

 

35.00

%

4.87

%

5.73

%

6.88

%

6.56

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Risk Component -The 2017 Bankwide Risk goal consists of two components, each with five complementary factors or metrics. Each metric will be evaluated on PASS/FAIL basis. Each component must have at a minimum three PASS rated metrics to qualify for incentive compensation. The more measures that receive PASS ratings, the higher the potential award.

 

Lowering the Bank’s risk profile provides a level of assurance that unexpected losses will not impair members’ investment in the Bank and serves to preserve the par value of membership stock.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Risk Component —Market, Capital and Earnings (“MCE”) Risk Exposure. The five metrics for the MCE Component are: 1) Conditional Value at Risk (CVaR); 2) Equity Sensitivity (Downside); 3) Dividend Sensitivity; 4) Capital Stock Protection; and 5) Retained Earnings Sufficiency. Each metric will be evaluated on PASS/FAIL basis. Each component must have at a minimum three PASS rated metrics to qualify for incentive compensation. The more measures that receive PASS ratings, the higher the potential award.

 

Attempts to broadly cover financial risks within the Bank’s book of business.

 

24.50

%

3

 

4

 

5

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Risk Component—Operations and Controls (“BOC”) Exposure. The BOC Component attempts to focus on the effectiveness of controls used to manage the risks associated with business activities and operational processes. The five metrics for BOC measure are: 1) Operational Exceptions; 2) Controls over Financial Reporting; 3) Control Awareness and Sustainment Training; 4) Protection of Information Assets; and 5) Information Technology General Controls.  Each metric will be evaluated on PASS/FAIL basis. Each component must have at a minimum three PASS rated metrics to qualify for incentive compensation. The more measures that receive PASS ratings, the higher the potential award.

 

Attempts to focus on the effectiveness of controls used to manage the risks associated with business activities and operational processes.

 

10.50

%

3

 

4

 

5

 

4

 

(ii) Growth Effectiveness Goal

The Risk Goals are intended to encourage management to balance those actions taken to enhance earnings (i.e., Dividend Capacity) with actions that are needed to appropriately manage risk levels in the business. Preserving the value of member paid-in capital and providing a predictable dividend are important ways that the Bank helps to provide value to stockholders.

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)

 

How Goal Meets
Stated Purpose

 

Weighting

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GROWTH EFFECTIVENESS (2)

 

 

 

15% of
Bankwide
Goal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of New Member Institutions

 

Positions the Bank for future growth and aligns with philosophy of being an “advances bank”.

 

3.75

%

4

 

8

 

12

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number of New/Return Borrowers

 

Positions the Bank for future growth and aligns with philosophy of being an “advances bank”.

 

3.75

%

10

 

20

 

30

 

33

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advance Volume-Average Balance Advances

 

Aligns with philosophy of being an “advances bank”.

 

3.75

%

$

95.32B

 

$

105.92B

 

$

116.51B

 

$

109.22B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Market Share — Calculated by comparing members’ outstanding advances against a pool of alternative wholesale funding sources

 

Helps the Bank gauge its competitive position against a variety of wholesale funding alternatives used by members. Strengthens the franchise as an “advances bank”.

 

3.75

%

45.00

%

49.00

%

51.00

%

52.51

%


(2)         The Bank’s Growth Effectiveness goal is intended to “plant the seeds” for future growth. Our district has historically been subject to a high level of merger and acquisition activity, and we consistently have had the least, or second least, number of members of all the FHLBs. Increasing the number of new members and increasing the number of new and returning borrowing members is a method employed to help manage the risk of the Bank having fewer members and borrowers in the future.

(iii) Community Investment Effectiveness Goal

 

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)

 

How Goal Meets
Stated Purpose

 

Weighting

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Results

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

COMMUNITY INVESTMENT EFFECTIVENESS (3)

 

 

 

15% of
Bankwide
Goal

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Dollar Amount of Approved Community Lending  Program Applications

 

Supports the provision of liquidity to members for housing and community development activities

 

3.75

%

$

2.1B

 

$

2.3B

 

$

2.6B

 

$

2.8B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Expand/Diversify Member Participation in the First Home Club (“FHC”) Program

 

Focus on outreach efforts in areas of our district where the FHC is underutilized.

 

3.75

%

7

 

9

 

11

 

12

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monthly Average Balance of Outstanding Letters of Credit

 

Supports the provision of liquidity for housing and community development activities

 

3.00

%

$

10B

 

$

11B

 

$

12.7B

 

$

13.6B

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community Investment and Affordable Housing Related Outreach and Technical Assistance Activities

 

Supports the promotion, understanding and use of the Bank’s affordable housing and community lending programs

 

4.50

%

50

 

55

 

65

 

169

 

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)
 How Goal Meets Stated Purpose Weighting Threshold Target Maximum Results 
Return Component - Dividend Capacity as forecasted in the 2020 business plan. Dividend Capacity is calculated as net income, divided by average capital stock. The Bank’s goal is to reward management for financial results that are generally controllable by management. Therefore, we adjust net income to eliminate the impact of items such as unrealized fair value changes on derivatives and associated hedged instruments. In addition, the target is adjusted due to changes in market interest rates during the year. Earnings provide value for shareholders through the ability to add to retained earnings and to pay a dividend. 40% 

3.72%

 

 

4.22%

 

 

4.97%

 

 5.11% 

 



2. Risk Goal

             

 

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)

 How Goal Meets Stated Purpose Weighting Threshold Target Maximum Results 
Risk Component - The 2020 Bank-wide Risk goal consists of three metrics, each with a unique complementary factor. Each metric will be evaluated on PASS/FAIL basis and must meet a Threshold (a specified minimum number of PASS rated metrics) to qualify for incentive compensation. Lowering the Bank’s risk profile provides a level of assurance that unexpected losses will not impair members’ investment in the Bank and serves to preserve the par value of membership stock. 25% 1 2 3 3 
The three metrics are:               

1) Dividend Sensitivity: This measure seeks to ensure dividend stability into the future by limiting downside risk to baseline forecasts from 14 specified stress scenarios (measured monthly on last business day) based on the range of scenario-based dividend capacity projections over a four quarter horizon.;

2) Capital Protection: This measure seeks to ensure members paid in capital stock are protected from potential and plausible losses. Measured as the MVE/CS ratio, this measure is defined as the quotient from dividing the Market Value of Equity (MVE) by the amount of Capital Stock (CS) outstanding and is measured monthly (last business day); and

3) Operational Exceptions: The health of the Bank’s operational control environment is represented by the aggregate number of risk events and the economic losses (i.e., an out-of-pocket loss without consideration of any insurance recoveries - this approach captures the dollar amount of the error prior to any post remediation mitigants (i.e. insurance)) that the Bank sustained for the year.

 

A PASS rating will be earned as long as the measure is at or above -100 basis points for 9 of 12 calendar months

 

 

 

 

A PASS rating will be earned as long as the measure is at or above 108% for 9 of 12 calendar months.

 

 

 

 

 

A PASS rating is earned when the Bank experiences:

1. Less than 20 Risk Events for the year; and

2. Sustains an aggregate economic loss (Operational Error Amount Post Remediation) of less than $3 mm for the year.

           


(3)               The Community Effectiveness3.  Mission and Membership Goal was implemented as a composite of several programs and activities as all of these components contribute to how the Bank achieves its mission-related housing and community development activities.

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)
 How Goal Meets Stated Purpose Weighting Threshold Target Maximum Results 
Community Investment, Business Development and Outreach Supports the promotion, understanding and use of the Bank’s affordable housing and community lending programs. 20% 12 24 36 32 
              
Member Goal 

The number of members who, in 2020, either:

1) submit applications for the first time;

2) submit an application after having not participated in the past two years; or

3) submit more applications than what was submitted in 2019.

   7 12 17 17 
              
Advances Balances  Supports the provision of liquidity to members for housing and community development activities.   $83.46 $92.73 $97.37 $107.68 
              
Market Share Helps the Bank gauge its competitive position against a variety of wholesale funding alternative used by members. Strengthens the franchise as an “advances bank”.   47% 51% 53% 47.77% 


4.  Technology Strategy Goal

Bankwide Goals
(Measure and calculation of measure)
 How Goal Meets Stated Purpose Weighting Threshold Target Maximum Results 

The Business Technology Strategy Goals will focus on three key tenets that are related to the success of the Business

Technology Strategy:

 

(1)    Reduction in Technology Debt

 

 

 

 

 

 

# of Applications or Platforms Removed

 15% 

 

 

 

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

 

 

 

 

 

 

7

 

 

 

 

 

 

5

 
              
(2)    Organizational Change Management: Communication and Outreach Activities for the Business Technology Strategy 

# of Communication & Outreach Activities

for the Business Technology Strategy Completed

   10 12 15 16 
              

(3)    Focus on “Change the Bank” Activities: Percentage of Planned Work Efforts Defined as “Change the Bank” Activities (Executing or Closed)

 % of Work Efforts Defined as "Change the Bank”   50% 65% 80% 93% 

 

Overall, the weighted average result for Bankwide goals was 77.2% above target. The weighted average result forand the Risk Management Group was 77.1%86.3% above target. Payments are interpolated between the target and maximum amounts.

 

c) Clawback Provision of the Incentive Compensation Plan

c)Clawback Provision of the Incentive Compensation Plan

 

Beginning with the 2010 IC Plan, we added aA clawback provision toin the Incentive Plan that currently readsprovides as follows:

 

If, within 3 years after an incentive has been paid or calculated as owed to a Participant who is a member of the Bank’s Management Committee, it is discovered that such amount was based on the achievement of financial or operational goals within this Plan that subsequently are deemed by the Bank to be inaccurate, misstated or misleading, the Board shall review such incentive amounts paid or owed. Inaccurate, misstated and/or misleading achievement of financial or operational goals shall include, but not be limited to, overstatements of revenue, income, capital, return measures and/or understatements of credit risk, market risk, operational risk or expenses.

 

If the Board determines that an incentive amount paid or considered owed to the Participant (the “Awarded Amount”) would have been a lower amount when calculated barring the inaccurate, misstated and/or misleading achievement of financial or operational goals (the “Adjusted Amount”), the Board shall, except as provided below, seek to recover to the fullest extent possible the difference between the Awarded Amount and the Adjusted Amount (the “Undue Incentive Amount”).

 

The Board may decide to not seek recovery of the Undue Incentive Amount if the Board determines that to do so would be unreasonable or contrary to the interests of the Bank.  In making such determination, the Board may take into account such considerations as it deems appropriate including, but not limited to: (a) whether the Undue Incentive Amount is immaterial in impact to the Bank; (b) whether the Participant engaged in any intentional or unlawful misconduct that contributed to the inaccurate, misstated and/or misleading information; (c) whether the change in the applicable achievement level was a result of circumstances beyond the control of management; (d) the likelihood of success to recover the claimed Undue Incentive Amount under governing law versus the cost and effort involved; and (e) whether seeking recovery could prejudice the interests of the Bank. The decision by the Board to seek recovery of an Undue Incentive Amount need not be uniform amongst

among Participants. Authority of the Board under this Article XIIC Plan may be delegated to the Committee but may not be delegated to the President.

 


If the Board determines to seek recovery of any or all of the Undue Incentive Amount (the “Recovery Amount”) pursuant to this Article XI,, it will make a written demand from the Participant for the repayment of the Recovery Amount. Subject to the IC Plan provisions of Schedule B regarding the forfeiture of unpaid amounts, if the Participant does not within a reasonable period, after receiving the written demand, provide repayment of the Recovery Amount, and the Board determines that he or she is unlikely to do so, the Board may seek a court order against the Participant for repayment of the Recovery Amount.

 

d) Required Deferral of IC Plan Awards for MC Members

d)Required Deferral of IC Plan Awards

 

A required deferral portion of the IC Plan (“DICP”) was implemented beginning on January 1, 2012 forapplies to members of the Bank’s Management Committee.Committee including all NEOs. Such deferred compensation plan provides that the payments made to Management Committee members under the IC Plan are deferred and will be made as described below.

 

The DICP provides that 50% of the Total Communicated Award (as defined below), if any, under the Plan year communicated to Management Committee participants (which includes the NEOs) will ordinarily be paid by the middle of March following the Plan year.

 

The remaining 50% will be deferred (the “Deferred Incentive Award”), subject to certain additional conditions specified in the Plan, such that 33 1/3% of the Deferred Incentive Award will ordinarily be paid by the middle of March of the following three years.

For the Plan years 2012-2014, each deferred payment could Deferred Incentive Awards will be increased or decreased by 25% based onpaid if the Bank’s performance on Market Valueratio of Equitymarket value of equity to Par Valuepar value of Capital Stock performance scorecard (“MVE”) and other performance measures as outlined in the table below.

Beginning with the 2015 Plan year, the C&HR Committee approved changes to the payment of the deferral amount as follows:

·                  If the MVE ratiocapital stock is equal to, or greater than 100%, eligible participants will become qualified to receive. To compensate employees for the deferral payment.  If MVE is less than 100%, then a participant would receive no payment for that year.

·                  Thelost time value of money, the Bank will pay an interest rate on the deferred amount equal to the Bank’s return on equity over the deferral period, subject to a floor of zero.

The first deferred payment affected by this change was under the 2015 IC Plan and the first deferred installment in 2016.

 

An executive who terminates employment with the Bank other than for “good reason” or who is terminated by the Bank for “cause” will forfeit any portion of the Deferred Incentive Award that has not yet been paid. In addition, the Deferred Incentive Award will be paid, if otherwise earned, in full in the event of the executive’s death or disability, or a “change in control” (as defined in the DICP).

 

In the chart below, the following terms have the following definitions:

 

“Total Communicated Award” means the total amount of the incentive award (if any) under the Plan communicated to Management Committee Participants;

 

“Current Communicated Incentive Award” means 50 percent of the Total Communicated Award;Award and shall not exceed 100 percent of the participant’s base salary; and

 

“Deferred Incentive Award” means the remaining 50 percent of the Total Communicated Award.

 

Payment

Description

Payment Year

Current Communicated Incentive Award

50% of the Total Communicated Award

Base year*

Deferred Incentive Award installment

Up to 33 1/3% of the Deferred Incentive Award

Year 1**

Deferred Incentive Award installment

Up to 33 1/3% of the Deferred Incentive Award

Year 2**

Deferred Incentive Award installment

Up to 33 1/3% of the Deferred Incentive Award

Year 3**

 


*Payment shall ordinarily be made within the first two and a half weeks of March.

**Payment shall ordinarily be made within the first two and a half weeks of March in the year indicated.

206

IV.Retirement Benefits

Introduction

We maintain comprehensive qualified and non-qualified defined benefit and defined contribution savings plans for our employees, including our NEOs. The Current Communicated Incentive Award at maximum shall not exceed 100 percentbenefits provided by these plans are components of the participant’s base salary.

B. Retirement Benefitstotal compensation opportunity for employees. The Board and C&HR Committee believe these plans serve as valuable retention tools and provide significant tax deferral opportunities and resources for the participants’ long-term financial planning. These plans are discussed below.

 

Introduction

There were elements of the Bank’s total compensation program in 2017 intended to help encourage the accumulation of wealth by consistent and superior results from qualified employees, including NEOs, over a long period of time.

These benefits (in addition to the Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits noted in Section IV C below) were part of our strategy to compete for and retain talent that might otherwise be lured away from the Bank by competing financial enterprises who offer their employees long-term incentives and equity-sharing opportunities- forms of compensation that we do not offer.

Thrift Restoration Plan

Starting in 2010, the Board approved the establishment of a Thrift Restoration Plan for certain members of former nonqualified plans.  Former participants of a terminated Nonqualified Deferred Compensation Plan program, who would have been otherwise eligible for a match in the amount of 6% of base pay in excess of IRS limitations ($265,000 for 2015), continued to receive an additional annual cash payment in an amount equal to 6% of the base pay in excess of the IRS limitation.  The Thrift Restoration Plan ceased as of January 1, 2017 due to the approval of the DC BEP effective as of January 1, 2017 as described below.

a) Profit Sharing Plan

 

In 2010, the Board approved the establishment of a Profit SharingProfit-Sharing Plan for employees who were not grandfathered in the Bank’s retirement plan and who were participants in the DB BEP. A provision of an amount equal to 8% of the prior year’s base pay and short-term incentive payment to the extent the requirements under the Bank’s IC Plan have been achieved. The 8% payment will not be included as income for calculating the benefits for the Qualified Defined Benefit Plan. There are no NEOs who qualify for this benefit.

 

1.b) DB Plan

 

The DB Plan is an IRS-qualified defined benefit plan which covers all employees who have achieved four months of service. The DB Plan is part of a multiple-employer defined benefit program administered by Pentegra Retirement Services.

 

Participants who, as of July 1, 2008, had five years of DB Plan service and were age 50 years or older, are provided with a benefit of 2.50% of a participant’s highest consecutive 3-year average earnings, multiplied by the participant’s years of benefit service, not to exceed 30 years. Earnings are defined as base salary plus short-term incentives,incentive compensation opportunities available under the Bank’s IC Plan, and overtime, subject to the annual Internal Revenue Code limit; short-term incentives for participants of the deferred incentive compensation plan is defined as the Total Communicated Award. The Normal Form of Payment is a life annuity with a guaranteed 12-year payout. A 1% simple interest cost of living adjustment (“COLA”) is provided annually to participants beginning at age 66. These participants are identified herein as “Grandfathered”.“DB Plan A.”

 

For participants who, as of July 1, 2008, did not have five years of DB Plan service and attained age 50 years or older, identified herein as “Non-Grandfathered”“DB Plan B”, the DB Plan provides a benefit of 2.0% of a participant’s highest consecutive 5-year average earnings (as opposed to consecutive 3-year average earnings as provided to Grandfathered participants), multiplied by the participant’s years of benefit service, not to exceed 30 years. Earnings are defined as base salary plus short-term incentives, and overtime, subject to the annual Internal Revenue Code limit. The Normal Form of Payment for participants hired on or after July 1, 2008 is a life annuity (i.e., an annuity paid until the death of the participant), as opposed to. The guaranteed 12-year payout option under a guaranteed twelve-year payoutlife annuity, as previously provided to Grandfathered participants.participants, was terminated effective July 1, 2008. In addition, for the Non-Grandfathered participants, the cost of living adjustments (“COLAs”)COLAs are no longer provided on future accruals (as opposed to a 1% simple interest COLA beginning at age 66 as previously provided).accruals.

 

For participants who were hired on or after July 1, 2014, the DB Plan provides a benefit of 1.50% of a participant’s highest consecutive 5-year average earnings, multiplied by the participant’s years of benefit service, not to exceed 30 years.  Earnings for participants who were hired on or after July 1, 2014 are defined as base salary only, excluding short-term incentive compensation opportunities available under the Bank’s IC Plan, subject to the annual Internal Revenue Code limit. These participants are identified herein as “DB Plan C.”


The table below summarizes the DB Plan changes affecting the Non-Grandfathered employees that went into effect on July 1, 2008 and July 1, 2014:

 

DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN
PROVISIONS

 

GRANDFATHERED
EMPLOYEES

 

NON-GRANDFATHERED
EMPLOYEES

 

PARTICIPANTS
HIRED ON OR
AFTER JULY 1, 2014

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DEFINED BENEFIT PLAN

(DB PLAN)
PROVISIONS

 DB PLAN A** DB PLAN B*** DB PLAN C****

Benefit Multiplier

 

2.5%

 

2.0%

 

1.5%

 

 2.5% 2.0% 1.5%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

Final Average Pay Period

 

High 3-Year

 

High 5-Year

 

High 5-Year

 

 High 3-Year High 5-Year High 5-Year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

Normal Form of Payment

 

Guaranteed 12 Year Payout

 

Life Annuity (payable only for Retiree’s lifetime)

 

Life Annuity (payable only for Retiree’s lifetime)

 

 

Life Annuity with Guaranteed 12 Year Payout

 

Straight Life Annuity

 

 

Straight Life Annuity

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

Cost of Living Adjustments

 

1% Per Year Cumulative Commencing at Age 66

 

None

 

None

 

 1% Per Year Cumulative Commencing at Age 66 None None

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

Early Retirement Subsidy<65:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

a) Rule of 70

 

1.5% Per Year

 

3% Per Year

 

3% Per Year

 

 1.5% Per Year 3% Per Year 3% Per Year

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

b) Rule of 70 Not Met

 

3% Per Year

 

Actuarial Equivalent

 

Actuarial Equivalent

 

 3% Per Year Actuarial Equivalent Actuarial Equivalent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      

*Vesting

 

20% Per Year Commencing Second Year of Employment

 

5-Year Cliff

 

5-Year Cliff

 

 20% Per Year Commencing Second Year of Employment 5-Year Cliff 5-Year Cliff

 


* Greater of DB Plan Vesting or New Plan Vesting applied to employees participating in the DB Plan prior to July 1, 2008.

** This includes the following NEO: K. Neylan.

*** This includes the following NEOs: M. Feinberg; J. González; and P. Scott

**** This includes the following NEO: M. Radziemski

 

For purposes of the above table, please note the following definitions:

 

Benefit Multiplier — The annuity paid from the DB Plan is calculated on an employee’s years of service, up to a maximum of 30 years, multiplied by the appropriate Benefit Multiplier for each participant, as described above.

 

Final Average Pay Period —The period of time that an employee’s salary is used in the calculation of that employee’s benefit. For Grandfathered Employees, the Benefit Multiplier, 2.5%, is multiplied by the average of the employee’s three highest consecutive years of salary multiplied by that employee’s years of service, not to exceed thirty years at the date of termination. For Non-Grandfathered Employees, any accrued benefits prior to July 1, 2008, the accrued Benefit Multiplier mirrors the Grandfathered Employees at 2.5%. For non-grandfathered employees benefits accrued after July 1, 2008, a Benefits Multiplier of 2% is multiplied by the employee’s years of service (total service not to exceed thirty years) multiplied by the average of the employee’s five highest consecutive years of salary.  For non-grandfathered employees, benefits accrued after July 1, 2014, a Benefits Multiplier of 1.50% is multiplied by the employee’s years of service (total service not to exceed thirty years) multiplied by the average of the employee’s five highest consecutive years of salary.

 

Normal Form of Payment — The DB Plan must state the form of the annuity to be paid to the retiring employee. For unmarried Grandfathered retirees, the Normal Form of Payment is a life annuity with a 12-year guaranteed payment (“Guaranteed 12-Year Payout”) which means that if the unmarried Grandfathered retiree dies prior to receiving 12 years of annuity payments, the retiree’s beneficiary will receive a lump sum equal to the remaining unpaid payments in the 12-year period. For married Grandfathered retirees, the Normal Form of Payment is a 50% joint and survivor annuity, which provides a continuation of half of the monthly annuity to the surviving beneficiary. The initial 50% joint and survivor annuity monthly payment is actuarially equivalent to the 12-year guaranteed payment provided to single retirees under the formula. Effective July 1, 2008, the DB Plan provides single Non-Grandfathered retirees and retirees hired on or after July 1, 2014 with a straight “Life Annuity” as the Normal Form of Payment, which means that, once a retiree dies, the annuity terminates. For married Non-Grandfathered retirees, the Normal Form of Payment will be a 50% joint and survivor annuity (continuation of half the monthly annuity to the surviving beneficiary) that is actuarially equivalent to the straight Life Annuity.

 

Cost of Living Adjustments (or “COLAs”) — Once a Grandfathered EmployeeDB Plan A retiree reaches age 65, in each succeeding year he/she will receive an extra payment annually equal to one percent of the original benefit amount multiplied by the number of years in pay status after age 65. As of July 1, 2008, this adjustment is no longer offered to Non-GrandfatheredDB Plan B Employees on benefits accruing after that date.

 

Early Retirement Subsidy — Early retirement under the plan is available after age 45.

 

VestingGrandfatheredDB Plan A Employees are entitled, starting with the second year of employment service, to 20% of his/her accumulated benefit per year. As a result, after the sixth year of employment service, an employee will be entitled to 100% of his/her accumulated benefit. Non-GrandfatheredDB Plan B Employees who entered the DB Plan on or after July 1, 2008 will not receive such benefit until such employee has completed five years of employment service. At that point, the employee will be entitled to 100% of his/her accumulated benefit. The term “5-Year Cliff” is a

reference to the foregoing provision. GrandfatheredDB Plan A and Non-GrandfatheredDB Plan B Employees already participating in the DB Plan prior to July 1, 2008 will vest at 20% per year starting with the second year through the fourth year of employment service and will be accelerated to 100% vesting after the fifth year.

 


Earnings under the DB Plan for GrandfatheredDB Plan A and Non-GrandfatheredDB Plan B Employees continue to be defined as base salary plus short-term incentives, and overtime, subject to the annual Internal Revenue Code (“IRC”) limit. The IRC limit on earnings for calculation of the DB Plan benefit for 20172020 was $265,000.$230,000.

 

The DB Plan pays monthly annuities, or a lump sum amount available at or after age 59-1/2, calculated on an actuarial basis, to vested participants or the beneficiaries of deceased vested participants. Annual benefits provided under the DB Plan also are subject to IRC limits, which vary by age and benefit payment option selected.

 

The Bank’s practice is to attempt to maintain “economic” funding levels for the DB Plan; therefore in the last two years we made contributions to the DB Plan in amounts greater than the minimum required contribution as determined actuarially under current pension rules as defined by Highway and Transportation Funding Act of 2014 (“HATFA”) and the 2012 Moving Ahead for Progress Act for the 21st Century (“MAP-21”).

