|• FORM 10-Q • EXHIBIT 31.1 • EXHIBIT 31.2 • EXHIBIT 32 • XBRL INSTANCE DOCUMENT • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION SCHEMA • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION CALCULATION LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION DEFINITION LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION LABEL LINKBASE • XBRL TAXONOMY EXTENSION PRESENTATION LINKBASE|
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549
x QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the quarterly period ended June 30, 2012