 

2.In order to help ensure that the Bank’s qualified pension plan continues to pass IRS Safe Harbor tests, commencing on July 1, 2021, the qualified retirement benefits for certain NEOs will no longer accrue under the DB Plan; rather, these benefits will be provided under the DB BEP described below.

c) DB BEP

 

Employees at the rank of Vice President and above (including the NEOs) who exceed income limitations established by the IRC for three out of five consecutive years and who are also approved for inclusion by the Bank’s Nonqualified Plan Committee are eligible to participate in the DB BEP, a non-qualified retirement plan that in many respects mirrors the DB Plan with the exception of the DB Plan changesbenefit multiplier reduction to 1.5% implemented effective July 1, 2014.2014 under DB Plan C.

 

The primary objective of the DB BEP is to ensure that participants receive the full benefit to which they would have been entitled under the DB Plan in the absence of limits on maximum benefit levels imposed by the IRC.

In the event that the benefits payable from the DB Plan have been reduced or otherwise limited by government regulations, the employee’s “lost” benefits are payable under the terms of the DB BEP. The DB BEP also enhances benefits for certain NEOs as follows:

 

NON-QUALIFIED
DEFINED BENEFIT

(DB BEP PLAN)
PROVISIONS

 DB BEP PLAN A* DB BEP PLAN B**
Benefit Multiplier 2.5% 2.0%
     
Final Average Pay Period High 3-Year High 5-Year
     
Normal Form of Payment 

Life Annuity with Guaranteed

12 Year Payout

 

Straight Life Annuity

 

     
Cost of Living Adjustments 1% Per Year Cumulative Commencing at Age 66 None

* This includes the following NEOs: J. González and K. Neylan. Effective January 1, 2019, the DB BEP Component of the Supplemental Executive Retirement Plan was amended to provide J. González with the provisions under DB Plan A of the DB Plan.

** This includes the following NEOs: M. Feinberg; and P. Scott.

The DB BEP is an unfunded arrangement.  However, the Bank has established a grantor trust to assist in financing the payment of benefits under this plan as well as the DC BEP and the NDICP.plan. The Bank’s practicepolicy is to maintain assets in the grantor trust at a level up to the Accumulated Benefit Obligation for the DB BEP. The financing level for the DB BEP the DC BEP and the NDICP; the financing levels areis reviewed annually.

 

The Nonqualified Plan Committee administers various oversight responsibilities pertaining to the DB BEP. These matters include, but are not limited to, approving employees as participants of the DB BEP and adopting any amendment or taking any other action which may be appropriate to facilitate the DB BEP. The Nonqualified Plan Committee is chaired by the Chair of the C&HR Committee; other members include a Board Director who is a member of the C&HR Committee, our Chief Financial Officer, and the Director of Human Resources. The Nonqualified Plan Committee reports its actions to the C&HR Committee by submitting its meeting minutes to the C&HR Committee on a regular basis.Committee.


d) DC Plan

 

3. DC Plan

Employees who have met certain eligibility requirements can choose toNEOs may contribute to the DC Plan, a retirement savings plan qualified under the IRC. EmployeesAll employees are eligible for membership in the DC Plan on the first day of the month following three full calendar months of employment.

 

An employee may contribute 1% to 100% of base salary into the DC Plan, up to IRC limitations. The IRC limit for 20172020 was $18,000$19,500 for employees under the age of 50. An additional “catch up” contribution of $6,000$6,500 is permitted under IRC rules for employees who attain age 50 before the end of the calendar year.

 

Effective July 1, 2014, there is no waiting period for new employees to receive the match of 6%.  If an employee contributes at least 4% of base salary, the Bank provides the maximum employer match of 6% of elective contributions upon plan entry.   If an employee contributes less than 4% of base salary, the Bank will match at a rate of 150% of elective contributions.  Contributions of less than 2% of base salary receive a match of 2%up to 1.5% of the employee’s base salary or $34.61 per pay period (whichever is less).salary.

 

4. e) DC BEP

On November 17, 2016, the Board approved and authorized the implementation of the Amended and Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Defined Benefit & Defined Contribution Benefit Equalization Plan, effective as of January 1, 2017 (the “Amended and Restated BEP”), and the separate NDICP, also effective as of January 1, 2017. On December 5, 2016 the Bank’s primary regulator, the Federal Housing Finance Agency, informed the Bank that it had no objection to the Bank’s adoption and implementation of the Amended and Restated BEP and the NDICP which is discussed immediately following.

 

Employees at the rank of Vice President and above (including the NEOs) who exceed income limitations established by the IRC, for three out of five consecutive years, and who contribute to their qualified DC Plan up to the IRC Limits, are eligible to participate in the DC BEP.  Effective January 1, 2017, qualifiedParticipating employees wereare allowed to defer up to 19% of the employee’s base salary (less the amount of salary deferrals allowed under the DC Plan pursuant to the IRS Limits).

 

Similar toAs a continuation of the qualified DC Plan, the Bank will make a matching contribution each plan year of up to 6% of base salary on the first 4% of elective deferrals made under the DC BEP.  If an employee elects to defer less than 4% of base salary, the Bank will match at a rate of 150% of elective deferred contributions.  For deferrals beginning January 1, 2020, the Bank will make a matching contribution of up to 9% of base salary for NEO elective deferrals (in excess of the DC Plan contribution limits). All deferred monies will be the property of the Bank until distribution to the employee and thus subject to claims of Bank creditors until distribution.

Amounts deferred and contributed as matching contributions under the DC BEP shall be credited to the participant’s DC BEP account. Participants may choose to invest their DC BEP funds within a menu of investment options.

 

5.f) NDICP

 

The NDICP which became effective on January 1, 2017, will allowallows employees serving at the rank of a Vice President or above (including the NEOs) with a hire date of October 31st or before in a calendar year to elect to defer all or a portion of the employee’s annual incentive compensation  that is paid to the employee under the terms of any Board-approved IC Plan or deferred portion of such IC Plan. The Bank does not provide a match on these deferrals.  All deferred monies will be the property of the Bank until distribution to the employee and thus subject to claims of Bank creditors until distribution.

 

Amounts deferred and contributed under the NDICP shall be credited to the participant’s NDICP account.  Participants may choose to invest their NDICP funds within a menu of investment options. Participants may elect to receive their funds in a lump sum or in at least two annual installments (not to exceed ten annual installments).

 

V.Health and Welfare Programs and Other Benefits

C. Health

a)Perquisites and Benefits

We offer the following additional perquisites and Welfare Programsother benefits to all employees, including the NEOs, under the same general terms and Other Benefitsconditions:

 

In addition to the foregoing, we offer a comprehensive benefits package for all regular employees (including NEOs) which include the following significant benefits:

Medical, dental, and vision insurance (subject to employee expense sharing);
Vacation leave, which increases based upon officer title and years of service;
Life and long-term disability insurance (NEOs are eligible for enhanced monthly benefits under our disability insurance program);

 


Travel and accident insurance which include life insurance benefits;
Educational assistance; and
Employee relocation assistance, where appropriate, for new hires.

Medical and Dental

Employees can choose preferred provider, open access or managed care medical plans. All types of medical coverage include a prescription benefit. Dental plan choices include preferred provider or managed care. Employees contribute to cover a portion of the costs for these benefits.  Effective January 1, 2015, the medical plans were replaced with a HDHP which includes a Health Savings Account HSA which are discussed in Section I above.  In order for the healthcare plan to be eligible for an HSA account, the IRS requires that plan deductibles and maximum out-of-pocket limits be increased and pharmacy benefits be paid only after the deductible is met.  The Bank established, and contributed to, employee HSA accounts on January 1, 2015 and thereafter to offset costs associated with these changes.

Retiree Medical

b)Retiree Medical

 

We offer eligible employees, including certain NEOs, medical coverage when they retire. Employees are eligible to participate in the Retiree Medical Benefits Plan if they were at least 55 years old as of January 1, 2015 with 10 years of service as of January 1, 2015.when they retire from active service.

 

Under the Plan as in effect from May 1, 1995 until December 31, 2007, retireesRetirees who retire before age 62 pay the full premium for the coverage they had as employees until they attain age 62. Thereafter, they contribute a percentage of the premium based on their total completed years of service (no adjustment is made for partial years of service) on a “Defined Benefit” basis, as defined below, as follows:

 

 

Percentage of Premium

 

Completed Years of Service

 

Paid by Retiree

 

10

 

50.0

%

11

 

47.5

%

12

 

45.0

%

13

 

42.5

%

14

 

40.0

%

15

 

37.5

%

16

 

35.0

%

17

 

32.5

%

18

 

30.0

%

19

 

27.5

%

20 or more

 

25.0

%

The premium paid by retirees upon becoming Medicare-eligible (either at age 65 or prior thereto as a result of disability) is a premium reduced to take into account the status of Medicare as the primary payer of the medical benefits of Medicare-eligible retirees.

 

As a result of the Aon study described previously and the recommendations that resulted from such study, the Board directed that certain changes inUnder the Plan be made, effective Januaryas in effect from May 1, 2008. Employees who, on1995 until December 31, 2007, hadherein identified as “Grandfathered,” retirees beginning at age 62, we contributed a percentage of the premium based on their total completed years of service (no adjustment is made for partial years of service) on a “Defined Benefit” basis. There are no NEOs who qualify for this benefit.

Effective January 1, 2008, for employees who, as of December 31, 2007, did not have 5 years of service and were age 60 or older, were not affected by this change. These employees areherein identified herein as “Grandfathered.” However, for all other employees, identified herein as “Non-Grandfathered,” the Plan premium-payment requirements beginning at age 62 were changed. From age 62 until the retiree or a covered dependent of the retiree becomes Medicare-eligible (usually at age 65 or earlier, if disabled), we contributecontributed $45 per month toward the premium of a Non-Grandfathered retiree multiplied by the number of years of service earned by the retiree after age 45 and45. The total cost of medical coverage elected by the employee (determined by the number of individuals (includingincluding the retiree, the retiree’s spouse, and each other dependent of the retiree) covered under the Plan.Plan is then reduced by the Bank contribution)

Afterfrom age 62 until the retiree or a covered dependent of the retiree becomes Medicare-eligible our contribution toward the premium(usually at age 65 or earlier, if disabled). There are no NEOs who qualify for the coverage of the Medicare-eligible individual will be reduced to $25 per month multiplied by the number of years of service earned by the retiree after age 45 and by the number of individuals (including the retiree, the retiree’s spouse, and each other dependent of the retiree) covered under the Plan. The $45 and $25 amounts were

fixed for the 2008 calendar year. Each year thereafter, these amounts will increase by a cost-of-living adjustment (“COLA”) factor not to exceed 3%. The table below summarizes the Retiree Medical Benefits Plan changes that affect Non-Grandfathered employees who retire on or after January 1, 2008.this benefit.

 

EffectiveFor all covered employees as of January 1, 2015, for all other employees,including the Plan premium-payment requirements beginning at age 62 were changed.  FromNEOs, from age 62 until the retiree or a covered dependent of the retiree becomes Medicare-eligible (usually at age 65 or earlier, if disabled), we contribute $26.87 per month toward the premium of a Non-Grandfathered retiree multiplied by the number of years of service earned by the retiree after age 45 and45. The total cost of medical coverage elected by the employee (determined by the number of individuals (includingincluding the retiree, the retiree’s spouse, and each other dependent of the retiree) covered under the Plan.Plan is then reduced by the Bank contribution.

 

After the retiree or a covered dependent of the retiree becomes Medicare-eligible, our contribution toward the premium for the coverage of the Medicare-eligible individual will be reduced to $14.93 per month multiplied by the number of years of service earned by the retiree after age 45 and45. The total cost of medical coverage elected by the employee (determined by the number of individuals (includingincluding the retiree, the retiree’s spouse, and each other dependent of the retiree) covered under the Plan.Plan is then reduced by the Bank contribution. The $26.87 and $14.93 amounts wereare fixed for the 2015 calendar year. The COLA factorand not cost-of-living adjusted.


Below is eliminated. The table below summarizesa summary of the Retiree Medical Benefits Plan changes that affect employees who retire on or after January 1, 2015.

For purposes of the following table and the preceding discussion on the Retiree Medical Benefits Plan, the following definitions have been used:

Defined Benefit — A medical plan in which we provide medical coverage to a retired employee and collect from the retiree a monthly fixed dollar portion of the premium for the coverage elected by the employee.

Defined Dollar Plan — A medical plan in which we provide medical coverage to a retired employee up to a fixed cost for the coverage elected by the employee and the retiree assumes all costs above the stated contribution.Plan:

 

Provisions for
GrandfatheredRetiree Medical Benefit Plan

Provisions for Non-
Grandfathered

Provisions
For Retirees

Retirees

Retirees

January 1, 2015 and AfterAfter*

Plan Type

Defined Dollar Plan: A medical plan in which medical coverage is provided to a retired employee up to a fixed cost for the coverage elected by the employee and the retiree assumes all costs above the stated contribution.

Plan Type

Defined Benefit

Defined Dollar Plan

Defined Dollar Plan

Eligibility

Active employee who has completed 10 years of employment at FHLBNY and attained age 55 as of January 1,2015.

Medical Plan Formula

1) Same coverage offered to active employees prior to age 65

1) Retiree (and covered individual), is eligible for $45/month x years of service after age 45, and has attained the age of 62. There is a 3% Cost of Living Adjustment each year.

1) Retiree (and covered individual), is eligible for $26.87/month x years of service after age 45 and has attained the age of 62. The 3% Cost of Living Adjustment is eliminated.

excluded.

2) Supplement Medicare coverage for retirees age 65 and over

2) Retiree (and covered individual) is eligible for $25/month x years of service after age 45 and after age 65. There is a 3% Cost of Living Adjustment each year.

2) Retiree (and covered individual) is eligible for $14.93/month x years of service after age 45 and after age 65. The 3% Cost of Living Adjustment is eliminated.

excluded.

Employer

Cost Share Examples:

0% for Pre-62

$0 for Pre-62 Pre-65/Post-65

$0 for Pre-62 Pre-65/Post-65

Employer Cost Share Examples:

10 years of service after age 45

50% for Post-62

$5,400/$3,000/Annually

$3,224/$1,792/Annually

15 years of service after age 45

62.5% for Post-62

$8,100/$4,500/Annually

$4,837/$2,687/Annually

20 years of service after age 45

75% for Post-62

$10,800/$6,000/Annually

$6,449/$3,583/Annually

 

*Vision CareThis includes the following NEOs: K. Neylan.

 

Employees can choose from two types of coverage offered. Basic vision care is offered at no charge to employees. Employees contribute to the cost for the enhanced coverage.

Life Insurance

The Group Term Life insurance provides a death benefit of twice an employee’s annual salary (including incentive compensation) at no cost to the employee other than taxation of the imputed value of coverage in excess of $50,000. The maximum amount of life insurance coverage is $2,000,000 (with proof of good health), otherwise maximum life insurance coverage is $750,000.

Additional Life Insurance

Additional Life Insurance is provided to one NEO (the Chief Bank Operations Officer) who, in 2003, was a participant in the Split Dollar life insurance program, as consideration for his assigning to the Bank his portion of the Split Dollar life insurance policy. The Split Dollar life insurance program was terminated in 2003. The total insurance coverage for the participating NEO is $1,000,000 with an annual premium expense to the Bank of $1,020 in 2017.

This Additional Term Life Insurance policy is paid by the Bank; however, the NEO owns the policy. We purchased these policies in 2003 for 15 years and locked in the premiums for the duration of the policies. When the policy expires in 2018, the Bank will renew the policy and the rate will be subject to change.

Retiree Life Insurance

Retiree Life Insurance provides a death benefit in relation to the amount of coverage one chooses at the time of retirement. The continued benefit is calculated by the insurance broker and is paid for by the retiree. Coverage can be chosen in $1,000 increments up to a maximum of $20,000.

Defined Benefit Plan - Active Service Death Benefit (“ASDB”)

Upon the death of an active employee in the DB Plan, a death benefit shall be paid to the employee’s beneficiary in a lump sum at least one to three times the employee’s ASDB salary.

Defined Benefit BEP — ASDB

Upon the death of an active employee in the DB BEP, a death benefit shall be paid to the employee’s beneficiary in a lump sum pursuant to the BEPs

If you are an active employee in the DB BEP and you die in active service, your beneficiary would be eligible to a lump sum pursuant to the administration of the BEP.

Business Travel Accident Insurance

Business Travel Accident insurance provides a death benefit while traveling on Bank business, outside of the normal commute, at no cost to the employee.

Short-and Long-Term Disability Insurance

Short-and long-term disability insurance is provided at no cost to the employee.

Supplemental Short-Term Disability Coverage

We provide supplemental short-term disability coverage at no cost to the employee. This coverage provides 66.67% (up to a maximum of $1,000 per week) of a person’s salary while they are on disability leave. Once state disability coverage is confirmed, we reduce supplemental calculations by the amount payable from the Short-Term Disability provider.

Flexible Spending Accounts

Flexible spending accounts in accordance with IRC rules are provided to employees to allow tax benefits for certain medical expenses, dependent medical expenses, and mass transit expenses and parking expenses associated with commuting. The administrative costs for these accounts are paid by the Bank. Effective January 1, 2015, the Health Savings Account replaced the medical Flexible Spending Account.

Employee Assistance Program

Employee assistance counseling is available at no cost to employees. This is a Bank-provided benefit that allows employees to anonymously speak to a 3rd party provider regarding various issues such as stress, finance, smoking cessation, weight management and personal therapy.

Educational Development Assistance

Educational Development Assistance provides tuition reimbursement, subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions.

Voluntary Life Insurance

Employees are afforded the opportunity to purchase additional life insurance for themselves and their eligible dependents.

Fitness Center Reimbursement

Fitness center reimbursement, up to $350 per year, is available to all employees subject to the satisfaction of certain criteria.

Service Award

We provide employees, including NEOs, who are employed at the Bank for 10 years or more with a service award.  This award is presented after 10 years in increments of 5 years.  The award ranges from $250 - $1,000.

Perquisites

Perquisites represent expenditures totaling less than $10,000 for the year 2017 per NEO.

D. VI.     Severance Plan, and Executive Change in Control Agreements and Golden Parachute Rule

 

1.a)     Severance Plan

 

Other than as described below, all Bank employees are employed under an “at will” arrangement.  Accordingly, an employee may resign employment at any time and the Bank may terminate the employee’s employment at any time for any reason with or without cause.

 

Severance benefits to an employee in the event of termination of his or her employment may be paid in accordance with the Bank’s formal Board-approved Severance Pay Plan (“Severance Plan”) available to all Bank employees who work twenty or more hours a week and have completed at least one yeartwo “periods of employment.service” (the number of six (6) month periods, in the aggregate, for which an employee is employed by the Bank).

 

Severance benefits may be paid to employees who:

 

(i) are part of a reduction in force;

 

(ii) have resigned from the Bank following a reduction in salary grade, level, or rank;

 

(iii) refuse a transfer of fifty miles or more;

 


(iv) have their position eliminated;

 

(v) are unable to perform his/her duties in a satisfactory manner and is warranted that the employee would not be discharged for cause; or

 

(vi)  had their employment terminated as a result of a change in control (however, in the event of a change in control that affects the Bank President, the other Bank NEOs, and the Chief Audit Officer, provisions contained in separate Executive Change in Control Agreements shall govern; see below for more information).

 

An officer shall be eligible for two weeks of severance benefits for each six month period of service with the Bank (even if the employment has been less than six months), but not less than eight weeks of severance benefits nor more than thirty-six weeks of such benefits; in the event of a change in control, the ‘floor’ and ‘cap’ shall be twelve weeks and fifty-two weeks, respectively. Non-officers are eligible for severance benefits in accordance with different formulas.

 

If the terminated employee is enrolled in the Bank’s medical benefits plan at the time of termination and elects to purchase health insurance continuation coverage, the Bank may provide a lump sum payment in an amount to be determined by the Bank intended to be used in connection with payments by terminated employees related to health insurance. The Bank may also in its discretion arrange for outplacement services.

 

Payment of severance benefits under the Severance Plan is contingent on an employee executing a severance agreement which includes a release of any claim the employee may have against the Bank and any present and former director, officer and employee.

 

Severance benefits payable under the Severance Plan shall be paid on a lump sum basis.

2.

b)     Executive Change in Control Agreements

 

Executive Change in Control Agreements (“CIC Agreements”) were executed in January 2016 and renewed in January 2019 for an additional three-year term between the FHLBNY and each of the members of the Management Committee, including the CEO and the other Named Executive Officers, and the Chief Audit Officer,NEOs, which as more fully described below, would provide the executive with certain severance payments and benefits in the event employment is terminated in connection with a “change in control” of FHLBNY. Previously, on December 10, 2015, the Federal Housing Finance Agency indicated to FHLBNY that it would have no objection to the FHLBNY entering into agreements containing the severance payment provisions that are included in the CIC Agreements.

 

The CIC Agreements are effective commencing December 1, 2015 for three (3) years from the date the CIC Agreement is executed. Under the terms of the CIC Agreement, if the executive’s employment with FHLBNY is terminated by FHLBNY without “cause” (as defined in the CIC Agreement) or by the executive for “good reason” (as defined in the CIC Agreement) during the period beginning on the earliest of (a) twelve (12) months prior to the execution by FHLBNY of a definitive agreement regarding a Change in Control, (b) twelve (12) months prior to Change in Control mandated by federal statute, rule or directive, and (c) twelve (12) months prior to the adoption of a plan or proposal for the liquidation or dissolution of FHLBNY, and ending, in all cases, twenty-four (24) months following the effective date of the Change in Control, the executive becomes entitled to certain severance payments and benefits. These

The payments and benefits include: (i) an amount equal to the product of the executive’s average gross base salary for the three years prior to his employment termination date (with any partial years being annualized), multiplied by 2.99 for the CEO,Chief Executive Officer, and 1.5 for other CIC Agreement participants; (ii) if the executive is a participant in FHLBNY’s Incentive Compensation Plan (the “Annual Plan”), an amount equal to the product of the executive’s full target incentive payout estimate, or the actual amount of the payment to the executive under the Annual Plan, if lower, in either case, in respect of the year prior to the year of the employment termination date, multiplied by 2.99 for the CEO,Chief Executive Officer, and 1.5 for other CIC Agreement participants; (iii) an amount equal to the cost of health, dental and vision care benefits that FHLBNY actually incurred by FHLBNY on behalf of the Executive and his dependents, if any, during the twelve (12) months prior to the executive’s employment termination date; (iv) $15,000, which the executive may put toward outplacement services; (v) $15,000, which the executive may put toward accounting, actuarial, financial, legal or tax services; (vi) additional age and service credits under the FHLBNY non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plan of three (3) years for the CEOChief Executive Officer and one and one-half (1.5) years for other CIC Agreement participants; and (vii) an amount equal to 2.99 times the CEO’sChief Executive Officer’s annual matching contribution under the DC Plan and 1.5 times the match for other CIC Agreement participants.

 

The payments described above are payable in a lump sum within sixty (60) days following the executive’s employment termination date, with the benefits under the BEP being distributed in accordance with the terms of the BEP. All payments and benefits are conditioned on the executive having delivered an irrevocable general release of claims against FHLBNY before


payment occurs.  In addition, notwithstanding anything to the contrary, all payments and benefits remain subject to FHLBNY’s compliance with any applicable statutory and regulatory requirements relating to the payment of amounts under the CIC Agreements and in the event that a governmental authority or a court with competent jurisdiction directs that any portion or all of the payments may not be paid to the executive, the executive shall not be eligible to receive, or shall return, such payments.

 

c)     Golden Parachute Rule

V. ExplanationThe Finance Agency issued final rules on executive compensation and golden parachute payments relating to the regulator’s oversight of how we determinesuch compensation and payments located at 12 CFR Parts 1230 and 1231 the amount (“Golden Parachute Rule”). This sets forth the standards that the Finance Agency will take into consideration when limiting or prohibiting golden parachute payments by an FHLBank, the Office of Finance, Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac. The Golden Parachute Rule generally prohibits golden parachute payments except in limited circumstances with Finance Agency approval. Golden parachute payments may include compensation paid to a director, officer or employee following the termination of such person's employment by a regulated entity that is insolvent, is in conservatorship or receivership, is required by the Director to improve its financial condition, or has been assigned a composite examination rating of 4 or 5 by the Finance Agency. Golden parachute payments generally do not include payments made pursuant to a qualified pension or retirement plan, an employee welfare benefit plan, a bona fide deferred compensation plan, a nondiscriminatory severance pay plan, or payments made by reason of the death or disability of the individual. Our benefit plans comply with the Golden Parachute Rule and where applicable, the formula for each element of compensationBank has not had a payment in 2020 restricted by the Finance Agency.

VII.Explanation of how we determine the amount and, where applicable, the formula for each element of compensation

 

Please see Section IVII directly above for an explanation of the mechanisms used to determine employee compensation.

 

VI. Explanation of how each element of compensation and the decisions regarding that element fit into the overall compensation objectives and affect decisions regarding other elements of compensation

VIII.Explanation of how each element of compensation and the decisions regarding that element fit into the overall compensation objectives and affect decisions regarding other elements of compensation

 

The Committee believes it has developed a unified, coherent system of compensation. Please refer to the Introduction sectionSection II under the heading “The Total Compensation Program” for an explanation of the components that make up our total compensation program. Together, these components comprised the total compensation program for 2017,2020 and they are established in accordance with our Compensation Philosophy and the regulated environment that we operate in as discussed in detail in Section IVI above.

 

Our overall objectives with regard to our compensation and benefits program are to motivate employees to achieve consistent and superior results over a long period of time, and to provide a program that allows us to compete for and retain talent that otherwise might be lured away. Section IV of the CD&A above describes how each element of the compensation objectives and the decisions regarding each element fit within such objectives.

 

As we make changes to one element of the compensation and benefits program mix, the C&HR Committee considers the impact on the other elements of the mix. In this regard, the C&HR Committee strives to maintain programs that keep the Bank within the parameters of its compensation philosophy as set forth in the Bank’s Compensation Policy.Policy and Compensation Benchmarking.

 

We note that differences in compensation levels that may exist among the NEOs are primarily attributable to the benchmarking process. The Board does have the power to adjust compensation from the results of the benchmarking process; however, this power is not normally exercised.

COMPENSATION COMMITTEE REPORT

 

The C&HR Committee of the Board of Directors has reviewed and discussed the Compensation Discussion and Analysis required by Item 402(b) of Regulation S-K with management and, based on such review and discussions, the C&HR Committee recommended to the Board that the Compensation Discussion and Analysis be included in the annual report on Form 10-K for the year 2017.2020.

 


THE COMPENSATION AND HUMAN RESOURCES COMMITTEE

 

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., Chair

C. Cathleen Raffaeli,David J. Nasca, Vice Chair

Kevin Cummings Anne Evans Estabrook

Gerald H. Lipkin

Christopher P. Martin David J. Nasca

Stephen S. Romaine

Ángela Weyne

 

RISKS ARISING FROM COMPENSATION PRACTICES

 

We do not believe that risks arising from the compensation policies with respect to its employees are reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect on the Bank. We do not structure any of our compensation plans in a way that inappropriately encourages risk taking to achieve payment.

 

Our business model operates on a low return/low risk basis.  One of the important characteristics of our culture is appropriate attention to risk management. We have established procedures with respect to risk which are reviewed frequently by entities such as our regulator, external audit firm, Risk Management Group, and Internal Audit Department.

 

In addition, we have a Board and associated Committees that provide governance. The compensation programs are reviewed annually by the C&HR Committee to ensure they followand the goals.

The structure of our compensation programs provides evidence of the balanced approach to risk and reward in our culture. The rationale behind the structure of the Incentive Plan and its goals is to motivate management to take a balanced approach to managing risks and returns in the course of managing the business, while at the same time ensuring that we fulfill our mission. The Incentive Plan design is intended to motivate management to act in ways that are aligned with the Board’s wishes to have us achieve forecasted returns while managing risks within prescribed risk parameters. In addition, the goals in the IncentiveIC Plan will not motivate management to increase returns if they require imprudently increasing risk.

 

We operate with a philosophy that all our employees are risk managers and are, therefore, responsible for managing risk.  It is true that we have separated operational management from risk oversight, and those employees who work in the Risk Management Group have a special responsibility to identify, measure, and report risk.  However, all employees need to be aware of and responsible for managing risks at the Bank, and to consider the risk implications of their decisions. To do otherwise is to relegate the management of risks to a limited number of professionals and allow other managers to believe that managing risks is not part of their jobs.  In our view, such an approach could lead to imprudent risk-taking and may erode the Bank’s value over time.

In addition, we are prohibited by lawregulations from offering equity-based compensation, and we do not currently offer long-term incentives. However, many of the firms in our peer group do offer these types of compensation. The total compensation program takes into account the existence of these other types of compensation by offering defined benefit and defined contribution plans to help effectively compete for talent. The defined benefit and defined contribution plans are designed to reward employees for continued strong performance over the course of their careers — that is, the longer an employee works at the Bank, the greater the benefit the employee is likely to accumulate. Senior and mid-level employees are generally long-tenured, and we believe that these employees would not want to endanger their pension benefits by inappropriately stretching rules to achieve a short-term financial gain. By definition, these programs are reflective of the low risk culture.

 

The Finance Agency also has issued certain compensation principles, one of which is that executive compensation should be consistent with sound risk management and preservation of the Market value of Equity to Capital Stock Ratio Value of membership stock. Also, the Finance Agency reviews all executive compensation plans relative to these principles and such other factors as the Finance Agency determines to be appropriate, including the Bank’s annual Incentive Plan, prior to their becoming effective.

 

Thus, the Bank’s low risk culture, which is reflected in the compensation policy, leads us to believe that any risks arising from the compensation policies with respect to our employees are not reasonably likely to have a material adverse effect.

 

Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation

 

The following persons served on the C&HR Committee during all or some of the period from January 1, 20172020 through the date of this annual report on Form 10-K: DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., Kevin Cummings, Anne Evans Estabrook, James W. Fulmer, Gerald H. Lipkin, Christopher P. Martin, David J. Nasca, C. Cathleen Raffaeli, Stephen S. Romaine, and Monte N. Redman.Ángela Weyne. During this period, no interlocking relationships existed between any member of the Bank’s Board of Directors or the C&HR Committee and any member of the boardBoard of directorsDirectors or compensation committee

of any other company, nor did any such interlocking relationship existedexist in the past.  Further, no member of the C&HR Committee listed above was an officer or our employee during the course of their service as a member of the Committee or was formerly an officer or our employee before becoming a member of the Committee.

 


Executive Compensation

 

The table below summarizes the total compensation earned by each of the Named Executive Officers (“NEOs”) for the years 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018 (in dollars):

 

Summary Compensation Table for Calendar Years 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018

 

Name and Principal Position

 

Year

 

Salary
(M) (1) (11)

 

Bonus

 

Stock
Awards

 

Option
Awards

 

Non-Equity
Incentive
Plan
Compensation
(A)(a) (1)

 

Change in
Pension Value
and Nonqualified
Deferred
Compensation
(B,C)
(b,c)
(2, 3)

 

All Other
Compensation
(D,E,F,G,H,I,J,K,L)
(d, e, f, g, h, i, j, k, l)
(4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10)

 

Total
(N)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

José R. González

 

2017

 

$

875,000

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

860,851

 

$

91,000

 

$

47,024

 

$

1,873,875

 

President & Chief Executive Officer (PEO)

 

2016

 

$

791,779

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

781,402

 

$

72,000

 

$

45,954

 

$

1,691,135

 

 

 

2015

 

$

729,750

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

677,021

 

$

60,000

 

$

97,968

 

$

1,564,739

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

2017

 

$

484,751

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

343,265

 

$

1,081,000

 

$

78,941

 

$

1,987,957

 

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer (PFO)

 

2016

 

$

469,492

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

347,149

 

$

627,000

 

$

64,267

 

$

1,507,908

 

 

 

2015

 

$

419,190

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

282,548

 

$

192,000

 

$

77,460

 

$

971,198

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Melody Feinberg*

 

2017

 

$

386,282

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

268,465

 

$

228,000

 

$

93,461

 

$

976,208

 

Senior Vice President, Chief Risk Officer

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

2017

 

$

398,645

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

281,650

 

$

1,118,000

 

$

104,949

 

$

1,903,244

 

Senior Vice President, CIO & Head of Enterprise Services

 

2016

 

$

386,097

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

284,905

 

$

617,000

 

$

84,665

 

$

1,372,667

 

 

 

2015

 

$

324,451

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

200,800

 

$

37,000

 

$

101,453

 

$

663,704

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

2017

 

$

410,055

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

291,114

 

$

1,040,000

 

$

118,345

 

$

1,859,514

 

Senior Vice President, Chief Banking Operations Officer

 

2016

 

$

400,054

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

296,968

 

$

574,000

 

$

110,357

 

$

1,381,379

 

 

 

2015

 

$

377,410

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

255,053

 

$

 

$

113,262

 

$

745,725

 

                    Change in       
                 Non-Equity  Pension Value       
                 Incentive  and Nonqualified       
           Stock  Option  Plan  Deferred  All Other    
Name and Principal Position Year  Salary  Bonus  Awards  Awards  Compensation (a)(1)  Compensation (b)(2)  Compensation (c)(3)  Total (d) 
José R. González  2020  $996,000  $-  $-  $-  $1,018,077  $1,430,000  $134,744  $3,578,821 
President &  2019  $993,600  $-  $-  $-  $961,906  $2,736,000  $145,233  $4,836,739 
Chief Executive Officer (PEO)  2018  $920,000  $-  $-  $-  $927,184  $69,000  $61,989  $1,978,173 
                                     
Kevin M. Neylan  2020  $550,000  $-  $-  $-  $415,545  $1,483,000  $104,580  $2,553,125 
Senior Vice President,  2019  $531,787  $-  $-  $-  $365,340  $1,598,000  $71,995  $2,567,122 
Chief Financial Officer (PFO)  2018  $515,048  $-  $-  $-  $376,879  $528,000  $38,402  $1,458,329 
                                     
Melody J. Feinberg  2020  $475,000  $-  $-  $-  $357,828  $575,000  $93,518  $1,501,346 
Senior Vice President,  2019  $438,813  $-  $-  $-  $302,648  $453,000  $60,018  $1,254,479 
Chief Risk Officer  2018  $425,000  $-  $-  $-  $309,608  $152,000  $34,064  $920,672 
                                     
Michael L. Radziemski*  2020  $454,300  $-  $-  $-  $325,226  $61,000  $54,899  $895,425 
Senior Vice President,                                    
Chief Information Officer                                    
                                     
Philip A. Scott**  2020  $490,438  $-  $-  $-  $368,926  $814,000  $106,467  $1,779,831 
Senior Vice President,  2019  $475,000  $-  $-  $-  $324,382  $742,000  $61,996  $1,603,378 
Chief Capital Markets Officer                                    

 

Footnotes for Summary Compensation Table for the Year Ending December 31, 20172020

(1)The amounts in column (a) reflect the dollar value of all earnings for services performed during the fiscal years ended December 31, 2020, 2019, and 2018 pursuant to awards under the ICP, even though fifty percent of the ICP awards for each year were subject to mandatory deferral and distribution over three years. As discussed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the 2020 non-equity incentive compensation awards were subject to a 30-day review period and receipt of non-objection by the Finance Agency. The Bank received written non-objection from the Finance Agency on February 19, 2020. The amounts in column (a) also include the dollar value of all interest during each year earned on Deferred Incentive related to ICP awards for prior fiscal years, in the following amounts for 2020: $54,891 for J. González, $21,809 for K. Neylan, $17,784 for M. Feinberg and $17,830 for P. Scott.

(2)The amounts in column (b) reflects the sum of the actuarial change in pension value for (i) the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions and (ii) the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan. These values are based on actuarial calculations and depend on the level of market interest rates in addition to other factors. These plans are described in greater detail below under “Pension Benefits.”

(3)The amounts in column (c) for 2020 consist of the following amounts:

 


Name Bank Contributions
under the 401(k)
Plan (1)
  Matching
contributions under
the Bank’s non-
qualified Defined
Contribution Benefit
Equalization Plan (2)
  Perquisite (3)  Tax Gross-ups (4)  Other (5)  Total 
José R. González $11,720  $81,357  $16,667  $-  $25,000  $134,744 
                         
Kevin M. Neylan $6,112  $45,216  $9,252  $-  $44,000  $104,580 
                         
Melody J. Feinberg $6,283  $37,961  $11,274  $-  $38,000  $93,518 
                         
Michael L. Radziemski* $17,100  $-  $1,455  $-  $36,344  $54,899 
                         
Philip A. Scott** $6,542  $39,231  $6,417  $329  $53,948  $106,467 

(1)Includes amount of funds matched in connection with the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial Institutions.

(A)Bonuses are not provided by the Bank. However, the non-equity incentive plan compensation in the above table may be considered by some to be deemed a “bonus”.  For 2017, the reported amount here is the sum of: (i) the 2017 Total Communicated Award and (ii) the adjustment to the third Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2014 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iii) the adjustment to the second Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2015 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iv) the adjustment to the first Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2016 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard. (Section IV. A.2 of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, at “Deferred Portion of Incentive Compensation Plan”, provides further details).  For each NEO, the amounts awarded are:

(2)Includes amount of funds matched for M. Feinberg, J. González, K. Neylan and P. Scott in connection with the Pentegra Nonqualified Defined Contribution Portion of the BEP.

(3)Perquisites are valued at the actual amounts paid by the Bank and are benefits not available to all employees on equal terms. The Bank paid premiums for each named executive officer for group term life and long term disability insurance.

(4)The Bank paid tax gross-up amounts for P. Scott’s reimbursement for fitness club membership. This amount is included in column (c) of the Summary Compensation Table.

(5)The Bank paid a performance-based award to employees (including NEOs) who received a rating of “Exceed Requirements” or “Outstanding” on their 2020 annual performance review. Payments will be made on March 26, 2021.

 

J. González (i) $821,557, (ii) $17,694, (iii) $13,690 and (iv) $7,910* M. Radziemski is a new NEO in 2020.

K. Neylan — (i) $326,554, (ii) $7,836, (iii) $5,416 and (iv) $3,459

M. Feinberg — (i) $262,117, (iii) $3,969 and (iv) $2,379

G. Robert Fusco — (i) $268,549, (ii) $6,065, (iii) $4,192 and (iv) $2,844

** P. Héroux — (i) $276,236, (ii) $7,055, (iii) $4,876 and (iv) $2,947

(B)Change in Pension Value for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — $91,000

K. Neylan — $269,000

M. Feinberg — $97,000

G. Robert Fusco — $274,000

P. Héroux — $272,000

(C)Change in Pension Value for the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — n/a

K. Neylan — $812,000

M. Feinberg — $131,000

G. Robert Fusco — $844,000

P. Héroux — $768,000

(D)For all NEOs, includes these items for all employees: amount of funds matched in connection with the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial    Institutions, payment of group term life insurance premium, payment of long term disability insurance premium and payment of employee assistance program premium.  Cost of health insurance premiums, dental insurance premiums, and vision insurance premiums are shared between the Bank and employees:

(E)For J. González and G. Robert Fusco, includes payment of this item: officer physical examination.

(F)For P. Héroux, includes payment of this item: payment of term life insurance premium.

(G)For P. Héroux and K. Neylan, includes payment of this item: fitness center reimbursement.

(H)For K. Neylan, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Defined Contribution Portion of the BEP.

(I)For G. Robert Fusco, $52,570 and P. Héroux, $54,470, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Profit SharingPlan.

(J)For J. González, K. Neylan, G. Robert Fusco and P. Héroux includes payment of this item: employer contribution to Health Savings Account.

(K)K. Neylan, M. Feinberg, G. Robert Fusco and P. Héroux, includes payment for funds matched by the Bank in connection with the Pentegra Nonqualified Defined Contribution Component of the BEP.

(L)For M. Feinberg, $64,185, includes payment of this item: Recognition Award.

(M)Figures represent salaries approved by our Board of Directors for the year 2017.

* M. Feinberg was promoted to Chief Risk Officer on March 1, 2017 andScott was not an NEO in 2016.  Board-approved annual salary beginning March 1, 2017 was $400,000; salary actually paid was $386,282.

(N)For each NEO, the total compensation excluding the Change in Pension Value for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions and the    Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan based on actuarial assumptions are:

J. González — $1,782,875

K. Neylan — $906,957

M. Feinberg — $748,208

G. Robert Fusco — $785,244

P. Héroux — $819,514

Footnotes for Summary Compensation Table for the Year Ending December 31, 2016


(a)Bonuses are not provided by the Bank. However, the non-equity incentive plan compensation in the above table may be considered by some to be deemed a “bonus”.  For 2016, the reported amount here is the sum of: (i) the 2016 Total Communicated Award and (ii) the adjustment to the third Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2013 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iii) the adjustment to the second Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2014 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iv) the adjustment to the first Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2015 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard. (Section IV. A.2 of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, at “Deferred Portion of Incentive Compensation Plan”, provides further details).  For each NEO, the amounts awarded are:

J. González (i) $753,741, (ii) $3,563, (iii) $17,694 and (iv) $6,405

K. Neylan — (i) $329,565, (ii) $7,215, (iii) $7,836 and (iv) $2,534

J. Edelen — (ii) $6,871, (iii) $7,466 and (iv) $ $2,302

G. Robert Fusco — (i) $271,024, (ii) $5,855, (iii) $6,065 and (iv) $1,961

P. Héroux — (i) $280,822, (ii) $6,810, (iii) $7,055 and (iv) $2,281

P. Scott  — (i) $268,175, (iii) $2,062 and (iv) $2,237

(b)Change in Pension Value for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — $72,000

K. Neylan — $179,000

J. Edelen — $666,000

G. Robert Fusco — $218,000

P. Héroux — $185,000

P. Scott — $97,000

(c)Change in Pension Value for the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — n/a

K. Neylan — $448,000

J. Edelen — $856,000

G. Robert Fusco — $399,000

P. Héroux — $389,000

P. Scott — $186,000

(d)For all NEOs, includes these items for all employees: amount of funds matched in connection with the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial    Institutions, payment of group term life insurance premium, payment of long term disability insurance premium and payment of employee assistance program premium.  Cost of health insurance premiums, dental insurance premiums, and vision insurance premiums are shared between the Bank and employees:

(e)For J. González, P. Héroux, and K. Neylan, includes payment of this item: officer physical examination.

(f)For P. Héroux, includes payment of this item: payment of term life insurance premium.

(g)For P. Héroux, K. Neylan, and P. Scott, includes payment of this item: fitness center reimbursement.

(h)For P. Héroux and K. Neylan, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Defined Contribution Portion of the BEP.

(i)For G. Robert Fusco, $42,020, P. Héroux, $48,879 and J. Edelen, $49,070, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Profit SharingPlan.

(j)For J. Edelen, $416,279, includes payment for severance.

(k)For J. Edelen, $38,800, includes payment for consulting agreement fees.

(l)For J. Edelen, $16,000, reflects value of outplacement services.

(m)Figures represent salaries approved by our Board of Directors for the year 2016.

(n)For each NEO, the total compensation excluding the Change in Pension Value for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions and the    Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan based on actuarial assumptions are:

J. González — $1,619,135

K. Neylan — $880,908

J. Edelen —  $779,913

G. Robert Fusco — $755,667

P. Héroux — $807,379

P. Scott — $703,484

*J. Edelen, who held the Chief Risk Officer position, left the Bank on July 8, 2016. His Board-approved annual salary was $387,111; the salary actually paid was $215,562.

** G. Robert Fusco returned as an NEO in 2016.

Footnotes for Summary Compensation Table for the Year Ending December 31, 2015


(1)Bonuses are not provided by the Bank. However, the non-equity incentive plan compensation in the above table may be considered by some to be deemed a “bonus”.  For 2015, the reported amount here is the sum of: (i) the 2015 Total Communicated Award and (ii) the adjustment to the third Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2012 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iii) the adjustment to the second Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2013 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard and (iv) the adjustment to the first Deferred Incentive Award installment from the 2014 Plan based on the results of the Performance Scorecard. (Section IV. A.2 of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, at “Deferred Portion of Incentive Compensation Plan”, provides further details).  For each NEO, the amounts awarded are:

J. González (i) $655,765, (iii) $3,562 and (iv) $17,694

K. Neylan — (i) $259,433, (ii) $8,064, (iii) $7,215 and (iv) $7,836

J. Edelen — (i) $235,701, (ii) $7,741, (iii) $6,871 and (iv) $7,466

P. Héroux — (i) $233,576, (ii) $7,612, (iii) $6,810 and (iv) $7,055

P. Scott  — (i) $228,998 and (iii) $2,062

(2)Change in Pension Value for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — $60,000

P. Héroux — ($33,000)

J. Edelen — $13,000

K. Neylan — $66,000

P. Scott — $43,000

(3)Change in Pension Value for the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan based on actuarial assumptions:

J. González — n/a

P. Héroux — ($77,000)

K. Neylan — $126,000

J. Edelen — $62,000

P. Scott — $83,000

(4)For all NEOs, includes these items for all employees: amount of funds matched in connection with the Pentegra Defined Contribution Plan for Financial    Institutions, payment of group term life insurance premium, payment of long term disability insurance premium and payment of employee assistance program premium.  Cost of health insurance premiums, dental insurance premiums, and vision insurance premiums are shared between the Bank and employees.

(5)For J. Edelen and K. Neylan, includes payment of this item: officer physical examination.

(6)For P. Héroux, includes payment of this item: payment of term life insurance premium.

(7)For P. Héroux, K. Neylan and P. Scott, includes payment of this item: fitness center reimbursement.

(8)For P. Héroux and K. Neylan, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Defined Contribution Portion of the BEP.

(9)For P. Héroux, $42,788 and J. Edelen, $43,812, includes payment for the replacement plan for the Nonqualified Profit Sharing Plan.

(10)Payment for an additional cash incentive award due to the employee receiving a rating of “Exceed Requirements” or “Outstanding” on their performance   review. These amounts are equal to 3% or 6% , respectively, of  base salary as described  in Section III.A.2 of the Compensation Discussion & Analysis as determined by the C&HRC for the President, and by the President with respect to all other NEOs:

J. González — $43,785

P. Héroux — $11,322

K. Neylan — $12,576

P. Scott — $11,100

(11)Figures represent salaries approved by our Board of Directors for the year 2015.

* J. González became CEO on April 2, 2014.

** P. Scott is a new NEO in 2015.

***G. Robert Fusco was not an NEO in 2015.2018. Therefore, footnotes regarding 20152018 compensation wereare not included in that year’sthis year's report.

 


The following table sets forth information regarding all incentive plan award opportunities made available to NEOs for the calendar year 20172020 (in whole dollars):

 

Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Calendar Year 20172020

 

Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Fiscal Year 2017

 

 

 

Grant

 

Estimated Future Payouts
Under Non-Equity Incentive
Plan Awards 
(2) (3)

 

Estimated Future Payouts
Under Equity Incentive
Plan Awards

 

All Other
Stock
Awards:
Number of
Shares of
Stock

 

All Other
Option
Awards:
Number of
Securities
Underlying

 

Exercise
or
Base
Price of
Option
Awards

 

Grant
Date
Fair Value
of Stock
and Option
Awards

 

Name

 

Date (1)

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

Threshold

 

Target

 

Maximum

 

or Units

 

Options

 

($/Sh)

 

($/Sh)

 

José R. González

 

1/18/2017

 

$

463,750

 

$

700,000

 

$

857,500

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

1/18/2017

 

$

155,121

 

$

242,376

 

$

351,445

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

Melody Feinberg

 

1/18/2017

 

$

123,610

 

$

193,141

 

$

280,054

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

1/18/2017

 

$

127,566

 

$

199,322

 

$

289,017

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

1/18/2017

 

$

131,218

 

$

205,028

 

$

297,290

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

Grants of Plan-Based Awards for Fiscal Year 2020
                       All Other  All Other  Exercise  Grant 
                       Stock  Option  or  Date 
                       Awards:  Awards:  Base  Fair Value 
     Estimated Future Payouts  Estimated Future Payouts  Number of  Number of  Price of  of Stock 
     Under Non-Equity Incentive  Under Equity Incentive  Shares of  Securities  Option  and Option 
  Grant  Plan Awards (2) (3)  Plan Awards  Stock  Underlying  Awards  Awards 
Name Date (1)  Threshold  Target  Maximum  Threshold  Target  Maximum  or Units  Options  ($/Sh)  ($/Sh) 
José R. González  2/19/2020  $498,000  $796,800  $996,000  $-  $-  $-   -   -  $-  $- 
                                             
Kevin M. Neylan  2/19/2020  $165,000  $275,000  $412,500  $-  $-  $-   -   -  $-  $- 
                                             
Melody J. Feinberg  2/19/2020  $142,500  $237,500  $356,250  $-  $-  $-   -   -  $-  $- 
                                             
Michael L. Radziemski  2/19/2020  $136,290  $227,150  $340,725  $-  $-  $-   -   -  $-  $- 
                                             
Philip A. Scott  2/19/2020  $147,131  $245,219  $367,829  $-  $-  $-   -   -  $-  $- 

 


(1)On this date, the Board of Directors’ C&HR Committee approved the 2020 Incentive Plan. Approval of the ICP does not mean a payout is guaranteed.

(1)On this date, the Board of Directors’ C&HR Committee approved the 2017 Incentive Plan. Approval of the ICP does not mean a payout is guaranteed.

(2)Figures represent an assumed rating attained by the NEO of at least a specified threshold rating within the “Meets Requirements” category for the NEO with respect to their individual performance.

(3)Amounts represent potential awards under the 2020 Incentive Plan.

(2)Figures represent an assumed rating attained by the NEO of at least a specified threshold rating within the “Meets Requirements” category for the NEO with respect to their individual performance.

(3)Amounts represent potential awards under the 2017 Incentive Plan.

Incentive Compensation Plan Opportunity Table for Calendar Year 20172020

 

The table below provides information regarding the total incentive compensation amount awarded to NEOs based on Bankwide goal results (in dollars):

 

    Bankwide Component (1)        
 2020 (100% of Opportunity)        
 Annual Salary  Threshold  Target  Maximum  Actual Result (2) 
            Total Current 

 

 

 

Threshold

 

(1)
Target

 

Maximum

 

(10% of
Opportunity)

 

Actual Result
(2)

 

          Bankwide Communicated Communicated 

 

2017
Annual Salary

 

Bank Performance

 

Individual
Performance
at Target

 

Bankwide
Component
(3)

 

Individual
Component
(4)

 

Total
Communicated
Award
(5)

 

Current
Communicated
Incentive Award
(6)

 

    Bank Performance  Component (3)  Award (4)  Incentive Award (5) 

President

 

 

 

50

%

80

%

100

%

10

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      50%  80%  100%            

José R. González

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 $996,000  $498,000  $796,800  $996,000  $963,186  $963,186  $481,593 

President &
Chief Executive Officer

 

$

875,000

 

$

393,750

 

$

630,000

 

$

787,500

 

$

70,000

 

$

751,557

 

$

70,000

 

$

821,557

 

$

410,779

 

                            
                            

Other NEOs

 

 

 

30

%

50

%

75

%

10

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

      30%  50%  75%            

Kevin M. Neylan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 $550,000  $165,000  $275,000  $412,500  $393,736  $393,736  $196,868 

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

 

$

484,751

 

$

130,883

 

$

218,138

 

$

327,207

 

$

24,238

 

$

302,316

 

$

24,238

 

$

326,554

 

$

163,277

 

                            

Melody Feinberg*

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                            
Melody J. Feinberg $475,000  $142,500  $237,500  $356,250  $340,045  $340,045  $170,022 

Senior Vice President, Chief Risk Officer

 

$

386,282

 

$

104,434

 

$

174,057

 

$

261,086

 

$

19,340

 

$

242,655

 

$

19,462

 

$

262,117

 

$

131,059

 

                            

G. Robert Fusco

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senior Vice President, CIO and Head of Enterprise Services

 

$

398,645

 

$

107,634

 

$

179,390

 

$

269,085

 

$

19,932

 

$

248,617

 

$

19,932

 

$

268,549

 

$

134,274

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Senior Vice President, Chief Banking Operations Officer

 

$

410,055

 

$

110,715

 

$

184,525

 

$

276,787

 

$

20,503

 

$

255,733

 

$

20,503

 

$

276,236

 

$

138,118

 

                            
Michael L. Radziemski $454,300  $136,290  $227,150  $340,725  $325,226  $325,226  $162,613 
Senior Vice President, Chief Information Officer                            
                            
Philip A. Scott $490,438  $147,131  $245,219  $367,829  $351,096  $351,096  $175,548 
Senior Vice President, Chief Capital Markets Officer                            

 

1Each NEO’s Incentive Compensation is weighted at 100% Bank Performance.
2Overall weighted average result for Bankwide goals including employees in the Risk Management Group was 86.3% above target. Payments are interpolated between the target and maximum amounts.
3The Incentive Compensation is calculated as follows:
a.The portion of the award for achieving target equals: Annual Salary multiplied by Target percentage, plus
b.The portion of the award for exceeding target equals: Annual Salary multiplied by the “Maximum minus Target percentage,” multiplied by 86.3%.
4There may be small differences in the calculated payout amounts due to rounding.
5The amount represented here is the Current Communicated Award of Incentive Compensation. The Current Communicated Incentive Award is the actual payout awarded to the NEO in 2021 for performance in 2020. [Refer to Section III. d. (Required Deferral of IC Plan Awards for MC Members) of this Compensation Discussion and Analysis for further details].


217

(1)Each NEO’s Incentive Compensation is made up of two components: Bankwide goals (90%) and Individual Performance (10%).

(2)Overall weighted average result for Bankwide goals was 77.2% above target; for the Risk Management Group it was 77.1% above target. Payments are interpolated between the target and maximum amounts.

(3)The Bankwide component is calculated as follows:  Annual Salary multiplied by Bankwide component Percentage multiplied by Target percentage multiplied by (1 plus the overall weighted average results [77.2% as mentioned in note 2 above]).

(4)Individual component is calculated as follows: Annual Salary multiplied by Individual Component multiplied by Target percentage. (When participants receive an Individual Component award, the award amount is at Target.)

(5)There may be small differences in the calculated payout amounts due to rounding.

(6)The Bank established a deferred compensation component for the Incentive Compensation Plan starting in 2012.  The amount represented here is the Current Communicated Award of Incentive Compensation. The Current Communicated Incentive Award is the actual payout received by the NEO in 2018 for performance in 2017. [Refer to Section IV.A.2 (Required Deferral of IC Plan Awards for MC Members) of this Compensation Discussion and Analysis for further details].

* M. Feinberg was promoted to Chief Risk Officer on March 1, 2017 and was not an NEO in 2016.  Board-approved annual salary beginning March 1, 2017 was $400,000; salary actually paid was $386,282.

Employment Arrangements

 

We are an “at will” employer and do not provide written employment agreements to any of its employees, except that we do provide Executive Change in Control Agreements to certain senior executivesthe NEOs (refer to Section IV.DVI. b. of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, “Severance Plan and Executive Change in Control Agreements”, for further details). However, employees, including NEOs, receive: (a) cash compensation (i.e., base salary, and, for exempt employees, “variable” or “at risk” short-term incentive compensation); (b) retirement-related benefits (i.e., the Qualified Defined Benefit Plan; the Qualified Defined Contribution Plan; and the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan (“DB BEP”)) and (c) health and welfare programs and other benefits. Other benefits, which are available to all regular employees, include medical, dental, vision care, life, business travel accident, and short and long term disability insurance, flexible spending accounts, an employee assistance program, educational development assistance, voluntary life insurance, long term care insurance, fitness club reimbursement and severance pay.

 

An additional benefit offered to all officers who are at Vice President rank or above (including the NEOs) is a physical examination every 18 months.

 

The annual base salaries for the NEOs are as follows (in(amounts in whole dollars):

 

 

 

2018
(1)

 

2017
(2)

 

José R. González

 

$

920,000

 

$

875,000

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

$

515,048

 

$

484,751

 

Melody Feinberg*

 

$

425,000

 

$

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

$

411,601

 

$

398,645

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

$

423,382

 

$

410,055

 

  2021  2020  % Increase* 
José R. González $996,000  $996,000   0.00%
Kevin M. Neylan $550,000  $550,000   0.00%
Melody J. Feinberg $475,000  $475,000   0.00%
Michael L. Radziemski $454,300  $454,300   0.00%
Philip A. Scott $490,438  $490,438   0.00%

 


(1)Figures represent salaries approved by our Board* Proposed 2021 base salary increases for NEOs received an objection from the FHLBNY’s regulator. See Section I. a) in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis portion of Directors for the year 2018.

(2)Figures represent salaries approved by our BoardPart III, Item 11 of Directors for the year 2017.this Form 10-K.

 

* M. Feinberg was promoted to Chief Risk Officer on March 1, 2017 and was not an NEO in 2016.

A performance-based merit increase program exists for all employees, including NEOs that have a direct impact on base pay. Generally, employees receive merit increases on an annual basis. Such merit increases are based upon the attainment of a performance rating of “Outstanding,” “Exceeds Requirements,” or “Meets Requirements” achieved on individual performance evaluations. Merit guidelines are determined each yearAnnual merit increases may also contain a market adjustment based on market compensation job benchmarking. Refer to Section II of the Compensation Discussion and distributed to managers. These guidelines establish the maximum merit increase percentage permissibleAnalysis, “The Total Compensation Program” for employee performance during that year. In November of 2017, the C&HR Committee determined that merit-related officer base pay increases for 2018 would be 2.50% for officers rated ‘Meets Requirements’; 3.25% for officers rated ‘Exceeds Requirements’; and 4.25% for officers rated ‘Outstanding’ for their performance in 2017.further details.

Short-Term Incentive Compensation Plan (“IncentiveIC Plan”)

 

Refer to section IV.A.2 (Cash Compensation; Incentive Plan — Deferred PortionSection III of Incentive Compensation Plan) of thisthe Compensation Discussion and Analysis IC Plan for further details.

 

Qualified Defined Contribution Plan

 

Employees who have met the eligibility requirements contained in the Pentegra Qualified Defined Contribution Plan for Financial Institutions (“DC Plan”) can choose to contribute to the DC Plan, a retirement savings plan qualified under the IRC. Employees are eligible for membership in the DC Plan on the first day of the month following three full calendar months of employment. Refer to section IV.B.3Section IV (DC Plan) of this Compensation Discussion and Analysis for further details.

 

218

OUTSTANDING EQUITY AWARDS AT CALENDAR YEAR-END
AND OPTION EXERCISES AND STOCK VESTED

 

The tables disclosing (i) outstanding option and stock awards and (ii) exercises of stock options and vesting of restricted stock for NEOs are omitted because all employees are prohibited by law from holding capital stock issued by a Federal Home Loan Bank. As such, these tables are not applicable.

PENSION BENEFITS

 

The table below shows the present value of accumulated benefits payable to each of the NEO, the number of years of service credited to each such person, and payments during the last Calendar year (if any) to each such person, under the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions and the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan (amounts in whole dollars) (refer to sections IV.B.1and 2Sections IV of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis for further details about these plans):

 

 Pension Benefits 
   Number of Present Value Payment During 

 

Pension Benefits

 

  Years Credited of Accumulated Last 

Name

 

Plan
Name

 

Number of
Years Credited
Service 
[1]

 

Present Value
of Accumulated
Benefit 
[2]

 

Payment During
Last
Fiscal Year

 

 Plan Name  Service (1)   Benefit (2)   Fiscal Year 

José R. González

 

Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan

 

3.83

 

$

273,000

 

$

 

 Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan  6.83  $588,000  $- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan  6.83  $5,333,000  $- 

 

Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan

 

 

 

$

 

$

 

            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan

 

16.33

 

$

1,548,000

 

$

 

 Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan  19.33  $2,442,000  $- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan  19.33  $5,453,000  $- 

 

Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan

 

16.33

 

$

2,738,000

 

$

 

            

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Melody Feinberg

 

Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan

 

5.83

 

$

328,000

 

$

 

Melody J. Feinberg Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan  8.83  $694,000  $- 

 

Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan

 

5.83

 

$

249,000

 

$

 

 Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan  8.83  $1,063,000  $- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

            

G. Robert Fusco

 

Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan

 

30.00

 

$

2,345,000

 

$

 

Michael L. Radziemski Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan  1.08  $65,000  $- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan  1.08  $-  $- 

 

Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan

 

30.00

 

$

2,715,000

 

$

 

            
Philip A. Scott Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan  14.00  $1,221,000  $- 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan  14.00  $1,973,000  $- 

Paul B. Héroux

 

Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan

 

30.00

 

$

2,337,000

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan

 

30.00

 

$

3,506,000

 

$

 

(1)Number of years of credited service pertains to eligibility/participation in the qualified plan. Assuming the NEO is eligible for the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan, years of credited service are the same as for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan.

(2)As of 12/31/2020.

 


219

(1) Number of years of credited service pertains to eligibility/participation in the qualified plan. Years of credited service for the Nonqualified Defined Benefit Portion of the Benefit Equalization Plan are the same as for the Pentegra Defined Benefit Plan for Financial Institutions Qualified Plan.

(2) As of 12/31/17.

NONQUALIFIED DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

 

The following table discloses contributions to Nonqualified Deferred Compensation plans, each Named Executive Officer’s withdrawals (if any), aggregate earnings and year-end balances in such plans (whole(in whole dollars):

 

 

Nonqualified Deferred Compensation for Fiscal Year 2017

 

Name

 

Executive
Contributions in
Last FY 
(1)

 

Registrant
Contributions in
Last FY 
(2)

 

Aggregate
Earnings in
Last FY

 

Aggregate
Withdrawals/
Distributions

 

Aggregate
Balance at
Last FYE

 

José R. González

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DC BEP

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

NDICP

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DC BEP

 

$

67,991

 

$

21,774

 

$

4,420

 

$

 

$

94,185

 

NDICP

 

$

34,297

 

$

 

$

5,201

 

$

 

$

39,498

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Melody Feinberg

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DC BEP

 

$

5,177

 

$

6,977

 

$

343

 

$

 

$

12,497

 

NDICP

 

$

27,909

 

$

 

$

4,353

 

$

 

$

32,262

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DC BEP

 

$

13,493

 

$

10,119

 

$

1,247

 

$

 

$

24,859

 

NDICP

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

DC BEP

 

$

6,580

 

$

8,380

 

$

429

 

$

 

$

15,389

 

NDICP

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

  Nonqualified Deferred Compensation for Fiscal Year 2020 
  Executive  Registrant  Aggregate  Aggregate  Aggregate 
  Contributions in  Contributions in  Earnings in  Withdrawals/  Balance at 
Name Last FY (1)  Last FY (2)  Last FY  Distributions  Last FYE 
José R. González                    
DC BEP $77,420  $77,659  $59,926  $-  $479,818 
NDICP $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
                     
Kevin M. Neylan                    
DC BEP $82,360  $43,189  $20,766  $-  $482,093 
NDICP $108,929  $-  $14,770  $-  $356,596 
                     
Melody J. Feinberg                    
DC BEP $67,404  $36,236  $9,784  $-  $159,370 
NDICP $283,002  $-  $90,334  $-  $950,016 
                     
Michael L. Radziemski                    
DC BEP $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
NDICP $-  $-  $-  $-  $- 
                     
Philip A. Scott                    
DC BEP $65,546  $37,414  $42,484  $-  $288,301 
NDICP $230,700  $-  $89,918  $-  $809,662 

 


(1)  These amounts are also included in the “Salary” or “Non-Equity Incentive Compensation” columns of the Summary Compensation Table if an executive is an NEO in a particular year;
(1)These amounts as they pertain to the DC BEP and NDICP are also included in the “Salary” and “Non-Equity Incentive Compensation” columns of the Summary Compensation Table, respectively, for if an executive is an NEO in a particular year; these amounts would have been paid as salary or incentive compensation but for deferral into the nonqualified deferred compensation benefit equalization plans (described above as our DC BEP and NDICP).

(2)These totals as they pertain to the DC BEP are also included in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table. There are no registrant contributions in connection with the NDICP.

Refer to Section IV of the Compensation and Discussion Analysis for more information concerning the DC BEP and NDICP).NDICP.

 


(2) These totals as they pertain to the DC BEP are also included in the “All Other Compensation” column of the Summary Compensation Table.  There are no registrant contributions in connection with the NDICP.

DISCLOSURE REGARDING TERMINATION AND CHANGE IN CONTROL PROVISIONS

 

Severance Plan

 

The Bank has a formal Board-approved Severance Plan available to all Bank employees who work twenty or more hours a week and have at least one year of employment. (Refer to Section IV.D.1VI of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, “Severance Plan”, for further details.)

 

The following table describes estimated severance payout information under the Severance Plan for each NEO assuming that severance would have occurred on December 31, 20172020 for reasons other than a change in control (for example, a reduction in force) (amounts in whole dollars):

 

 

 

Number of Weeks Used to
Calculate Severance Amount

 

2017 Annual
Base Salary

 

Severance Amount
Based on Years of Service*

 

José R. González

 

16

 

$

875,000

 

$

269,231

 

Kevin M. Neylan

 

36

 

$

484,751

 

$

335,597

 

Melody Feinberg**

 

24

 

$

400,000

 

$

184,615

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

36

 

$

398,645

 

$

275,985

 

Paul B. Héroux

 

36

 

$

410,055

 

$

283,884

 

  Number of Weeks Used to  2020 Annual  Severance Amount 
  Calculate Severance Amount  Base Salary  Based on Years of Service* 
José R. González  28  $996,000  $536,308 
Kevin M. Neylan  36  $550,000  $380,769 
Melody J. Feinberg  36  $475,000  $328,846 
Michael L. Radziemski  8  $454,300  $69,892 
Philip A. Scott  36  $490,438  $339,534 

 


* Additionally, under the Bank’s Severance Plan, the Bank, in its discretion, may provide a payment to be used in connection with health insurance replacement costs.

 

221

** M. Feinberg was promoted to Chief Risk Officer on March 1, 2017 and was not an NEO in 2016.  Board-approved annual salary beginning March 1, 2017 was $400,000; salary actually paid was $386,282.

Executive Change in Control Agreements

 

Executive Change in Control Agreements (“CIC Agreements”) were executed in January 2016 between the FHLBNY and each of the members of the Management Committee, including the CEO and the other Named Executive Officers, which, as more fully described below, would provide the executive with certain severance payments and benefits in the event employment is terminated in connection with a Bank “change in control” of FHLBNY.. The CIC Agreements were renewed in January 2019 for an additional three-year period.

 

The following table describes estimated severance and benefit payout information under the CIC Agreements for each NEO assuming that a “change in control” merger or acquisition would have occurred on December 31, 2017.2020 (amounts in whole dollars). (Refer to section IV.D.2Section VI of the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, “Executive Change in Control Agreements”, for further details).

 

Provision

 

José González

 

Kevin Neylan

 

Paul Héroux

 

Melody Feinberg

 

G. Robert Fusco

 

Amount equal to the executive’s average gross base salary for the three years prior to employment termination date (with any partial years being annualized), multiplied by 2.99 for Mr. González, and 1.5 for Messrs. Neylan, Héroux, Fusco, and Ms. Feinberg

 

$

2,385,488

 

$

685,643

 

$

606,994

 

$

507,189

 

$

586,956

 

Amount equal to the executive’s full target incentive payout estimate, or the actual amount of the payment to the executive under the FHLBNY’s Incentive Compensation Plan, if lower, in either case, in respect of the year prior to the year of the employment termination date, multiplied by 2.99 for Mr. González, and 1.5 for Messrs. Neylan, Héroux, Fusco, and Ms. Feinberg

 

$

2,456,457

 

$

489,831

 

$

414,353

 

$

393,176

 

$

402,823

 

Amount equal to the cost of health, dental and vision care benefits that FHLBNY actually incurred by FHLBNY on behalf of the Executive and his dependents, if any, during the twelve (12) months prior to the executive’s employment termination date

 

$

20,049

 

$

29,168

 

$

29,168

 

$

194

 

$

19,462

 

A payment in the amount of $15,000 which may be used by the Executive for job search-related expenses

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

A payment in the amount of $15,000 which may be used by the Executive for accounting, actuarial, financial, legal and/or tax services

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

$

15,000

 

Additional age and service credits under the FHLBNY non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plan (“BEP”) of three (3) years for Mr. González and one and one-half (1.5) years for Messrs. Neylan, Héroux, Fusco, and Ms. Feinberg

 

$

1,840,653

 

$

1,012,649

 

$

596,422

 

$

299,698

 

$

786,829

 

Additional age and service credits under the FHLBNY qualified defined contribution plan of three (3) years for Mr. González and one and one- half (1.5) years for Messrs. Neylan, Héroux, Fusco, and Ms. Feinberg

 

$

48,600

 

$

24,300

 

$

24,300

 

$

24,300

 

$

24,300

 

Total value of contract

 

$

6,781,247

 

$

2,271,591

 

$

1,701,237

 

$

1,254,557

 

$

1,850,370

 

Sample CIC Agreement contract pay-outs Assuming December 31, 2020 Bank Merger or Acquisition

Provision José
Gonzàlez
  Kevin
Neylan
  Melody
Feinberg
  Michael Radziemski  Philip
Scott
 
Amount equal to the executive's average gross base salary for the three years prior to his employment termination date (with any partial years being annualized), multiplied by 2.99 for Mr. Gonzàlez, and 1.5 for Messrs. Neylan, Radziemski, Scott and Ms. Feinberg $2,899,901  $798,417  $669,406  $619,956  $686,356 
Amount equal to the executive’s full target incentive payout estimate, or the actual amount of the payment to the executive under the FHLBNY's Incentive Compensation Plan, if lower, in either case, in respect of the year prior to the year of the employment termination date, multiplied by 2.99 for Mr. Gonzàlez, and 1.5 for Messrs. Neylan, Radziemski, Scott, and Ms. Feinberg $2,200,640  $386,286  $318,750  $0  $305,455 
Amount equal to the cost of health, dental and vision care benefits that FHLBNY actually incurred by FHLBNY on behalf of the Executive and his dependents, if any, during the twelve (12) months prior to the executive's employment termination date $19,998  $27,255  $1,845  $28,892  $18,626 
A payment in the amount of $15,000 which may be used by the Executive for job search-related expenses $15,000  $15,000  $15,000  $15,000  $15,000 
A payment in the amount of $15,000 which may be used by the Executive for accounting, actuarial, financial, legal and/or tax services $15,000  $15,000  $15,000  $15,000  $15,000 
Additional age and service credits under the FHLBNY non-qualified Benefit Equalization Plan ("Nonqualified DB BEP") of three (3) years for Mr. Gonzalez and one and one-half (1.5) years for Messrs. Neylan, Radziemski, Scott, and Ms. Feinberg $5,469,931  $690,108  $414,958  $188,392  $408,952 
Additional age and service credits under the FHLBNY qualified & non-qualified defined contribution plan of three (3) years for Mr. Gonzalez and one and one-half (1.5) years for Messrs. Neylan, Radziemski, Scott, and Ms. Feinberg $179,280  $49,500  $42,750  $40,887  $44,139 
Total value of contract $10,799,750  $1,981,566  $1,477,709  $908,127  $1,493,528 

 

Additionally, in the event of a change in control, the executive will be paid deferred incentive compensation otherwise owed under the terms of the deferred portion of the Bank’s Incentive Compensation Plan (as described at Section IV.A.2III of this Compensation Discussion and Analysis, “Deferred Portion of Incentive Compensation Plan”).

 

CEO Pay Ratio

 

For the year ended December 31, 2017,2020, the ratio of our CEO’s Total Compensation to the FHLBNYsFHLBNY median of the annual Total Compensation of all our employees, except the CEO (“Median Employee”) is 10.5:14.3:1. Total Compensation of the Median Employee for 20172020 is calculated in the same manner “Total Compensation” for 20172020 is shown for our CEO in the Summary Compensation Table, which includes among other things, amounts attributable to the change in pension value, which will vary among employees based upon their tenure at the FHLBNY. For 2017,2020, the Total Compensation of the Median Employee was $178,456$250,470 and the Total Compensation of the CEO, as reported in the Summary Compensation Table, was $1,873,875.$3,578,821.

 

We identified the Median Employee by comparing the amount of base salary and incentive awards as reflected in our payroll records for 20172020 for each of the employees who were employed by the FHLBNY on October 1, 2017,2020, and ranking the annual cash compensation for all such employees (a list of 332371 employees) from lowest to highest, excluding the CEO. FHLBNY identified the Median Employee using base salaryCEO, and incentive awards, which was applied consistently to all our employees included in the calculation, and wecalculation. We believe this compensation measure reasonably reflects the annual compensation of all the FHLBNY employees.employees and was prepared under applicable SEC rules. The FHLBNY included all full-time and part-time employees in the calculation of the Median Employee and annualized all such employees who were not employed by us for all of 2017.2020.


DIRECTOR COMPENSATION

 

The following table summarizes the compensation paid by us to each of our Directors for the year ended December 31, 20172020 (whole dollars):

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Change in Pension

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Value and

 

 

 

 

 

          Change in Pension      

 

Fees

 

 

 

 

 

Non-Equity

 

Nonqualified

 

All

 

 

 

         Value and     

 

Earned or

 

Stock

 

Option

 

Incentive Plan

 

Deferred Compensation

 

Other

 

 

 

  Fees
Earned or
 
  Stock Option Non-Equity
Incentive Plan
 Nonqualified
Deferred Compensation
 All
Other
    

Name

 

Paid in Cash

 

Awards

 

Awards

 

Compensation

 

Earnings

 

Compensation

 

Total

 

  Paid in Cash    Awards  Awards  Compensation  Earnings  Compensation  Total 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John R. Buran $145,000  $  $  $  $  $  $145,000 
Larry E. Thompson  125,000                  125,000 
Kevin Cummings  122,000                  122,000 
Joseph R. Ficalora  112,500                  112,500 
Jay M. Ford  112,500                  112,500 

Michael M. Horn

 

$

130,000

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

130,000

 

  122,000                  122,000 

James W. Fulmer

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

John R. Buran

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

Kevin Cummings

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

Anne Evans Estabrook

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

Jay M. Ford

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

Thomas L. Hoy

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

  122,000                  122,000 
David R. Huber  112,500                  112,500 
Charles E. Kilbourne, III  112,500                  112,500 

Gerald H. Lipkin

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

  112,500                  112,500 

Kenneth J. Mahon

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

  112,500                  112,500 

Christopher P. Martin

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

  112,500                  112,500 

Richard S. Mroz (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

  122,000                  122,000 

David J. Nasca

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

  112,500                  112,500 

C. Cathleen Raffaeli

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

  112,500                  112,500 

Monte N. Redman

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

Edwin C. Reed

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

Stephen S. Romaine  112,500                  112,500 

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

  122,000                  122,000 

Larry E. Thompson

 

95,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

95,000

 

Carlos J. Vázquez

 

105,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

105,000

 

  122,000                  122,000 

Ángela Weyne

 

35,625

 

 

 

 

 

 

35,625

 

  112,500                  112,500 

Total Fees

 

$

1,755,625

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

 

$

1,755,625

 

 $2,239,500  $  $  $  $  $  $2,239,500 

 



(a)Director Mroz elected to not receive compensation for his Board service in 2017.

Director Compensation Policy: Director FeesFee Opportunities

 

The Board establishes on an annual basis a Director Compensation Policy governing compensation for Board meeting attendance. This policy is established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act (“Bank Act”)(Bank Act) and related Federal Housing Finance Agency. In sum, the applicable statutes and regulations allow each FHLBank to pay its Directors reasonable compensation and expenses, subject to the authority of the Director of the Finance Agency to object to, and to prohibit prospectively, compensation and/or expenses that the Director of the Finance Agency determines are not reasonable. The Director Compensation Policy provides that directors shall be paid a meeting fee for their attendance at meetings of the Board of Directors up to a maximum annual compensation amount as set forth in the Director Compensation Policy.

 

With respectIn determining appropriate and reasonable fee opportunities available to recent FHLBNY Directors, the Board takes into consideration the following factors:

the desire to attract and retain highly qualified and skilled individuals in order to help guide a complex and highly-regulated financial institution that is subject to a variety of financial, reputational and other risks;

the highly competitive environment for talent in the New York City metropolitan area a center of world finance in which stock exchanges, securities companies and other sophisticated financial institutions are located;

the demands of the Director position, including the time and effort that Directors must devote to FHLBNY and Board business demands that have grown over the past several years;

the overall performance of the FHLBNY, an institution that is a Federal Home Loan Bank System leader, a strong financial performer, a reliable source of liquidity for its customers, and a provider of a consistent dividend and an institution which wishes to maintain this performance;

information pertaining to compensation opportunities available to directors of other Federal Home Loan Banks; and

director compensation developments,surveys performed over time by outside compensation consulting firm McLagan, most recently in September 20152019 surveys which provide the Board reviewedDirectors with the matter of directorability to compare Director compensation and took into consideration recommendations contained in a directoropportunities with compensation survey performed earlier in the year by McLagan.  opportunities available at other institutions.

The Board determined that an adjustment to Director compensation limits in 2016 inreviews the amountissue of $15,000 per Director was appropriate given the FHLBNY’s performance.  The Board noted that the increases were generally at the low end of the ranges suggested by McLagan’s study, and that the comparators used in the study appeared appropriate. In September 2016, the Board determined that the 2016 director compensation structure continued to remain appropriate and did not require adjustment for 2017. In June 2017, the Board once again reviewed the matter of director compensation, and took into consideration recommendations contained in a director compensation survey performed earlier in the year by McLagan.  The Board determined thatreasonable Director fee opportunities on an adjustment to Director compensation limits in 2018 in the amount of $7,500 per Director was appropriate given the FHLBNY’s continued financial performance.  The Board noted that the increases were generally at the low end of the ranges suggested by McLagan’s study, and that the comparators used in the study appeared appropriate.annual basis.

Below are tables summarizing the Director fees and the annual compensation limits that were set by the Board for 2017.2020. Following these tables are additional tables summarizing the Director fees and the annual compensation limits set by the Board for 2018.2021 (which reflect that there were no changes from 2020).

 

Director FeesFee Opportunities20172020 (in whole dollars)

 

Position

 

Fees For Each Board
Meeting Attended (Paid
Quarterly in Arrears)
(a)

 

 Fees For Each Board
Meeting Attended (Paid
Quarterly in Arrears)(b)
 

Chairman

 

$

15,000

 

 $18,125 

Vice Chairman

 

$

13,125

 

 $15,625 

Committee Chair (b)

 

$

13,125

 

Committee Chairs (a) $15,250 

All Other Directors

 

$

11,875

 

 $14,060 

 

Director Annual Compensation Limits — 20172020 (in whole dollars)

 

Position

 

Annual Limit

 

 Annual Limit 

Chairman

 

$

120,000

(c)

 $145,000 

Vice Chairman

 

$

105,000

 

 $125,000 

Committee Chair

 

$

105,000

 

Committee Chairs (a) $122,000 

All Other Directors

 

$

95,000

 

 $112,500 

 


Director FeesFee Opportunities20182021 (in whole dollars)

 

Position

 

Fees For Each Board
Meeting Attended (Paid
Quarterly in Arrears)
(d)

 

 Fees For Each Board
Meeting Attended (Paid
Quarterly in Arrears) (b)
 

Chairman

 

$

15,930

 

 $18,125 

Vice Chairman

 

$

14,060

 

 $15,625 

Committee Chair (b)

 

$

14,060

 

Committee Chairs (a) $15,250 

All Other Directors

 

$

12,810

 

 $14,060 

 

Director Annual Compensation Limits — 20182021 (in whole dollars)

 

Position

 

Annual Limit

 

 Annual Limit 

Chairman

 

$

127,500

 

 $145,000 

Vice Chairman

 

$

112,500

 

 $125,000 

Committee Chair

 

$

112,500

 

Committee Chairs (a) $122,000 

All Other Directors

 

$

102,500

 

 $112,500 

 


(a)The numbers in this column represent payments for each of eight meetings attended.

(a)A Committee Chair does not receive any additional payment if he or she serves as the Chair of more than one Board Committee. In addition, the Board Chair and Board Vice Chair do not receive any additional compensation if they serve as a Chair of one or more Board Committees.

 

(b)A Committee Chair does not receive any additional payment if he or she serves as the Chair of more than one Board Committee.  In addition, the Board Chair and Board Vice Chair do not receive any additional compensation if they serve as a Chair of one or more Board Committees.

(c)The Chairman received an additional fee of $10,000 (payable in the amount of $2,500 per quarter) in 2017 for service as the Chair of the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks.

(d)The numbers in this column represent payments for each of seven meetings attended.  If an eighth meeting is attended, the Chairman will receive $15,990 for that meeting; the Vice Chairman will receive $14,080 for that meeting; Committee Chairs will receive $14,080 for that meeting; and all other Directors will receive $12,830 for that meeting.

(b)The numbers in this column represent payments for each of eight meetings attended by the Board Chair, the Board Vice Chair and the Committee Chairs. The numbers in this column also represent payments for each of seven meetings attended by all other Directors. If an eighth meeting is attended by the other Directors, they will receive $14,080 for that eighth meeting.

 

Director Compensation Policy: Director Expenses

 

The Director Compensation Policy also authorizes us to reimburse Directors for necessary and reasonable travel, subsistence, and other related expenses incurred in connection with the performance of their official duties. For expense reimbursement purposes, Directors’ official duties can include:

 

¨Meetings of the Board and Board Committees
¨Meetings requested by the Federal Housing Finance Agency
¨Meetings of Federal Home Loan Bank System committees
¨Federal Home Loan Bank System director orientation meetings
¨Meetings of the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks and Council committees
¨Attendance at other events on behalf of the Bank with prior approval

·                  Meetings of the Board and Board Committees

·                  Meetings requested by the Federal Housing Finance Agency

·                  Meetings of Federal Home Loan Bank System committees

·                  Federal Home Loan Bank System director orientation meetings

·                  Meetings of the Council of Federal Home Loan Banks and Council committees

·                  Attendance at other events on behalf of the Bank with prior approval of the Board of Directors

Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.


Item 12.Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters.

 

FHLBNY stock can only be held by member financial institutions.  No person, including directors and executive officers of the FHLBNY, may own our capital stock.  As such, we do not offer any compensation plan to any individuals under which equity securities of the Bank are authorized for issuance.  The following tables provide information about those members who were beneficial owners of more than 5% of our outstanding capital stock (shares in thousands) as of February 28, 20182021 and December 31, 2017:2020:

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Percent

 

  Number Percent 

 

February 28, 2018

 

of Shares

 

of Total

 

 February 28, 2021 of Shares of Total 

Name of Beneficial Owner

 

Principal Executive Office Address

 

Owned

 

Capital Stock

 

 Principal Executive Office Address Owned  Capital Stock 

Citibank, N.A.

 

399 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10043

 

18,981

 

28.89

%

 399 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10043  7,705   14.51%
MetLife, Inc.:         

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166

 

7,335

 

11.16

 

 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  7,648   14.40 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  475   0.89 
Subtotal MetLife, Inc.   8,123   15.29 

New York Community Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

5,919

 

9.01

 

 615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY,11590  7,088   13.35 

New York Commercial Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

151

 

0.23

 

Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10104  3,894   7.33 

 

 

 

6,070

 

9.24

 

   26,810   50.48%

 

 

 

32,386

 

49.29

%

 

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Percent

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

of Shares

 

of Total

 

Name of Beneficial Owner

 

Principal Executive Office Address

 

Owned

 

Capital Stock

 

Citibank, N.A.

 

399 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10043

 

21,523

 

31.79

%

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166

 

7,335

 

10.83

 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

5,887

 

8.70

 

New York Commercial Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

151

 

0.22

 

 

 

 

 

6,038

 

8.92

 

 

 

 

 

34,896

 

51.54

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Percent

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

of Shares

 

of Total

 

Name

 

Director

 

City

 

State

 

Owned

 

Capital Stock

 

Sterling National Bank

 

Monte N. Redman 

 

Lake Success

 

NY

 

2,367

 

3.50

%

Investors Bank

 

Kevin Cummings

 

Short Hills

 

NJ

 

2,315

 

3.42

%

Valley National Bank

 

Gerald H. Lipkin

 

Wayne

 

NJ

 

1,268

 

1.87

%

The Provident Bank

 

Christopher P.Martin

 

Iselin

 

NJ

 

809

 

1.19

%

Flushing Bank

 

John R. Buran

 

Uniondale

 

NY

 

601

 

0.89

%

Dime Community Bank

 

Kenneth J. Mahon

 

Brooklyn

 

NY

 

597

 

0.88

%

Banco Popular de Puerto Rico

 

Carlos J. Vázquez

 

San Juan

 

PR

 

291

 

0.43

%

Banco Popular North America

 

Carlos J. Vázquez

 

San Juan

 

PR

 

287

 

0.42

%

Mahopac Bank

 

James W. Fulmer

 

Batavia

 

NY

 

127

 

0.19

%

Glens Falls National Bank & Trust Company

 

Thomas L. Hoy

 

Glens Falls

 

NY

 

74

 

0.11

%

Evans Bank, N.A

 

David J. Nasca

 

Hamburg

 

NY

 

49

 

0.07

%

The Bank of Castile

 

James W. Fulmer

 

Batavia

 

NY

 

44

 

0.07

%

Crest Savings Bank

 

Jay M. Ford

 

Wildwood

 

NJ

 

28

 

0.04

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8,857

 

13.08

%

    Number  Percent 
  December 31, 2020 of Shares  of Total 
Name of Beneficial Owner Principal Executive Office Address Owned  Capital Stock 
Citibank, N.A.   

399 Park Avenue, New York, NY,10043

  7,705   14.35%
MetLife, Inc.:            
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  7,648   14.24 
Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  475   0.88 
Subtotal MetLife, Inc.    8,123   15.12 
New York Community Bank 615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY,11590  7,140   13.30 
Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10104  3,219   6.00 
     26,187   48.77%

 

All capital stock held by each member of the FHLBNY is by law automatically pledged to the FHLBNY as additional collateral for all indebtedness of each such member to the FHLBNY.

Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

         Number  Percent 
         of Shares  of Total 
Name Director City State  Owned  Capital Stock 
New York Community Bank Joseph R. Ficalora Westbury  NY   7,140   13.30%
Investors Bank Kevin Cummings Short Hills  NJ   1,598   2.98 
Valley National Bank Gerald H. Lipkin Wayne  NJ   1,463   2.72 
Dime Community Bank Kenneth J. Mahon Brooklyn  NY   607   1.13 
Provident Bank Christopher P. Martin Iselin  NJ   593   1.10 
Flushing  Bank John R. Buran Uniondale  NY   434   0.81 
Popular Bank Carlos J. Vázquez San Juan  PR   273   0.51 
Banco Popular de Puerto Rico Carlos J. Vázquez San Juan  PR   225   0.42 
Tompkins Trust Company Stephen S. Romaine Ithaca  NY   47   0.09 
Glens Falls National Bank & Trust Company Thomas L. Hoy Glens Falls  NY   35   0.07 
Evans Bank, N.A David J. Nasca Hamburg  NY   35   0.06 
Crest Savings Bank Jay M. Ford Wildwood  NJ   28   0.05 
           12,478   23.24%


Item 13.Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence.

 

We have a cooperative structure and our customers own the entity’s capital stock. Capital stock ownership is a prerequisite to the transaction by members of any business with us. The majority of the members of our Board of Directors are Member Directors (i.e., directors elected by our members who are officers or directors of our members). The remaining members of the Board are Independent Directors (i.e., directors elected by our members who are not officers or directors of our members). We conduct our advances and mortgage loan business almost exclusively with members. Grants under the AHP and AHP advances are also made in partnership or in connection with our members. Therefore, in the normal course of business, we may extend credit to members whose officers or directors may serve as our directors. In addition, we may also extend credit and offer services and AHP benefits to members who own more than 5% of our stock. All products, services and AHP benefits extended by us to such members are provided at market terms and conditions that are no more favorable to them than the terms and conditions of comparable transactions with other members. Under the provisions of Section 7(j) of the FHLBank Act (12 U.S.C. § 1427(j)), our Board is required to administer our business with our members without discrimination in favor of or against any member. For more information about transactions with stockholders, see Note 19.20. Related Party Transactions, in the audited financial statements in this Form 10-K.

 

The review and approval of transactions with related persons is governed by the Bank’s written Code of Ethics and Business Conduct (“Code”)(Code), which is posted on the Corporate Governance Section of the FHLBNY’s website at http://www.fhlbny.com. Under the Code, each director is required to disclose to the Board of Directors all actual or apparent conflicts of interest, including any personal financial interest that he or she has, as well as such interests of any immediate family member or business associate of the director known to the director, in any matter to be considered by the Board of Directors or in which another person does, or proposes to do, business with the Bank. Following such disclosure, the Board of Directors is empowered to determine whether an actual conflict exists. In the event the Board of Directors determines the existence of a conflict with respect to any matter, the affected director must recuse himself or herself from all further considerations relating to that matter. Issues under the Code regarding conflicts of interests involving directors are administered by the Board or, in the Board’s discretion, the Board’s Corporate Governance Committee.

 

The Code also provides that, subject to certain limited exceptions for, among other items, interests arising through ownership of mutual funds and certain financial interests acquired prior to employment by the Bank, no Bank employee may have a financial interest in any Bank member. Extensions of credit from members to employees are acceptable that are entered into or established in the ordinary, normal course of business, so long as the terms are no more favorable than would be available in like circumstances to persons who are not employees of the Bank. Employees provide disclosures regarding financial interests and financial relationships on a periodic basis. These disclosures are provided to and reviewed by the Director of Human Resources, who is (along with the Chief Audit Officer) one of the Bank’s two Ethics Officers; the Ethics Officers have responsibility for enforcing the Code of Ethics with respect to employees on a day-to-day basis.

 

Director Independence

 

In General

 

During the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, the Bank had a total of 21 directors serving on its Board, 12 of whom were Member Directors (i.e., directors elected by the Bank’s members who are officers or directors of Bank members) and 9 of whom were Independent Directors (i.e., directors elected by the Bank’s members who are not officers or directors of Bank members). All of the Bank’s directors were independent of management from the standpoint that they were not, and could not serve as, Bank employees or officers. Also, all individuals, including the Bank’s directors, are prohibited by law from personally owning stock or stock options in the Bank. In addition, the Bank is required to determine whether at least some of its directors are independent under two distinct director independence standards. First, Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Finance Agency”)(Finance Agency) regulations establish independence criteria for directors who serve as members of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors. Second, for disclosure purposes, the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (“SEC”)(SEC) regulations require that the Bank’sBank disclose whether the members of its Board of Directors applyare independent under the independence criteria of a national securities exchange or automatedan inter-dealer quotation system in assessing the independence of its directors. In addition, Rule 10A-3 promulgated under the Exchange Act sets forth the independence requirements of directors serving on the Audit Committee of an SEC reporting company.

 


Finance Agency Regulations Regarding Independence

 

The Finance Agency director independence standards prohibit individuals from serving as members of the Bank’s Audit Committee if they have one or more disqualifying relationships with the Bank or its management that would interfere with the exercise of that individual’s independent judgment. Under Finance Agency regulations, disqualifying relationships can include, but are not limited to: employment with the Bank at any time during the last five years; acceptance of compensation from the Bank other than for service as a director; being a consultant, advisor, promoter, underwriter or legal counsel for the Bank at any time within the last five years; and being an immediate family member of an individual who is or who has been within the past five years, a Bank executive officer. The Board of Directors has assessed the independence of all directors under the Finance Agency’s independence standards, regardless of whether they serve on the Audit Committee. From January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, the Board has determined that all of the persons who served as a director of the Bank, including all directors who served as members of the Audit Committee, were independent under these criteria.

Exchange Act and NYSE Rules Regarding Independence

 

In addition, pursuant to SEC regulations, for disclosure purposes, the Board applies the independence standards of the New York Stock Exchange (“NYSE”)(NYSE) to determine which of its directors and committee members are independent. The Board also applies Rule 10A-3 to determine the independence of the directors serving on its Audit Committee.

 

After applying the NYSE independence standards, the Board has determined that all of the Bank’s Independent Directors who served at any time during the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K (i.e., Anne Evans Estabrook, Caren Franzini,Danelle M. Barrett, Michael M. Horn, David R. Huber, Charles E. Kilbourne, III, Richard S. Mroz, C. Cathleen Raffaeli, Edwin C. Reed, DeForest B. Soaries, Jr., Larry E. Thompson and Ángela Weyne) were independent.

 

Separately, the Board was unable to affirmatively determine that there were no material relationships (as defined in the NYSE rules) between the Bank and its Member Directors, and has therefore concluded that none of the Bank’s Member Directors who served at any time during the aforementioned period (i.e., John R. Buran, Kevin Cummings, Joseph R. Ficalora, Jay M. Ford, James W. Fulmer, Thomas L. Hoy, Thomas J. Kemly, Gerald H. Lipkin, Kenneth J. Mahon, Christopher P. Martin, David J. Nasca, Monte N. Redman,Stephen S. Romaine, and Carlos J. Vázquez) were independent under the NYSE independence standards.

 

In making this determination, the Board considered the cooperative relationship between the Bank and its members. Specifically, the Board considered the fact that each of the Bank’s Member Directors are officers of a Bank member institution, and that each member institution has access to, and is encouraged to use, the Bank’s products and services.

 

Furthermore, the Board acknowledges that under NYSE rules, there are certain objective tests that, if not passed, would preclude a finding of independence. One such test pertains to the amount of business conducted with the Bank by the Member Director’s institution. It is possible that a Member Director could satisfy this test on a particular day. However, because the amount of business conducted by a Member Director’s institution may change frequently, and because the Bank generally desires to increase the amount of business it conducts with each member, the directors deemed it inappropriate to draw distinctions among the Member Directors based solely upon the amount of business conducted with the Bank by any director’s institution at a specific time.

 

Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Board believes that it functions as a governing body that can and does act with good judgment with respect to the corporate governance and business affairs of the Bank. The Board is aware of its statutory responsibilities under Section 7(j) of the Federal Home Loan Bank Act, which specifically provides that the Board of Directors of a Federal Home Loan Bank must administer the affairs of the Home Loan Bank fairly and impartially and without discrimination in favor of or against any member borrower.

 

The Board has a standing Audit Committee. For the reasons noted above, the Board has determined that none of the Member Directors who served at any time as members of the Board’s Audit Committee during the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K (Kevin Cummings, Joseph R. Ficalora, Jay M. Ford, James W. Fulmer, Thomas L. Hoy, Thomas J. Kemly and Christopher P. Martin and Monte N. Redman)Martin) were independent under the NYSE standards for such committee members. The Board also determined that the Independent Directors who served as members of the Board’s Audit Committee during the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K (Caren Franzini, Larry(David R. Huber, Charles E. ThompsonKilbourne, III and Ángela Weyne) were independent under the NYSE independence standards for such committee members. The Board also applied Rule 10A-3 to assess the independence of the members of its Audit Committee.


Under Rule 10A-3, in order to be considered independent, a member of the Audit Committee may not, other than in his or her capacity as a member of the Board or any other Board Committee (i) accept any consulting, advisory, or other compensation from us or (ii) be an affiliated person of the Bank. During the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K, all of our directors, including all members of our Audit Committee, were independent under these criteria.

 

The Board also has a standing Compensation & Human Resources Committee (“C&HRC”)(C&HRC). For the reasons noted above, the Board has determined that none of the Member Directors who served at any time as members of the Bank’s C&HRC during the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K (James W. Fulmer,(Kevin Cummings, Gerald H. Lipkin, Christopher P. Martin, David J. Nasca and Monte N. Redman)Stephen S. Romaine) were independent under the NYSE standards for such committee members. The Board also determined that the Independent Directors who served as members of the Board’s C&HRC during the period from January 1, 20172020 through and including the date of this annual report on Form 10-K (C. Cathleen Raffaeli, and DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.) and Ángela Weyne) were independent under the NYSE independence standards for such committee members.

Item 14.Principal Accounting Fees and Services.


Item 14.Principal Accounting Fees and Services.

 

The following table sets forth the fees paid to our independent registered public accounting firm, PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP (“PwC”)(PwC), during years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018 (in thousands):

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

2017 (a)

 

2016 (a)

 

2015 (a)

 

 Years ended December 31, 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 2020 (a) 2019 (a) 2018 (a) 

Audit Fees and Expenses

 

$

828

 

$

859

 

$

836

 

 $960  $874  $1,017 

Audit-related Fees

 

60

 

261

 

189

 

  58   148   134 

Tax Fees

 

8

 

26

 

3

 

  20   12   35 

All Other Fees

 

4

 

10

 

23

 

  3   1   4 

Total

 

$

900

 

$

1,156

 

$

1,051

 

 $1,041  $1,035  $1,190 

 


(a)The amounts in the table do not include the assessment from the Office of Finance (“OF”) for the Bank’s share of the audit fees of approximately $62 thousand, $58 thousand and $55 thousand for 2017, 2016 and 2015, incurred in connection with the audit of the combined financial statements published by the OF.

(a)The amounts in the table do not include the assessment from the Office of Finance (OF) for the Bank’s share of the audit fees of approximately $78 thousand, $66 thousand and $63 thousand for 2020, 2019 and 2018, incurred in connection with the audit of the combined financial statements published by the OF.

 

AUDIT FEES

 

Audit fees relate to professional services rendered in connection with the audit of the FHLBNY’s annual financial statements, and review of interim financial statements included in quarterly reports on Form 10-Q.

 

AUDIT-RELATED FEES

 

Audit-related fees primarily relate to consultation services provided in connection with respect to certain accounting and reporting standards.

 

TAX FEES

 

Tax fees relate to consultation services provided primarily with respect to tax withholding matters.

 

ALL OTHER FEES

 

These other fees are primarily related to review of various accounting matters and consultation services.

 

Policy on Audit Committee Pre-approval of Audit and Non-Audit Services Performed by the Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm.

 

We have adopted a policy that prohibits our independent registered public accounting firm from performing non-financial consulting services, such as information technology consulting and internal audit services.  This policy also mandates that the audit and non-audit services and related budget be approved by the full Audit Committee or Audit Committee Chair in advance, and that the Audit Committee be provided with periodic reporting on actual spending.  In accordance with this policy, all services to be performed by PwC were pre-approved by either the full Audit Committee or the Audit Committee Chair.

 

Subsequent to the enactment of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (the “Act”), the Audit Committee has met with PwC to further understand the provisions of that Act as it relates to independence. PwC will rotate the lead audit partner and other partners as appropriate in compliance with the Act. The Audit Committee will continue to monitor the activities undertaken by PwC to comply with the Act.

230

PART IV

 

Item 15.Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

Item 15.Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules.

 

(a)     1. Financial Statements

 

The financial statements included as part of this Form 10-K are identified in the index to the Financial Statements appearing in Item 8 of this Form 10-K, which index is incorporated in this Item 15 by reference.

 

2. Financial Statement Schedules

 

Financial statement schedules have been omitted because they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the financial statements or notes, under Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

 

3. Exhibits

 

No. 

Exhibit Description

Filed with
this Form 
10-K

FormForm*

Date Filed

3.01

Restated Organization Certificate of the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (“Bank”)

8-K

12/1/2005

3.02

Amended and Restated Bylaws of the Bank

8-K

3/22/2018

21/2019

4.01

Amended and Restated Capital Plan of the Bank

8-K

8-K/A

1/8/2018

2/10/2021
4.02Description of Securities   X

10.01

Bank 2016 Incentive Compensation Plan (a)

10-K

3/21/2016

10.02

Bank 2017 Incentive Compensation Plan(a)

10-K

10-K

3/21/2017

10.03

10.02

Bank 2018 Incentive Compensation Plan(a)

10-K3/22/2018
10.03Bank 2019 Incentive Compensation Plan(a) 8-K3/18/2019

10.04

Bank 2020 Incentive Compensation Plan

 

X

8-K

4/6/2020

10.04

10.05

20162021 Director Compensation Policy(a)

X

10-K

3/21/2016

10.05

10.06

2017 Director Compensation Policy (a)

10-K

3/21/2017

10.06

2018 Director Compensation Policy(a)

X

10.07

Bank Amended and Restated Severance Pay Plan(a)

X

10-K

3/21/2017

10.08

10.07

Qualified Defined Benefit Plan (a)

10-K

3/25/2013

10.09

Qualified Defined Contribution Plan (a)

10-K

3/25/2013

10.10

Bank Amended and Restated Benefit Equalization Plan (2016) (a)

10-K

3/21/2016

10.11

Bank Amended And Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Defined Benefit & Defined Contribution Benefit Equalization Plan (2017)(a)

X

8-K

12/9/2016

10.12

10.08

Bank Amended And Restated Supplemental Executive Retirement Defined Benefit & Defined Contribution Benefit Equalization Plan (2018)

X

10.13

Nonqualified Deferred Incentive Compensation Plan(a)

X

8-K

12/9/2016

10.14

10.09

Thrift Restoration Plan (a)

10-Q

8/12/2010

10.15

Bank Amended and Restated Bank Profit Sharing Plan(a)

10-K

3/25/2013

10.16

10.10

Compensatory Arrangements for Named Executive Officers (a)

X

10.17

Amended and Restated Federal Home Loan Banks P&I Funding and Contingency Agreement (2017)

10-K

3/21/2017

10.18

10.11

Form of Executive Change in Control Agreement between the Bank and each of the CEO and the other members of the Bank’s Management Committee(a)

10-K

3/21/2016

2019

10.19

10.12

Amended Joint Capital Enhancement Agreement among the Federal Home Loan Banks

8-K

8/5/2011

12.01

31.01

Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

X

31.01

Certification of Registrant’s Chief Executive Officer, as required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

X

31.02

Certification of the Registrant’s Chief Financial Officer, as required by Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

X

32.01

Certification of Registrant’s Chief Executive Officer, as required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

X

32.02

Certification of Registrant’s Chief Financial Officer, as required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

X

99.01

Audit Committee Report

X

99.02

Audit Committee Charter

X

101.INS

XBRL Instance Document

X

101.SCH

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document

X

101.CAL

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document

X

101.LAB

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document

X

101.PRE

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document

X

101.DEF

XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document

X

 


Notes:

 

* Means that this exhibit is incorporated by reference from the named Form; the filing date of such named Form is listed in the next column.

(a) This exhibit includes a management contract, compensatory plan or arrangement required to be noted herein.

SIGNATURES

231

Item 16.Form 10-K Summary.

None.


SIGNATURES

 

Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.

 

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

By:

/s/ José R. González

José R. González

President and Chief Executive Officer

(Principal Executive Officer)

 

Date: March 22, 201819, 2021

 

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated below:

 

Signature

Title

Date

/s/ José R. González

President and Chief Executive Officer

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

José R. González

(Principal Executive Officer)

/s/ Kevin M. Neylan

Senior Vice President and Chief

Financial Officer

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Kevin M. Neylan

Financial Officer

(Principal Financial Officer)

/s/ Backer Ali

Vice President, Chief Accounting

March 22, 2018

Backer Ali

Officer and Controller

March 19, 2021

Backer Ali

(Principal Accounting Officer)

/s/ John R. Buran

Chairman of the Board of Directors

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

John R. Buran

/s/ Larry E. Thompson

Vice Chairman of the Board of

Directors

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Larry E. Thompson

Directors

/s/ Danelle M. Barrett

DirectorMarch 19, 2021
Danelle M. Barrett
/s/ Kevin Cummings

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Kevin Cummings

/s/ Anne Evans Estabrook

Director

March 22, 2018

Anne Evans Estabrook

/s/ Joseph R. Ficalora

Director

March 22, 2018

Joseph R. Ficalora

/s/ Jay M. Ford

Director

March 22, 2018

Jay M. Ford

/s/ Michael M. Horn

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Michael M. Horn

/s/ Thomas L. Hoy

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Thomas L. Hoy

/s/ David R. HuberDirectorMarch 19, 2021
David R. Huber
/s/ Thomas J. KemlyDirectorMarch 19, 2021
Thomas J. Kemly


SignatureTitleDate
/s/ Charles E. Kilbourne, IIIDirectorMarch 19, 2021
Charles E. Kilbourne, III
/s/ Gerald H. Lipkin

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Gerald H. Lipkin

/s/ Kenneth J. Mahon

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Kenneth J. Mahon

/s/ Christopher P. Martin

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Christopher P. Martin

/s/ Richard S. Mroz

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Richard S. Mroz

/s/ David J. Nasca

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

David J. Nasca

/s/ C. Cathleen Raffaeli

Director

March 22, 2018

C. Cathleen Raffaeli

/s/ Monte N. Redman

Director

March 22, 2018

Monte N. Redman

/s/ Stephen S. Romaine

Director

March 19, 2021

Stephen S. Romaine

/s/ Edwin C. Reed

Director

March 22, 2018

Edwin C. Reed

/s/ DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.

/s/ Carlos J. Vázquez

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Carlos J. Vázquez

/s/ Ángela Weyne

Director

March 22, 2018

19, 2021

Ángela Weyne

 


211


Mortgage loans and “Realreal estate owned”owned (OREO or REO)Fair valuesThe FHLBNY measured and recorded certain impaired mortgage loans and Real estate owned (foreclosed properties) on a non-recurring basisbasis. These assets were subject to fair value adjustments in certain circumstances at the occurrence of the events during the period ended on the reporting dates.  During the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, certainperiods in this report. Impaired loans were primarily loans that were delinquent for 180 days or more, were partially charged-off, andwith the remaining loans were recorded at their collateral values of $2.5 millionat the dates the loans were charged off. Fair value adjustments on a non-recurring basis.  Realthe impaired loans and real estate owned (“Foreclosed”) properties,assets were based primarily on broker price opinions.

In accordance with disclosure provisions, we have reported changes in fair values of $1.1 millionsuch assets as of the date the fair value adjustments were recorded on a non-recurring basis during the same period.period ended December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, and reported fair values were not as of the period end dates.

 

Fair Value Option Disclosures

 

The fair value option (“FVO”) providesFrom time to time, the FHLBNY will elect the FVO for advances and Consolidated obligations on an irrevocable option to elect fair value as an alternative measurement for selected financial assets, financial liabilities, unrecognized firm commitments, and written loan commitments not previously carried at fair value.  It requires entities to display the fair value of those assets and liabilities for which the entity has chosen to use fair value on the face of the Statements of Condition.  Fair value is used for both the initial and subsequent measurement of the designated assets, liabilities and commitments,instrument-by-instrument basis with the changes in fair value recognizedreported in net income.  Interest income and interest expense on advances and Consolidated obligations at fair value are recognized solely onearnings. Customarily, the contractual amount of interest due or unpaid.  Any transaction fees or costs are immediately recognized into non-interest income or non-interest expense.

The FHLBNY has electedelection is made when either the FVO for certain advances and certain Consolidated obligations that eitherinstruments do not qualify for hedge accounting or may be at risk for not meeting hedge effectiveness requirements,requirements; the objective is primarily in an effort to mitigate the potential income statement volatility that can arise from economic hedging relationships in which the carrying value of the hedged item is not adjusted for changes in fair value. Advances haveWe may also been electedelect advances under the FVO when analysis indicatedindicates that changes in the fair values of the advance would be an offset to fair value volatility of debt elected under the FVO. The FVO election is made at inception of the contracts for advances and debt obligations.

 

For instruments for which the fair value option has been elected, the related contractual interest income, contractual interest expense and the discount amortization on fair value option discount notes are recorded as part of net interest income in the Statements of Income. The remaining changes in fair value for instruments for which the fair value option has been elected are recorded as net gains (losses) on financial instruments held under fair value option in the Statements of Income. The change in fair value does not include changes in instrument-specific credit risk. The FHLBNY has determined that no adjustments to the fair values of its instruments recorded under the fair value option for instrument-specific credit risk were necessary at December 31, 2017, December 31, 2016,2020 and December 31, 2015.2019.

 

AdvancesAs with all advances, when advances are elected under the FVO, were short-term in nature, with tenors that were generally less than 24 months.  As with all advances, the loans werethey are also fully collateralized through their terms to maturity. We consider our Consolidated obligation bonds and discount notes elected under the FVO aredebt as high credit quality,credit-quality, highly-rated instruments, and changes in fair values wereare generally related to changes in interest rates and investor preference, including investor asset allocation strategies. The FHLBNY believes the credit-quality of Consolidated obligation debt has remained stable, and changes in fair value attributable to instrument-specific credit risk, if any, were not material given that the debt elected under the FVO had been issued within the recent past 24 months,periods, and no adverse changes have been observed in their credit characteristics.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York


Notes to Financial Statements

The following tables summarize the activity related to financial instruments for which the FHLBNY elected the fair value option (in thousands):

 

 

Year ended December 31, 2017

 

 Years ended December 31, 2020 

 

Advances

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

 Bonds  Discount Notes 

Balance, beginning of the period

 

$

9,873,157

 

$

(2,052,513

)

$

(12,228,412

)

 $(12,134,043) $(2,186,603)

New transactions elected for fair value option

 

5,000,000

 

(1,100,000

)

(5,980,042

)

  (19,375,000)  (23,818,753)

Maturities and terminations

 

(12,659,567

)

2,019,550

 

15,875,322

 

  14,867,000   18,883,387 

Net (losses) gains on financial instruments held

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net gains (losses) on financial instruments held        

under fair value option

 

(5,142

)

224

 

378

 

  2,069   (1,946)

Change in accrued interest/unaccreted balance

 

(2,824

)

1,665

 

20,133

 

  59,510   (9,840)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, end of the period

 

$

2,205,624

 

$

(1,131,074

)

$

(2,312,621

)

 $(16,580,464) $(7,133,755)

 

 

Year ended December 31, 2016

 

 Years ended December 31, 2019 

 

Advances

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

 Bonds  Discount Notes 

Balance, beginning of the period

 

$

9,532,553

 

$

(13,320,909

)

$

(12,471,868

)

 $(5,159,792) $(3,180,086)

New transactions elected for fair value option

 

8,304,504

 

(2,295,300

)

(23,022,995

)

  (18,392,000)  (2,182,845)

Maturities and terminations

 

(7,979,746

)

13,568,410

 

23,277,806

 

  11,465,000   3,170,915 

Net gains (losses) on financial instruments held

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

        

under fair value option

 

12,744

 

(10,234

)

(4,364

)

  (3,952)  (194)

Change in accrued interest/unaccreted balance

 

3,102

 

5,520

 

(6,991

)

  (43,299)  5,607 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, end of the period

 

$

9,873,157

 

$

(2,052,513

)

$

(12,228,412

)

 $(12,134,043) $(2,186,603)

 

 

Year ended December 31, 2015

 

 Years ended December 31, 2018 

 

Advances

 

Bonds

 

Discount Notes

 

 Advances  Bonds  Discount Notes 

Balance, beginning of the period

 

$

15,655,403

 

$

(19,523,202

)

$

(7,890,027

)

 $2,205,624  $(1,131,074) $(2,312,621)

New transactions elected for fair value option

 

9,282,240

 

(18,462,660

)

(19,085,181

)

  -   (5,225,000)  (4,735,290)

Maturities and terminations

 

(15,400,780

)

24,655,080

 

14,512,436

 

  (2,200,000)  1,215,000   3,873,993 

Net (losses) gains on financial instruments held

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net gains (losses) on financial instruments held            

under fair value option

 

(2,325

)

8,494

 

3,703

 

  (590)  681   118 

Change in accrued interest/unaccreted balance

 

(1,985

)

1,379

 

(12,799

)

  (5,034)  (19,399)  (6,286)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance, end of the period

 

$

9,532,553

 

$

(13,320,909

)

$

(12,471,868

)

 $-  $(5,159,792) $(3,180,086)


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

The following tables present the change in fair value included in the Statements of Income for financial instruments for which the fair value option has been elected (in thousands):

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Interest
Income

 

Net Losses Due
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Advances

 

$

54,023

 

$

(5,142

)

$

48,881

 

   December 31, 2018 
   Interest
Income
  Net Gains (Losses)
Due to Changes in
Fair Value
  Total Change in Fair
Value Included in Current
Period Earnings
 
Advances  $10,085  $(590) $9,495 

 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Interest
Income

 

Net Gains Due 
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Advances

 

$

78,787

 

$

12,744

 

$

91,531

 

  December 31, 2020 
  Interest
Expense
  Net Gains (Losses)
Due to Changes in
Fair Value
  Total Change in Fair
Value Included in Current
Period Earnings
 
Consolidated obligation bonds $(55,088) $2,069  $(53,019)
Consolidated obligation discount notes  (60,063)  (1,946)  (62,009)
  $(115,151) $123  $(115,028)

 

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

Interest
Income

 

Net Losses Due
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Advances

 

$

43,889

 

$

(2,325

)

$

41,564

 

  December 31, 2019 
  Interest
Expense
  Net Gains (Losses)
Due to Changes in
Fair Value
  Total Change in Fair
Value Included in Current
Period Earnings
 
Consolidated obligation bonds $(168,329) $(3,952) $(172,281)
Consolidated obligation discount notes  (26,475)  (194)  (26,669)
  $(194,804) $(4,146) $(198,950)

  December 31, 2018 
  Interest
Expense
  Net Gains (Losses)
Due to Changes in
Fair Value
  Total Change in Fair
Value Included in Current
Period Earnings
 
Consolidated obligation bonds $(25,077) $681  $(24,396)
Consolidated obligation discount notes  (21,617)  118   (21,499)
  $(46,694) $799  $(45,895)


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

Net Gains Due
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

$

(6,436

)

$

224

 

$

(6,212

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

(27,519

)

378

 

(27,141

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

(33,955

)

$

602

 

$

(33,353

)

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

Net Losses Due
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

$

(22,339

)

$

(10,234

)

$

(32,573

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

(54,557

)

(4,364

)

(58,921

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

(76,896

)

$

(14,598

)

$

(91,494

)

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

Interest Expense

 

Net Gains Due
to Changes in
Fair Value

 

Total Change in Fair
Value Included in
Current Period
Earnings

 

Consolidated obligation bonds

 

$

(40,265

)

$

8,494

 

$

(31,771

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes

 

(27,744

)

3,703

 

(24,041

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

(68,009

)

$

12,197

 

$

(55,812

)

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

The following tables compare the aggregate fair value and aggregate remaining contractual principal balance outstanding of financial instruments for which the fair value option has been elected (a)(in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 December 31, 2020 

 

Aggregate
Unpaid Principal
Balance

 

Aggregate Fair
Value

 

Fair Value
Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance

 

Advances (a)

 

$

2,200,000

 

$

2,205,624

 

$

5,624

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
  Aggregate Fair
Value
  Fair Value Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
 

Consolidated obligation bonds (b)

 

$

1,130,000

 

$

1,131,074

 

$

1,074

 

 $16,575,000  $16,580,464  $5,464 

Consolidated obligation discount notes (c)

 

2,309,618

 

2,312,621

 

3,003

 

  7,118,211   7,133,755   15,544 

 

$

3,439,618

 

$

3,443,695

 

$

4,077

 

 $23,693,211  $23,714,219  $21,008 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 December 31, 2019 

 

Aggregate
Unpaid Principal
Balance

 

Aggregate Fair
Value

 

Fair Value
Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance

 

Advances (a)

 

$

9,859,504

 

$

9,873,157

 

$

13,653

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
  Aggregate
Fair Value
  Fair Value Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
 

Consolidated obligation bonds (b)

 

$

2,049,550

 

$

2,052,513

 

$

2,963

 

 $12,067,000  $12,134,043  $67,043 

Consolidated obligation discount notes (c)

 

12,204,898

 

12,228,412

 

23,514

 

  2,182,845   2,186,603   3,758 

 

$

14,254,448

 

$

14,280,925

 

$

26,477

 

 $14,249,845  $14,320,646  $70,801 

 

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

Aggregate
Unpaid Principal
Balance

 

Aggregate Fair
Value

 

Fair Value
Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance

 

Advances (a)

 

$

9,532,240

 

$

9,532,553

 

$

313

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Consolidated obligation bonds (b)

 

$

13,322,660

 

$

13,320,909

 

$

(1,751

)

Consolidated obligation discount notes (c)

 

12,459,708

 

12,471,868

 

12,160

 

 

 

$

25,782,368

 

$

25,792,777

 

$

10,409

 


(a)Advances — The FHLBNY has elected the FVO for certain advances, primarily short- and intermediate term floating-rate advances and intermediate-term fixed-rate advances.  The elections were made primarily as a natural fair value offset to debt elected under the FVO.

(b)The FHLBNY has elected the FVO for certain short-term callable and non-callable CO bonds because management was not able to assert with confidence that the debt would qualify for hedge accounting as such short-term debt, specifically with call options, may not remain highly effective hedges through the maturity of the bonds.

(c)Discount notes were elected under the FVO because management was not able to assert with confidence that the debt would qualify for hedge accounting as the short-term discount note debt may not remain highly effective hedges through maturity.

  December 31, 2018 
  Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
  Aggregate Fair
Value
  Fair Value Over/(Under)
Aggregate Unpaid
Principal Balance
 
Consolidated obligation bonds (b) $5,140,000  $5,159,792  $19,792 
Consolidated obligation discount notes (c)  3,170,915   3,180,086   9,171 
  $8,310,915  $8,339,878  $28,963 

 

Note 18.Commitments and Contingencies.

(a)Advances – No advances elected under the FVO were outstanding at December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018.  From time to time, the FHLBNY has elected the FVO for advances on an instrument by instrument basis with terms that were primarily short-and intermediate-term.
(b)CO bonds – The FHLBNY has elected the FVO on an instrument-by-instrument basis for CO bonds, primarily fixed-rate, intermediate- and short-term debt, because management was not able to assert with confidence that the debt would qualify for hedge accounting as such short-term debt may not remain highly effective hedges through the maturity of the bonds.
(c)Discount notes were elected under the FVO because management was not able to assert with confidence that the debt would qualify for hedge accounting as the short-term discount note debt may not remain highly effective hedges through maturity.

Note 19.Commitments and Contingencies.

 

Consolidated obligationsThe FHLBanks have joint and several liability for all the Consolidated obligations issued on their behalf. Accordingly, should one or more of the FHLBanks be unable to repay their participation in the Consolidated obligations, each of the other FHLBanks could be called upon to repay all or part of such obligations, as determined or approved by the Finance Agency. Neither the FHLBNY nor any other FHLBank has ever had to assume or pay the Consolidated obligations of another FHLBank. The FHLBNY does not believe that it will be called upon to pay the Consolidated obligations of another FHLBank in the future. Under the provisions of accounting standards for guarantees, the FHLBNY would have been required to recognize the fair value of the FHLBNY’s joint and several liability for all the Consolidated obligations, as discussed above. However, the FHLBNY considers the joint and several liabilities as similar to a related party guarantee, which meets the scope exception under the accounting standard for guarantees. Accordingly, the FHLBNY has not recognized the fair value of a liability for its joint and several obligations related to other FHLBanks’ Consolidated obligations, which in aggregate were par amounts of $0.7 trillion and $1.0 trillion as of December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016.2019.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Litigation settlement Lehman Brothers Bankruptcy Proceedings — In September 2008, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. (“LBHI”), the parent company of Lehman Brothers Special Financing Inc. (“LBSF”), filed for protection under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code in the United States Bankruptcy Court in the Southern District of New York.  At the time of LBHI’s bankruptcy filing, the FHLBNY had interest rate swap and other derivative transactions outstanding with LBSF, with a total notional amount of $16.5 billion.  On September 18, 2008, the FHLBNY terminated these transactions as permitted in the wake of LBHI’s bankruptcy filing.  On July 23, 2010, the FHLBNY received a notice from LBSF claiming that the FHLBNY improperly calculated the termination payment, and that the FHLBNY owed LBSF a substantial amount.

In connection with the dispute, on April 11, 2017 the FHLBNY reached an agreement to settle all claims pending in the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York.  The parties have stipulated to the voluntary dismissal of the case in its entirety, with prejudice.  On April 18, 2017, we paid $70 million to the Lehman bankruptcy estate and took a charge for that amount in 2017.

Financial letters of credit — Standby letters of credit are executed for a fee on behalf of members to facilitate residential housing, community lending, and members’ asset/liability management or to provide liquidity.  A standby letter of credit is a financing arrangement between the FHLBNY and its member.  Members assume an unconditional obligation to reimburse the FHLBNY for value given by the FHLBNY to the beneficiary under the terms of the standby letter of credit.  The FHLBNY may, in its discretion, permit the member to finance repayment of their obligation by receiving a collateralized advance.

Outstanding standby letters of credit were approximately $16.2 billion at December 31, 2017, with original terms of up to three years, and final expiration in 2020.  The outstanding balance was $12.8 billion at December 31, 2016.  Standby letters of credit are fully collateralized.  Unearned fees on standby letters of credit are recorded in Other liabilities, and were $1.0 million and $0.8 million as of December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.

MPF Program — Under the MPF program, the FHLBNY was unconditionally obligated to purchase $13.0 million and $28.4 million of mortgage loans at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016.  Commitments were generally for periods not to exceed 45 business days.  Such commitments were recorded as derivatives at their fair values in compliance with the provisions of the accounting standards for derivatives and hedging.

Advances to members — No members had conditional agreements at either December 31, 2017 or December 31, 2016 to borrow through advances with the FHLBNY.

Derivative contracts

 

·Affordable Housing Program When the FHLBNY executes derivatives that— The 11 FHLBanks are not eligibleexpected to be cleared under the CFTC rules, the FHLBNY and the swap counterparties enter into bilateral collateral agreements.

·                  When the FHLBNY executes derivatives that are eligible to be cleared, the FHLBNY and the FCMs, acting as agents of Derivative Clearing Organizations or DCOs, would enter into margin agreements.  The fair values of open derivative contracts are settled on a daily basis by the exchange of variation margin.  In addition, the FHLBNY posts initial margin to DCOs.

The FHLBNY had posted $11.1 million and $256.0contribute $100 million in cash to derivative counterparties at December 31, 2017 and 2016.  In addition, the FHLBNY had pledged $239.1 million of marketable securities to derivative counterparties at December 31, 2017.  Further information is provided in Note 16.  Derivatives and Hedging Activities.

Deposits The FHLBNY had pledged $5.7 million of mortgage-backed securitiesaggregate annually to the FDIC to collateralize deposit placed byAHP. If the FDIC at December 31, 2017.

Lease contracts — The FHLBNY charged to operating expenses net rental costs of approximately $4.6 million, $3.3 million and $3.2aggregate assessment is less than $100 million for all the FHLBanks, each FHLBank would be required to assure that the aggregate contributions of the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015.  Lease agreements for FHLBNY premises generally provide for inflationary increases inFHLBanks equal $100 million. The proration would be made on the basic rentals resulting from increases in property taxes and maintenance expenses.  Additionally, the FHLBNY has a lease agreement for a shared offsite data backup site at an annual cost estimated to be $1.4 million.  Componentsbasis of the offsite agreement are generally renewable upFHLBank’s income in relation to three years.

Federal Home Loan Bankthe income of New York

Notes to Financial Statementsall FHLBanks for the previous year. There have been no shortfalls in any periods in this report.

 

The following table summarizes contractual obligations and contingencies as of December 31, 20172020 (in thousands):

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 December 31, 2020 

 

Payments Due or Expiration Terms by Period

 

 Payments Due or Expiration Terms by Period 

 

 

 

Greater Than

 

Greater Than

 

 

 

 

 

    Greater Than Greater Than      

 

Less Than

 

One Year

 

Three Years

 

Greater Than

 

 

 

 Less Than One Year Three Years Greater Than    

 

One Year

 

to Three Years

 

to Five Years

 

Five Years

 

Total

 

 One Year to Three Years to Five Years Five Years Total 

Contractual Obligations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Consolidated obligation bonds at par (a)

 

$

82,118,565

 

$

9,825,655

 

$

2,799,430

 

$

4,107,500

 

$

98,851,150

 

 $45,481,150  $14,692,205  $2,403,975  $6,329,200  $68,906,530 

Consolidated obligation discount notes at par

 

49,685,334

 

 

 

 

49,685,334

 

  57,668,646   -   -   -   57,668,646 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock (a)

 

13,672

 

1,145

 

445

 

4,683

 

19,945

 

  127   293   317   2,254   2,991 

Premises (lease obligations) (b)

 

4,803

 

12,782

 

13,809

 

79,318

 

110,712

 

  6,916   15,676   16,202   62,094   100,888 

Remote backup site

 

1,406

 

1,510

 

 

 

2,916

 

  723   1,371   263   -   2,357 

Other liabilities (c)

 

124,004

 

9,218

 

7,508

 

63,448

 

204,178

 

  80,490   11,828   9,502   84,730   186,550 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Total contractual obligations

 

131,947,784

 

9,850,310

 

2,821,192

 

4,254,949

 

148,874,235

 

  103,238,052   14,721,373   2,430,259   6,478,278   126,867,962 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Other commitments

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Standby letters of credit(d)

 

16,145,174

 

14,025

 

 

 

16,159,199

 

  19,924,154   177,396   -   -   20,101,550 

Consolidated obligation bonds/discount notes traded not settled

 

59,000

 

 

 

 

59,000

 

  3,613,925   -   -   -   3,613,925 
Commitments to fund additional advances  215,000   -   -   -   215,000 

Commitments to fund pension

 

7,500

 

 

 

 

7,500

 

  10,000   -   -   -   10,000 

Open delivery commitments (MPF)

 

12,952

 

 

 

 

12,952

 

Open delivery commitments (MPF and MAP)  9,777   -   -   -   9,777 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Total other commitments

 

16,224,626

 

14,025

 

 

 

16,238,651

 

  23,772,856   177,396   -   -   23,950,252 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                    

Total obligations and commitments

 

$

148,172,410

 

$

9,864,335

 

$

2,821,192

 

$

4,254,949

 

$

165,112,886

 

 $127,010,908  $14,898,769  $2,430,259  $6,478,278  $150,818,214 

 


(a)
(a)Callable bonds contain an exercise date or a series of exercise dates that may result in a shorter redemption period. Redemption dates of mandatorily redeemable capital stock are assumed to correspond to maturity dates of member advances. Excess capital stock is redeemed at that time, and hence, these dates better represent the related commitments than the put dates associated with capital stock. While interest payments on CO bonds and discount notes are contractual obligations, they are deemed to be not material and, therefore, amounts were omitted from the table.
(b)Amounts represent undiscounted obligations. The Bank adopted ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) on January 1, 2019. Upon adoption, all lease obligations, including legacy leases were recorded in the Statements of Condition as a Right-of-use (ROU) asset and a corresponding lease liability. Under legacy pre-ASU GAAP, lease obligations were reported as off-balance sheet commitments. Immaterial amounts of equipment and other leases have been excluded in the table above.
(c)Includes accounts payable and accrued expenses, liabilities recorded for future settlements of investments, Pass-through reserves due to member institutions held at the FRB, and projected payment obligations for pension plans. Where it was not possible to estimate the exact timing of payment obligations, they were assumed to be due within one year; amounts were not material. For more information about employee retirement plans in general, see Note 16. Employee Retirement Plans.
(d)Financial letters of credit — Standby letters of credit are executed for a fee on behalf of members to facilitate residential housing, community lending, and members’ asset/liability management or to provide liquidity. A standby letter of credit is a financing arrangement between the FHLBNY and its member. Members assume an unconditional obligation to reimburse the FHLBNY for value given by the FHLBNY to the beneficiary under the terms of the standby letter of credit. The FHLBNY may, in its discretion, permit the member to finance repayment of their obligation by receiving a collateralized advance.

Effective January 1, 2020, we adopted the framework for credit losses under ASU 2016-13 (Topic 326), which did not result in a shorter redemption period.  Redemption datesrecognition of mandatorily redeemable capital stock are assumedcredit losses on off-balance sheet arrangements as of January 1, 2020 or periods in this report. 

175

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to correspond to maturity dates of member advances.  Excess capital stock is redeemed at that time, and hence, these dates better representFinancial Statements

Operating Lease Commitments

Effective January 1, 2019, the related commitments than the put dates associated with capital stock.

(b)We renewed the lease for the New York City office in June 2017.  Our existing office lease in New Jersey expires in 2018, and we executed aFHLBNY adopted new lease agreement in December 2017.  The Bank plans to adoptguidance under ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842) in 2019.  Upon adoptionthat requires lessees to recognize on the balance sheet all leases with lease terms greater than twelve months as a lease liability with a corresponding right-of-use (ROU) asset.

At December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, the FHLBNY was obligated under a number of noncancelable leases, predominantly operating leases for premises. These leases generally have terms of 15 years or less that contain escalation clauses that will increase rental payments. Operating leases also include backup datacenters and certain office equipment. Operating lease liabilities and ROU are recognized at the lease obligations will be recordedcommencement date based on the present value of the future minimum lease payments over the lease term. The future lease payments are discounted at a rate that represents the FHLBNY’s borrowing rate for its own debt (Consolidated obligation bonds) of a similar term. ROU includes any lease prepayments made, plus any initial direct costs incurred, less any lease incentives received. Rental expense associated with operating leases is recognized on a straight-line basis over the lease term. Premise rental expense is included in occupancy expense, and datacenter and other lease expenses are included in other operating expense in the Statements of Condition.  Until then,income. ROU and lease obligations will continue to beliabilities are reported as commitments under existing GAAP.

(c)Includes accounts payable and accrued expenses, Pass-through reserves due to member institutions held atin the FRB, and projected payment obligations for pension plans.  Where it was not possible to estimate the exact timingStatements of payment obligations, they were assumed to be due within one year; amounts were not material.  For more information about employee retirement plans in general, see Note 15. Employee Retirement Plans.condition.

 

The FHLBNY does not anticipate any credit losses from its off-balance sheet commitments and accordingly no provision for losses is required.following tables provide summarized information on our leases (dollars in thousands):

 

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Operating Leases (a)        
Right-of-use assets $70,733  $75,464 
Lease Liabilities $84,475  $89,365 

Note 19.Related Party Transactions.

  Twelve months ended December 31, 
  2020  2019 
Operating Lease Expense $7,776  $7,585 
Operating cash flows - Cash Paid $7,899  $6,624 

  December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
Weighted Average Discount Rate 3.29 % 3.29 %
Weighted Average Remaining Lease Term 12.01 Years 12.98 Years

  Remaining maturities through 
Operating lease liabilities December 31, 2020  December 31, 2019 
2020 $-  $7,886 
2021  8,148   8,107 
2022  8,246   8,205 
2023  8,615   8,575 
2024  8,297   8,282 
2025  8,088   8,088 

    Thereafter

  61,798   61,798 

Total undiscounted lease payments

  103,192   110,941 
Imputed interest  (18,717)  (21,576)
Total operating lease liabilities $84,475  $89,365 

(a)We have elected to exclude immaterial amounts of short-term operating lease liabilities in the Right-of-use assets and lease liabilities.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

Note 20.Related Party Transactions.

 

The FHLBNY is a cooperative and the members own almost all of the stock of the FHLBNY. Stock issued and outstanding that is not owned by members is held by former members. The majority of the members of the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY are elected by and from the membership. The FHLBNY conducts its advances business almost exclusively with members, and considers its transactions with its members and non-member stockholders as related party transactions in addition to transactions with other FHLBanks, the Office of Finance, and the Finance Agency. The FHLBNY conducts all transactions with members and non-members in the ordinary course of business. All transactions with all members, including those whose officers may serve as directors of the FHLBNY, are at terms that are no more favorable than comparable transactions with other members. The FHLBNY may from time to time borrow or sell overnight and term federal funds at market rates to members.

 

Debt Assumptions and TransfersTransfers.

Debt assumptions — No debt was assumed from another FHLBank in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and in the same period in the prior year.

Debt transfers — No debt was transferred to another FHLBank in the twelve months ended December 31, 2017 and in the same period in the prior year.  Cash paid in excess of book cost is charged to earnings in the period when debt is transferred; the transferring bank notifies the Office of Finance, the issuing agent, on trade date of the change in primary obligor for the transferred debt.

When debt is transferred or assumed, the transactions would be executed in the ordinary course of the FHLBNY’s business and at negotiated market pricing.

 

Debt assumptions — In December 2020, the FHLBNY assumed $985.1 million of debt (par amounts) from FHLB Boston. No debt was assumed from another FHLBank in the twelve months ended December 31, 2019.

Debt transfers — No debt was transferred to another FHLBank in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020 and in the same period in the prior year.

Advances Sold or Transferred

 

No advances were transferred or sold to the FHLBNY or from the FHLBNY to another FHLBank in any periods in this report. When an advance is transferred or assumed, the transactions would be executed in the ordinary course of the FHLBNY’s business and at negotiated market pricing.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

MPF Program

 

In the MPF program, the FHLBNY may participate to the FHLBank of Chicago portions of its purchases of mortgage loans from its members. Transactions are participated at market rates. Since 2004, the FHLBNY has not shared its purchases with the FHLBank of Chicago. From the inception of the program through 2004, the cumulative share of MPF Chicago’s participation in the FHLBNY’s MPF loans that has remained outstanding was $11.5$6.0 million and $15.5$7.3 million at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016.2019.

 

Fees paid to the FHLBank of Chicago for providing MPF program services were approximately $2.3$2.6 million, $2.1$2.5 million, and $1.3$2.6 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2017, 2016,2020, 2019, and 2015.2018.

 

Mortgage-backed Securities

 

No mortgage-backed securities were acquired from other FHLBanks during the periods in this report.

 

We pay an annual fee of $6.0 thousand to the FHLBank of Chicago for the use of MBS cash flow models in connection with OTTIimpairment analysis performed by the FHLBNY for certain of our private-label MBS.

 

Intermediation

 

From time to time, the FHLBNY acts as an intermediary to purchase derivatives to accommodate its smaller members. At December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016,2019, outstanding notional amounts were $193.0$444.0 million and $129.0$536.0 million, and representedrepresenting derivative contracts in which the FHLBNY acted as an intermediary to execute derivative contracts with members. Separately, the contracts were offset with contracts purchased from unrelated derivatives dealers. Net fair value exposures of these transactions at December 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 were not significant. The intermediated derivative transactions with members and derivative counterparties were fully collateralized.


Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

Loans to Other Federal Home Loan Banks

 

In the twelve months ended December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 2016,2019, overnight loans extended to other FHLBanks averaged $3.3$2.0 million and $8.0$6.9 million. Generally, loans made to other FHLBanks are uncollateralized. Interest income from such loans was immaterial in any periodthe periods in this report.

 

Borrowings from Other Federal Home Loan Banks

The FHLBNY borrows from other FHLBanks, generally for a period of one day. There were no borrowings from other FHLBanks in the twelve months ended December 31, 2020. In the twelve months ended December 31, 2017,2019, the FHLBNY borrowed a total of $0.8$2.1 billion in overnight loans from other FHLBanks. InThe borrowings averaged $6.6 million for the twelve months ended December 31, 2016, there were no borrowings from other FHLBanks.2019. Interest expense was immaterial.

 

Sub-lease of Office Space to Another Federal Home Loan Bank

The FHLBNY is a lessor of shared office space to another FHLBank for a term through August 2028 at an estimated $0.1 million in annual lease receipts.

Cash and Due from Banks

 

CompensatingAt December 31, 2020 and December 31, 2019, there was no compensating cash balances were held at Citibank.  Citibank is a member and stockholder of the FHLBNY. For more information, see Note 3. Cash and Due from Banks.

 

The following tables summarize significant balances and transactions with related parties at December 31, 20172020 and December 31, 20162019, and transactions for each of the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162020, 2019 and 20152018 (in thousands):

 

Related Party: Outstanding Assets, Liabilities and Capital

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

December 31, 2016

 

 December 31, 2020 December 31, 2019 

 

Related

 

Related

 

 Related Related 

Assets

 

 

 

 

 

        

Advances

 

$

122,447,805

 

$

109,256,625

 

 $92,067,104  $100,695,241 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

 

255,000

 

Accrued interest receivable

 

175,926

 

126,026

 

  89,604   181,792 

 

 

 

 

 

        

Liabilities and capital

 

 

 

 

 

        

Deposits

 

$

1,196,055

 

$

1,240,749

 

 $1,752,963  $1,194,409 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

19,945

 

31,435

 

  2,991   5,129 

Accrued interest payable

 

443

 

68

 

  45   140 

Affordable Housing Program (a)

 

131,654

 

125,062

 

  148,827   153,894 

Other liabilities (b)

 

84,194

 

67,670

 

  32,378   45,388 

 

 

 

 

 

        

Capital

 

$

8,241,038

 

$

7,624,081

 

 $7,256,699  $7,531,895 

 


(a)Represents funds not yet allocated or disbursed to AHP programs. 
(b)Includes member pass-through reserves at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

(a)Represents funds not yet allocated or disbursed to AHP programs.

(b)Related column includes member pass-through reserves at the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

Related Party: Income and Expense Transactions

 

 

 

Years ended December 31,

 

 

 

2017

 

2016

 

2015

 

 

 

Related

 

Related

 

Related

 

Interest income

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Advances

 

$

1,563,322

 

$

919,890

 

$

627,866

 

Interest-bearing deposits (a)

 

2

 

 

 

Mortgage loans held-for-portfolio (b)

 

 

1

 

 

Loans to other FHLBanks

 

26

 

33

 

13

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest expense

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Deposits

 

$

15,060

 

$

3,091

 

$

455

 

Mandatorily redeemable capital stock

 

1,285

 

1,617

 

820

 

Cash collateral held and other borrowings

 

26

 

 

3

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service fees and other

 

$

12,251

 

$

10,984

 

$

10,353

 

  Years ended December 31, 
  2020  2019  2018 
  Related  Related  Related 
Interest income            
Advances $1,166,745  $2,526,662  $2,522,040 
Interest-bearing deposits  1   6   5 
Loans to other FHLBanks  33   165   130 
             
Interest expense            
Deposits $3,768  $22,839  $17,816 
Mandatorily redeemable capital stock  235   379   964 
Cash collateral held and other borrowings  -   165   - 
             
Service fees and other $18,207  $17,022  $14,439 

 


(a)Includes insignificant amounts

Federal Home Loan Bank of interest income from MPF service provider.New York

(b)Includes immaterial amounts of mortgage interest income from loans purchased from members of another FHLBank.Notes to Financial Statements

 

Note 20.Segment Information and Concentration.

Note 21.Segment Information and Concentration.

 

The FHLBNY manages its operations as a single business segment. Management and the FHLBNY’s Board of Directors review enterprise-wide financial information in order to make operating decisions and assess performance. Advances to large members constitute a significant percentage of the FHLBNY’s advance portfolio and its source of revenues.

 

The FHLBNY’s total assets and capital could significantly decrease if one or more large members were to withdraw from membership or decrease business with the FHLBNY. Members might withdraw or reduce their business as a result of consolidating with an institution that was a member of another FHLBank, or for other reasons. The FHLBNY has considered the impact of losing one or more large members. In general, a withdrawing member would be required to repay all indebtedness prior to the redemption of its capital stock. Under current conditions, the FHLBNY does not expect the loss of a large member to impair its operations, since the FHLBank Act, as amended, does not allow the FHLBNY to redeem the capital of an existing member if the redemption would cause the FHLBNY to fall below its capital requirements. Consequently, the loss of a large member should not result in an inadequate capital position for the FHLBNY. However, such an event could reduce the amount of capital that the FHLBNY has available for continued growth. This could have various ramifications for the FHLBNY, including a possible reduction in net income and dividends, and a lower return on capital stock for remaining members.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

 

The top ten advance holders at December 31, 2017,2020, December 31, 20162019 and December 31, 20152018 and associated interest income for the periodsyears then ended are summarized as follows (dollars in thousands):

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Par

 

Total Par Value

 

Twelve Months

 

 

 

City

 

State

 

Advances

 

of Advances

 

Interest Income

 

Percentage (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citibank, N.A.

 

New York

 

NY

 

$

43,100,000

 

35.12

%

$

450,596

 

36.83

%

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

14,445,000

 

11.77

 

221,310

 

18.09

 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

11,830,600

 

9.64

 

182,103

 

14.88

 

New York Commercial Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

273,900

 

0.22

 

3,822

 

0.31

 

Subtotal New York Community Bancorp, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

12,104,500

 

9.86

 

185,925

 

15.19

 

Sterling National Bank (b)(d)

 

Montebello

 

NY

 

4,507,000

 

3.67

 

58,049

 

4.74

 

Investors Bank (b)

 

Short Hills

 

NJ

 

4,326,053

 

3.53

 

82,894

 

6.77

 

Signature Bank

 

New York

 

NY

 

4,195,000

 

3.42

 

36,503

 

2.98

 

Goldman Sachs Bank USA

 

New York

 

NY

 

3,390,000

 

2.76

 

30,433

 

2.49

 

HSBC Bank USA, National Association (c)

 

Mc Lean

 

VA

 

3,100,000

 

2.53

 

68,391

 

5.59

 

AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

3,000,415

 

2.45

 

52,308

 

4.27

 

New York Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,625,000

 

2.14

 

37,263

 

3.05

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

$

94,792,968

 

77.25

%

$

1,223,672

 

100.00

%

  December 31, 2020
         Percentage of       
      Par  Total Par Value  Twelve Months 
  City State Advances  of Advances  Interest Income  Percentage (a) 
MetLife, Inc.:                    
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company New York NY $15,245,000   16.80% $211,797   19.03%
Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company New York NY  955,000   1.05   3,176   0.28 
Subtotal MetLife, Inc.      16,200,000   17.85   214,973   19.31 
Citibank, N.A. New York NY  14,900,000   16.42   280,084   25.16 
New York Community Bank (b) Westbury NY  14,627,661   16.12   233,915   21.01 
Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company (c) New York NY  6,890,415   7.60   77,739   6.98 
HSBC Bank USA, National Association New York NY  4,250,000   4.69   41,663   3.74 
New York Life Insurance Company New York NY  3,250,000   3.58   68,611   6.16 
Signature Bank New York NY  2,839,245   3.13   54,832   4.93 
Investors Bank (b) Short Hills NJ  2,668,000   2.94   61,501   5.53 
Valley National Bank (b) Wayne NJ  2,588,059   2.85   49,770   4.47 
Prudential Insurance Company of America Newark NJ  2,517,125   2.77   30,158   2.71 
Total     $70,730,505   77.95% $1,113,246   100.00%

 


(a)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.

(b)At December 31, 2017, an officer of this member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.

(c)For Bank membership purposes, principal place of business is New York, NY.

(a)

(d)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.
(b)

At December 31, 2020, an officer of this member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.
(c)

Astoria Bank merged into Sterling National BankAXA Equitable Life Insurance Company changed name to Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company in the fourthsecond quarter 2017. Both entities are member banks and are related parties. The par advance balance represents advances outstanding with Sterling, the merged entity. Interest income earned by the FHLBNY during 2017 was for the two entities.of 2020.

 


 

 

 

December 31, 2016

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Par

 

Total Par Value

 

Twelve Months

 

 

 

City

 

State

 

Advances

 

of Advances

 

Interest Income

 

Percentage (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citibank, N.A.

 

New York

 

NY

 

$

33,551,388

 

30.71

%

$

188,265

 

22.73

%

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

14,445,000

 

13.22

 

202,428

 

24.44

 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

11,380,600

 

10.42

 

166,832

 

20.15

 

New York Commercial Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

283,900

 

0.26

 

5,249

 

0.63

 

Subtotal New York Community Bancorp, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

11,664,500

 

10.68

 

172,081

 

20.78

 

HSBC Bank USA, National Association (c)

 

McLean

 

VA

 

5,700,000

 

5.22

 

62,770

 

7.58

 

Investors Bank (b)

 

Short Hills

 

NJ

 

4,409,420

 

4.04

 

69,571

 

8.40

 

Goldman Sachs Bank USA

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,425,000

 

2.22

 

23,753

 

2.87

 

New York Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,275,000

 

2.08

 

24,816

 

3.00

 

AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,238,498

 

2.05

 

18,879

 

2.28

 

Astoria Bank (b)

 

Lake Success

 

NY

 

2,090,000

 

1.91

 

41,007

 

4.95

 

Signature Bank

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,050,900

 

1.88

 

24,565

 

2.97

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

$

80,849,706

 

74.01

%

$

828,135

 

100.00

%


(a)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.

(b)At December 31, 2016, officer of member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.

(c)For Bank membership purposes, principal place of business is New York, NY.

 

 

December 31, 2015

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percentage of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Par

 

Total Par Value

 

Twelve Months

 

 

 

City

 

State

 

Advances

 

of Advances

 

Interest Income

 

Percentage (a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Citibank, N.A.

 

New York

 

NY

 

$

14,750,000

 

15.77

%

$

88,933

 

9.21

%

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

12,699,600

 

13.58

 

221,991

 

22.99

 

New York Commercial Bank

 

Westbury

 

NY

 

764,200

 

0.82

 

6,208

 

0.64

 

Subtotal New York Community Bancorp, Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

13,463,800

 

14.40

 

228,199

 

23.63

 

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

New York

 

NY

 

12,570,000

 

13.44

 

192,749

 

19.96

 

HSBC Bank USA, National Association

 

New York

 

NY

 

5,600,000

 

5.99

 

25,014

 

2.59

 

First Niagara Bank, National Association

 

Buffalo

 

NY

 

5,525,000

 

5.91

 

26,638

 

2.76

 

Investors Bank (b)

 

Short Hills

 

NJ

 

3,124,782

 

3.34

 

63,921

 

6.62

 

Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company

 

Buffalo

 

NY

 

3,102,771

 

3.32

 

279,394

 

28.95

 

Goldman Sachs Bank USA

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,925,000

 

3.13

 

6,889

 

0.71

 

Signature Bank

 

New York

 

NY

 

2,720,163

 

2.91

 

13,062

 

1.35

 

Astoria Bank (b)

 

Lake Success

 

NY

 

2,180,000

 

2.33

 

40,790

 

4.22

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

$

65,961,516

 

70.54

%

$

965,589

 

100.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


(a)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.

(b)At December 31, 2015, officer of member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.

Federal Home Loan Bank of New York

Notes to Financial Statements

  December 31, 2019
          Percentage of       
       Par  Total Par Value  Twelve Months 
  City State  Advances  of Advances  Interest Income  Percentage (a) 
Citibank, N.A. New York  NY  $23,045,000   22.95% $486,275   27.71%
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company New York  NY   14,445,000   14.39   367,507   20.94 
New York Community Bank (b) Westbury  NY   13,102,661   13.05   259,207   14.77 
AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company New York  NY   6,900,415   6.87   111,997   6.38 
Investors Bank (b) Short Hills  NJ   4,986,397   4.97   115,789   6.60 
Signature Bank New York  NY   4,142,144   4.13   127,299   7.26 
New York Life Insurance Company New York  NY   2,825,000   2.81   81,348   4.64 
Valley National Bank (b) Wayne  NJ   2,397,769   2.39   88,389   5.04 
Sterling National Bank Montebello  NY   2,245,000   2.24   76,029   4.33 
ESL Federal Credit Union Rochester  NY   1,739,823   1.73   40,937   2.33 
Total       $75,829,209   75.53% $1,754,777   100.00%

(a)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.
(b)At December 31, 2019, an officer of this member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.

  December 31, 2018
          Percentage of       
       Par  Total Par Value  Twelve Months 
  City State  Advances  of Advances  Interest Income  Percentage (a) 
Citibank, N.A. New York  NY  $19,995,000   18.96% $644,926   37.66%
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company New York  NY   14,245,000   13.51   301,318   17.60 
New York Community Bank (b) (c) Westbury  NY   13,053,661   12.38   247,973   14.48 
Signature Bank New York  NY   4,970,000   4.71   92,592   5.41 
Investors Bank (b) Short Hills  NJ   4,925,681   4.67   95,921   5.60 
Sterling National Bank Montebello  NY   4,837,000   4.59   92,835   5.42 
Manufacturers and Traders Trust Company Buffalo  NY   4,774,712   4.53   13,256   0.77 
AXA Equitable Life Insurance Company New York  NY   3,990,415   3.78   72,582   4.24 
New York Life Insurance Company New York  NY   3,575,000   3.39   67,793   3.96 
Valley National Bank (b) Wayne  NJ   3,027,000   2.87   83,172   4.86 
Total       $77,393,469   73.39% $1,712,368   100.00%

(a)Interest income percentage is the member’s interest income from advances as a percentage of the top 10 members.
(b)At December 31, 2018, an officer of this member bank also served on the Board of Directors of the FHLBNY.
(c)New York Commercial Bank merged into New York Community Bank in the fourth quarter 2018. Par advances are for New York Community Bank. Interest income reported in the table represent interest income received from New York Commercial Bank and New York Community Bank in 2018.

 

The following tables summarize capital stock held by members who were beneficial owners of more than 5 percent of the FHLBNY’s outstanding capital stock as of February 28, 20182021 and December 31, 20172020 (shares in thousands):

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Percent

 

  Number Percent 

 

February 28, 2018

 

of Shares

 

of Total

 

 February 28, 2021 of Shares of Total 

Name of Beneficial Owner

 

Principal Executive Office Address

 

Owned

 

Capital Stock

 

 Principal Executive Office Address Owned  Capital Stock 

Citibank, N.A.

 

399 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10043

 

18,981

 

28.89

%

 399 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10043  7,705   14.51%
MetLife, Inc.:        

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166

 

7,335

 

11.16

 

 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  7,648   14.40 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  475   0.89 
Subtotal MetLife, Inc.   8,123   15.29 

New York Community Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

5,919

 

9.01

 

 615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY,11590  7,088   13.35 

New York Commercial Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

151

 

0.23

 

Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10104  3,894   7.33 

 

 

 

6,070

 

9.24

 

   26,810   50.48%

 

 

 

32,386

 

49.29

%

 

 

 

 

 

Number

 

Percent

 

 

 

December 31, 2017

 

of Shares

 

of Total

 

Name of Beneficial Owner

 

Principal Executive Office Address

 

Owned

 

Capital Stock

 

Citibank, N.A.

 

399 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10043

 

21,523

 

31.79

%

Metropolitan Life Insurance Company

 

200 Park Avenue, New York, NY 10166

 

7,335

 

10.83

 

New York Community Bancorp, Inc.:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

New York Community Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

5,887

 

8.70

 

New York Commercial Bank

 

615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY 11590

 

151

 

0.22

 

 

 

 

 

6,038

 

8.92

 

 

 

 

 

34,896

 

51.54

%

    Number  Percent 
  December 31, 2020 of Shares  of Total 
Name of Beneficial Owner Principal Executive Office Address Owned  Capital Stock 
Citibank, N.A. 399 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10043  7,705   14.35%
MetLife, Inc.:          
Metropolitan Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  7,648   14.24 
Metropolitan Tower Life Insurance Company 200 Park Avenue, New York, NY, 10166  475   0.88 
Subtotal MetLife, Inc.    8,123   15.12 
New York Community Bank 615 Merrick Avenue, Westbury, NY,11590  7,140   13.30 
Equitable Financial Life Insurance Company 1290 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY, 10104  3,219   6.00 
     26,187   48.77%

Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.


Item 9.Changes in and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure.

 

None.

 

Item 9A.Controls and Procedures.

Item 9A.Controls and Procedures.

 

(a)         Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures: An evaluation of the Bank’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Act”)) was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of the Bank’s President and Chief Executive Officer, José R. González, and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Kevin M. Neylan, at December 31, 2017.  Based on this evaluation, they concluded that as of December 31, 2017, the Bank’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable level of assurance in ensuring that the information required to be disclosed by the Bank in the reports it files or submits under the Act is (i) accumulated and communicated to the Bank’s management (including the President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer) in a timely manner, and (ii) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms.

(a)Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures: An evaluation of the Bank’s disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Act”)) was carried out under the supervision and with the participation of the Bank’s President and Chief Executive Officer, José R. González, and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer, Kevin M. Neylan, at December 31, 2020.  Based on this evaluation, they concluded that as of December 31, 2020, the Bank’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective at a reasonable level of assurance in ensuring that the information required to be disclosed by the Bank in the reports it files or submits under the Act is (i) accumulated and communicated to the Bank’s management (including the President and Chief Executive Officer and Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer) in a timely manner, and (ii) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms.

 

(b)         Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting: There were no changes in the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Act) during the Bank’s fourth quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting.

(b)Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting: There were no changes in the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Act) during the Bank’s fourth quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Bank’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

Management’s Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting and the Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm thereon are set forth in Part II, Item 8 of the Annual Report on this Form 10-K and incorporated herein by reference.

 

Item 9B.Other Information.Item 9B.Other Information.

None.

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP (PwC) serves as the independent registered public accounting firm for us and the other FHLBs. Rule 2-01(c)(1)(ii)(A) of Regulation S-X (the Loan Rule) prohibits an accounting firm, such as PwC, and any covered person in the firm, from having certain financial relationships with their audit clients and affiliated entities.  Specifically, the Loan Rule provides, in the relevant part, that an accounting firm generally would not be independent if the accounting firm or any covered person in the firm receives a loan from a lender that is a “record or beneficial owner of more than ten percent of the audit client’s equity securities.”

181

PART III

 

PwC has advised the Bank that as of December 31, 2017, it has borrowing relationships with two Bank members (and certain covered persons in the firm have borrowing relationships with one such member) (referred to below as the “Lenders”) who each own more than ten percent of the Bank’s capital stock which could call into question PwC’s independence with respect to the Bank.  The Bank is providing this disclosure to explain the facts and circumstances of PwC’s and its covered persons’ relationships with these Lenders as well as PwC’s and the Audit Committee’s conclusions concerning PwC’s objectivity and impartiality with respect to the audit of the Bank.

Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

 

PwC advised the Audit Committee of the Bank that it believed that, in light of the facts of each borrowing relationship, its ability to exercise objective2020 and impartial judgment on all matters encompassed within PwC’s audit engagement is not impaired and that a reasonable investor with knowledge of all relevant facts and circumstances would reach the same conclusion.

PwC advised the Audit Committee that this conclusion is based in part on the following considerations with respect to borrowing relationships between one of the Lenders and PwC:

·                  the borrowings are in good standing and the Lender does not have the right to take action against PwC, as borrower, in connection with the financings;

·                  the debt balances outstanding were immaterial to PwC and to the Lender;

·                  PwC has borrowing relationships with a diverse group of lenders, therefore PwC is not dependent on any single lender or group of lenders; and

·                  the PwC audit engagement team has no involvement in PwC’s treasury function and PwC’s treasury function has no oversight or ability to influence the PwC audit engagement team.

PwC advised the Audit Committee that with respect to borrowing relationships between one of the Lenders and an engagement team member, its conclusion is based on factors listed above and the following considerations:

·                  the Lender has not made any attempt to influence the conduct of the audits or objectivity and impartiality of this engagement team member;

·                  each loan was obtained under the Lender’s normal lending procedures, terms, and requirements; and

·                  each loan is current.

Additionally, PwC advised the Audit Committee that with respect to certain covered persons who do not play an active role in the Bank’s audit and that have borrowing relationships with the Lenders, its conclusion is based on such professionals being required to disclose immediately any relationships that may raise issues about objectivity, independence, conflicts of interest, or favoritism.

Moreover, the Audit Committee of the Bank assessed PwC’s ability to perform an objective and impartial audit, including consideration of the ownership and governance structure of the Bank, the limited voting rights of the Bank’s members and the composition of the board of directors.  In addition to the above listed considerations, the Audit Committee considered the following:

·                  although each of the Lenders owned more than ten percent of the Bank’s capital stock, the voting power of each Lender’s capital stock is less than ten percent; and

·                  no officer or director of either Lender served on the board of directors of the Bank.

Based on the Audit Committee’s evaluation, the Audit Committee concluded that PwC’s ability to exercise objective and impartial judgment on all issues encompassed within PwC’s audit engagement has not been impaired.

If in the future, however, PwC is ultimately determined under the Loan Rule not to be independent with respect to the Bank, or permanent relief regarding this matter is not granted by the SEC, the Bank may need to take other actions and incur other costs in order for the Bank’s previously filed Annual Reports on Form 10-K and Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q to be deemed compliant with applicable securities laws.  Such actions may include, among other things, obtaining a new audit and review of our historical financial statements by another independent registered public accounting firm.  Any of the foregoing could have an adverse impact on the Bank.

For further discussion of Bank members owning more than ten percent of the Bank’s capital stock at December 31, 2017, please see Note 20.  Segment Information and Concentration to the financial statements in this Form 10-K.  For a discussion of the voting rights of our members, please see Item 10 - Directors, Executive Officers, and Corporate Governance — 2017 and 20182021 Board of Directors in this Form 10-K.

PART III

Item 10.Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance.

2017 and 2018 Board of Directors

 

The FHLBank Act, as amended by the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008 (“HERA”), provides that a FHLBank’s board of directors is to comprise thirteen Directors, or such other number as the Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“Finance Agency” or “FHFA”) determines appropriate. For both 20172020 and 2018,2021, the FHFA Director designated nineteen directorships for us, eleven of which were Member Directorships and eight of which were Independent Directorships.

 

All individuals serving as Bank Directors must be United States citizens. A majority of the directors serving on the Board must be Member Directors and at least two-fifths must be Independent Directors.

 

A Member Directorship may be held only by an officer or director of a member institution that is located within our district and that meets all minimum regulatory capital requirements. There are no other qualification requirements for Member Directors apart from the foregoing.

 

Member Directors are, generally speaking, elected by our stockholders in, respectively, New York, New Jersey, and Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Our Board of Directors is ordinarily not permitted to nominate or elect Member Directors; however, the Board may appoint a director to fill a vacant Member Directorship in the event that no nominations are received from members in the course of the Member Director election process. In the event that only one nomination is received from members for an open Member Directorship, that nominee will automatically be declared elected by the Bank. (The Board may also take action to fill Member Directorship vacancies that arise for other reasons.) Each member institution that is required to hold stock as of the record date, which is December 31 of the year prior to the year in which the election is held, may nominate and/or vote for representatives from member institutions in its respective state to fill open Member Directorships. The Finance Agency’s election regulation provides that none of our directors, officers, employees, attorneys or agents, other than in a personal capacity, may support the nomination or election of a particular individual for a Member Directorship.

 

Because of the process described above pertaining to how Member Directors are nominated and elected, we do not know what particular factors our member institutions may consider in nominating particular candidates for Member Directorships or in voting to elect Member Directors. However, if the Board takes action to fill a vacant Member Directorship, we can know what was considered in electing such Director. In general, such considerations may include satisfaction of the regulatory qualification requirements for the Directorship, the nature of the person’s experience in the financial industry and at a member institution, knowledge of the person by various members of the Board, and previous service on the Board, if any.

 

In contrast to the requirements pertaining to Member Directorships, an Independent Directorship may, per FHFA regulations, be held, generally speaking, only by an individual who is a bona fide resident of our district, who is not a director, officer, or employee of a member institution or of any person that receives advances from us, and who is not an officer of any FHLBank. At least two Independent Directors must be “public interest” directors. Public interest directors, as defined by Finance Agency regulations, are Independent Directors who have at least four years of experience representing consumer or community interests in banking services, credit needs, housing or consumer financial protection. Pursuant to Finance Agency regulations, each Independent Director must either satisfy the aforementioned requirements to be a public interest director, or have knowledge or experience in one or more of the following areas: auditing and accounting, derivatives, financial management, organizational management, project development, risk management practices, and the law.

 

Any individual may submit an Independent Director application form and request to be considered by us for inclusion on the Independent Director nominee slate. Our Board of Directors is then required by Finance Agency regulations to consult with our Affordable Housing Advisory Council (“Advisory Council”) in establishing the nominee slate. (The Advisory Council is an advisory body consisting of fifteen persons residing in our district appointed by our Board, the members of which are drawn from community and not-for-profit organizations that are actively involved in providing or promoting low and moderate income housing or community lending. The Advisory Council provides advice on ways in which we can better carry out our housing finance and community lending mission.) After the nominee slate is approved by the Board, the slate is then presented to our membership for a district-wide vote. The election regulation permits our directors, officers, attorneys,


employees, agents, and Advisory Council to support the candidacy of the board of director’s nominees for Independent Directorships. (As is the case with Member Directorships, the Board may also take action to fill a vacancy of an Independent Directorship.)

 

The Bank encourages diversity on its Board of Directors and encourages minorities and women to consider service as Bank Directors.

 

Voting rights and processes with regard to the election of Member and Independent Directors are set forth in the FHLBank Act and FHFA regulations. For the election of both Member Directors and Independent Directors, each eligible member institution is entitled to cast one vote for each share of capital stock that it was required to hold as of the record date (which is December 31st)31st). However, the number of votes that each institution may cast for each Directorship cannot exceed the average number of shares of capital stock that were required to be held by all member institutions located in the voting member’s state on the record date. The Board does not solicit proxies, nor are member institutions permitted to solicit or use proxies in order to cast their votes in an election.


The following table sets forth information regarding each of the directors who served on our Board during the period from January 1, 20172020 through the date of this annual report on Form 10-K. Footnotes are used to specifically identify (i) four Directorsone New Jersey Member Director and one Independent Director whose termterms both expired at the end of 20172020 and who could not run again due to term limits; (ii) one new New Jersey Member Director and one new Independent Director who were elected by the Bank’s membership to begin service on the Board on January 1, 2021; (iii) two New York Member Directors and one Independent Director whose terms all expired at the end of 2020 and who were elected by the Bank’s membership to serve again on the Board; (ii) a(iv) one New York Member Director whose term expiredof service ended at the end of 2017 and who was unable to serve again due to term limits; (iii)2020 as he retired from the positions at a Director who did not serve on theNew York member institution that qualified him for Board in 2017 but who was elected to serve for a term on the Board commencing on January 1, 2018; (iv) a Director who passed away in early 2017;service; and (v) the Directortwo Independent Directors who filled the resulting vacancyalso serve as public interest directors.

 

Following the table is biographical information for each Director.

 

No Director has any family relationship with any other FHLBNY Directors or executive officers. In addition, no Director or executive officer has an involvement in any legal proceeding required to be disclosed pursuant to Item 401(f) of Regulation S-K.

 

Director Name

Age as of
3/22/201819/21

Bank
Director
Since

Start of
Most
Recent
Term

Expiration
of Most
Recent
Term

Represents
Bank
Members in

Director Type
John R. Buran (Chair) 7112/20101/1/2012/31/23NYMember
Larry E. Thompson (Vice Chair)701/20141/1/1812/31/21DistrictwideIndependent
Danelle M. Barrett(a)541/20211/1/2112/31/24DistrictwideIndependent
Kevin Cummings661/20141/1/1912/31/22NJMember
Joseph R. Ficalora(b)741/20181/1/1812/31/20NYMember
Jay M. Ford(c)716/20081/1/1712/31/20NJMember
Michael M. Horn814/20071/1/1812/31/21DistrictwideIndependent
Thomas L. Hoy721/20121/1/2012/31/23NYMember
David R. Huber571/20191/1/1912/31/22DistrictwideIndependent
Thomas J. Kemly(d)631/20211/1/2112/31/24NJMember
Charles E. Kilbourne, III(e)481/20191/1/2112/31/24DistrictwideIndependent*
Gerald H. Lipkin801/20141/1/1812/31/21NJMember
Kenneth J. Mahon(f)701/20171/1/2112/31/24NYMember
Christopher P. Martin641/20151/1/1912/31/22NJMember
Richard S. Mroz593/20021/1/1912/31/22DistrictwideIndependent
David J. Nasca631/20151/1/1912/31/22NYMember
C. Cathleen Raffaeli(c)644/20071/1/1712/31/20DistrictwideIndependent
Stephen S. Romaine(f)561/20191/1/2112/31/24NYMember
DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.691/20091/1/2012/31/23DistrictwideIndependent*
Carlos J. Vázquez6211/20131/1/1812/31/21PR & USVIMember
Ángela Weyne779/20171/1/2012/31/23DistrictwideIndependent

(a)

Director Barrett was elected by the Bank’s districtwide membership on November 4, 2020 to serve as an Independent Director for a four year term commencing on January 1, 2021.

Director
Type

Michael M. Horn(b)(a)(Chair through 12/31/17)

Director Ficalora served on the Board as a New York Member Director throughout 2020. He retired from his positions as President, Chief Executive Officer and Director of member New York Community Bank on December 31, 2020. Because service as a Member Director of a Home Loan Bank requires that one serve continuously as an officer or director of a member, his service on the Board ended on December 31, 2020.

(c)

78Director Ford served on the Board as a New Jersey Member Director and Director Raffaeli served on the Board as an Independent Director throughout 2020, and their terms both expired on December 31, 2020. Neither Director Ford nor Director Raffaeli were able to run again for a seat on the Board due to term limits.

4/2007

1/1/18

12/31/21

Districtwide

Independent

 

James W. Fulmer(d)(b)(Vice Chair through 12/31/17)

Director Kemly was elected by the Bank’s New Jersey membership on November 4, 2020 to serve as a New Jersey Member Director for a four year term commencing on January 1, 2021.

66

1/2007

1/1/14

12/31/17

NY

Member

 

John R. Buran (Chair beginning 1/1/18)

(e)

Director Kilbourne served on the Board as an Independent Director throughout 2020, and his term expired on December 31, 2020. On November 4, 2020, he was elected by the Bank’s districtwide membership to serve as an Independent Director for a new four year term commencing on January 1, 2021.

68

12/2010

1/1/16

12/31/19

NY

Member

 

Larry E. Thompson(f)(a) (Vice Chair beginning 1/1/18)

67

1/2014

1/1/18

12/31/21

Districtwide

Independent

Directors Mahon and Romaine served on the Board as New York Member Directors throughout 2020, and their terms both expired on December 31, 2020. On November 4, 2020, they were both elected by the Bank’s New York membership to serve as New York Member Directors for new four year terms each commencing on January 1, 2021.

Kevin Cummings

63

1/2014

1/1/15

12/31/18

NJ

Member

Anne Evans Estabrook

*

73

2/2004

1/1/15

12/31/18

Districtwide

Independent

Joseph R. Ficalora Directors so indicated served as public interest directors throughout the entire course of their service covered by this table.(c)

71

1/1/18

1/1/18

12/31/21

NY

Member

Jay M. Ford

68

6/2008

1/1/17

12/31/20

NJ

Member

Caren S. Franzini(d)

1/2016

1/1/16

12/31/19

Districtwide

Independent

Thomas L. Hoy

69

1/2012

1/1/16

12/31/19

NY

Member

Gerald H. Lipkin(e)

77

1/2014

1/1/18

12/31/21

NJ

Member

Kenneth J. Mahon

66

1/2017

1/1/17

12/31/20

NY

Member

Christopher P. Martin

61

1/2015

1/1/15

12/31/18

NJ

Member

Richard S. Mroz

56

3/2002

1/1/15

12/31/18

Districtwide

Independent

David J. Nasca

60

1/2015

1/1/15

12/31/18

NY

Member

C. Cathleen Raffaeli

61

4/2007

1/1/17

12/31/20

Districtwide

Independent

Monte N. Redman

67

1/2014

1/1/17

12/31/20

NY

Member

Edwin C. Reed

64

4/2007

1/1/17

12/31/20

Districtwide

Independent

DeForest B. Soaries, Jr.

66

1/2009

1/1/16

12/31/19

Districtwide

Independent

Carlos J. Vázquez(f)

59

11/2013

1/1/18

12/31/21

PR & USVI

Member

Ángela Weyne(g)

74

9/2017

9/7/17

12/31/19

Districtwide

Independent

 


184

(a)Directors Horn and Thompson both served on the Board as Independent Directors throughout 2017, and their terms expired on December 31, 2017. They were both elected on November 6, 2017 by the Bank’s membership to serve as Independent Directors for new four year terms commencing on January 1, 2018.

 

(b)Director Fulmer served on the Board as a New York Member Director throughout 2017, and his term expired on December 31, 2017. Due to term limits, he was unable to serve for another term.

(c)Director Ficalora was elected on November 6, 2017 by the Bank’s New York membership to serve as a New York Member Director for a four year term commencing on January 1, 2018.

(d)Director Franzini, whose four year term as an Independent Director commenced on January 1, 2016, and which was scheduled to end on December 31, 2019, passed away on January 25, 2017.

(e)Director Lipkin served on the Board as a New Jersey Member Director throughout 2017, and his term expired on December 31, 2017. On November 6, 2017, he was elected by the Bank’s New Jersey membership to serve as a New Jersey Member Director for a new four year term commencing on January 1, 2018.

(f)Director Vázquez served on the Board as a Puerto Rico & U.S. Virgin Islands Member Director throughout 2017, and his term expired on December 31, 2017. On November 6, 2017, he was elected by the Bank’s Puerto Rico & U.S. Virgin Islands membership to serve as a Puerto Rico & U.S. Virgin Islands Member Director for a new four year term commencing on January 1, 2018.

(g)Director Weyne was selected by the Board on September 7, 2017 to fill the Independent Director vacancy that resulted from the passing away of Director Franzini; her term is scheduled to end on December 31, 2019.

Mr. Horn (Chair through December 31, 2017) has been a partner in the law firm of McCarter & English, LLP since 1990.  He has served as the Commissioner of Banking for the State of New Jersey and as the New Jersey State Treasurer.  He was also a member of the New Jersey State Assembly and served as a member of the Assembly Banking Committee.  In addition, Mr. Horn served on New Jersey’s Executive Commission on Ethical Standards as both its Vice Chair and Chairman, was appointed as a State Advisory Member of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, and was a member of the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board.  He is counsel to the New Jersey Bankers Association, was chairman of the Bank Regulatory Committee of the Banking Law Section of the New Jersey State Bar Association, and is a Fellow of the American Bar Foundation.  Mr. Horn’s legal and regulatory experience, as indicated by his background described above, supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.

Mr. Fulmer (Vice Chair through December 31, 2017) has been a director of FHLBNY member The Bank of Castile since 1988 and the chairman since 1992.  He also served as chief executive officer of The Bank of Castile from 1996 through 2014 and president from 2002 through 2014.  Mr. Fulmer has also served as vice chairman of Tompkins Financial Corporation (“Tompkins Financial”), the parent company of The Bank of Castile, since 2007, and has served as a director of Tompkins Financial since 2000.  Since 2001, he has served as chairman of the board of Tompkins Insurance Agencies, Inc., a subsidiary of Tompkins Financial.  In addition, since 1999, Mr. Fulmer has served as a member of the board of directors of Bank member Mahopac Bank, a subsidiary of Tompkins Financial.  Since 2012, he has served as a member of the board of directors for VIST Bank, a subsidiary of Tompkins Financial.  He is an active community leader, serving as a member of the board of directors of the Erie and Niagara Insurance Association, and Cherry Valley Cooperative Insurance Company, Williamsville, NY.  Mr. Fulmer is also former Chairman and a current director of WXXI Public Broadcasting Council in Rochester, NY.  He is a former member of the board of directors of the Catholic Health System of Western New York.  He is also former president of the Independent Bankers Association of New York State and former member of the board of directors of the New York Bankers Association.

Mr. Buran (Chair since January 1, 2018(Chair)) is Director, President and Chief Executive Officer of Flushing Financial Corporation, the holding company for FHLBNY member Flushing Bank (formerly Flushing Savings Bank)., and of Flushing Bank.  He joined the holding company and the bank in 2001 as Chief Operating Officer and he became a Director of these entities in 2003.  In 2005, he was named President and Chief Executive Officer of both entities. Mr. Buran’s career in the banking industry began with Citibank in 1977.  There, he held a variety of management positions including Business Manager of its retail distribution in Westchester, Long Island and Manhattan and Vice President in charge of its Investment Sales Division.  Mr. Buran left Citibank to become Senior Vice President, Division Head for Retail Services of NatWest Bank and later Executive Vice President of Fleet Bank’s (now Bank of America) retail branch system in New York City, Long Island, Westchester and Southern Connecticut.  He also spent time as a consultant and Assistant to the President of Carver Bank.  Mr. Buran is past Chairman and current Board member of the New York Bankers Association.  From 2011 to 2017 he served on the Community Depository Institutions Advisory Council of The Federal Reserve Bank of New York.  Since 2012 he has beenJohn is also a former member of the Nassau County Interim Finance Authority.Authority where he served for eight years. Mr. Buran has devoted his time to a variety of charitable and not-for-profit organizations.  He has been a Board member of the Long Island Association, both the Nassau and Suffolk County Boy Scouts, EAC, Long Island University, the Long Island Philharmonic and Channel 21.  He was the fundraising Chairman for the Suffolk County Vietnam Veteran’s War Memorial in Farmingville, New York and has been recipient of the Boy Scouts’ Chief Scout Citizen Award.  His work in the community has been recognized by Family and Children’s Association, and Gurwin Jewish Geriatric Center.  He was also a recipient of the Long Island Association’s SBA Small Business Advocate Award.  Mr. Buran was honored twice with St. Joseph’s College’s Distinguished Service Award.  Mr. Buran also serves on the Advisory Board and is a former Board President of Neighborhood Housing Services of New York City.  He is a Board member of The Korean American Youth Foundation.  Mr. Buran also serves on the Board of the Long Island Conservatory.  He was recently presented with an honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from St. Francis College of Brooklyn and was the recipient of the Catholic Charities Gold Medal Award in 2019. He holds a B.S. in Management and an M.B.A., both from New York University.

 

Mr. Thompson (Vice Chair since January 1, 2018) iswas Vice Chairman of The Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC) through the end of 2018, and previously served as the Chief Legal Officer/General Counsel of the firm since 2005. He has more than 30 years of experience as a senior executive in corporate law, risk management and regulatory affairs. In his role as DTCC Vice Chairman, Mr. Thompson servesserved as a senior advisor to DTCC and iswas responsible for all legal and regulatory activities of the company and its subsidiaries. He regularly interfacesinterfaced with government and regulatory agencies on issues impacting the company. Mr. Thompson iswas Chairman of the Board of DTCC Deriv/SERV LLC and former Chairman of the DTCC Operating Committee. He iswas a member of the DTCC Management Committee, which is comprised of the company’s executive leadership. In addition, Mr. Thompson iswas a member of the DTCC Management Risk Committee, where he helpshelped oversee and assess a broad range of issues related to market, capital and operational risks facing the corporation. Mr. Thompson previously served as Chair of a DTCC Board subcommittee charged with reviewing the potential risk impacts of high frequency trading and algorithmic trading as a result of the Knight Capital market event of 2012. Mr. Thompson is the former Co-Chair of the DTCC Internal Risk Management Committee and former Chairman of the DTCThe Depository Trust Company (DTC) Internal Risk Management Committee. Mr. Thompson began his legal career with DTC as Associate Counsel in 1981 and was elected Vice President and Deputy General Counsel in 1991, Senior Vice President in 1993, General Counsel of DTC in 1999 and Managing Director and First Deputy General Counsel of DTCC in 2004. Previously, he was a partner in the New York law firm of Lake, Bogan, Lenoir, Jones & Thompson. Mr. Thompson began his legal career at Davis Polk & Wardwell. Mr. Thompson previously served on the Board of Directors of New York Portfolio Clearing (NYPC), a former joint venture derivatives clearinghouse owned by NYSE Euronext and DTCC. He is currently the chairman of the Board of Directors of both LedgerX LLC, a digital currency futures and options exchange and clearinghouse, and its parent, Ledger Holdings Inc. In addition, he also served as former Chairman of the Securities Clearing Group and former Co-Chairman of the Unified Clearing Group. His memberships include the New York State Bar Association; the New York County Lawyers’ Association; Association of the Bar of the City of New York; Business Executives for National Security; and the Global Association of Risk Professionals. He is a former director of the Legal Aid Society of New York and a former director of The Studio Museum of Harlem. Mr. Thompson’s legal and regulatory and risk management experience, as indicated by his background described above, supports his qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.

185

Rear Admiral Barrett, USN (Ret.) was born in Buffalo, New York and is a 1989 graduate of Boston University with a Bachelor of Arts in History where she received her commission as an officer from the U. S. Naval Reserve Officer Training Corps in a ceremony aboard the USS Constitution. She holds Masters of Arts in Management from Webster University, National Security Strategic Studies from the U.S. Naval War College, and Human Resources Development from Webster University. She also earned a Master of Science in Information Management from Syracuse University. As an admiral, Danelle served as Director of Current Operations at U.S. Cyber Command, and assumed duties in 2017 as the Navy Cyber Security Division Director and Deputy Chief Information Officer on the Chief of Naval Operations staff. In her last position in the U.S. Navy, she led the Navy’s strategic development and execution of digital and cyber security efforts, enterprise information technology improvements and cloud policy and governance for 700,000 personnel across a global network. An innovator, she implemented visionary digital transformation to modernize with unprecedented speed, significantly improving Navy Information Warfare capabilities. Ms. Barrett’s other tours of duty include assignments as Commanding Officer, Naval Computer and Telecommunications Area Master Station Atlantic where she directly led the largest telecommunications station in the Navy with responsibility for 2,700 people in 15 subordinate organizations worldwide; Chief of Staff, Navy Information Forces Command, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/U.S. 5th Fleet and 2nd Fleet, Carrier Strike Group 2 and Carrier Strike Group 12 which included deployments in support of Operations Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan and Unified Response in Haiti, MultiNational Forces Iraq; Naval Computer and Telecommunications Stations in Jacksonville and Puerto Rico and Standing Joint Force Headquarters United States Pacific Command. She currently executes a portfolio of work that includes consulting, public speaking, and writing. She is an independent director on the boards of KVH Industries and the Protego Trust Company, and is on several advisory boards for other organizations. Her personal awards include Defense Superior Service Medal and other military decorations, Federal 100 winner 2010; Armed Forces Communications and Electronics Association Women in Leadership Award 2014; Women in Technology Leadership Award 2017 and the Executive Women’s Forum Women of Influence Award 2019. Ms. Barrett earned the National Defense University Chief Information Officer and Information Security certifications and has published 35 articles. Rear Admiral Barrett’s organizational management, project development and risk management experience, as indicated by her background described above, supports her qualifications to serve on our Board as an Independent Director.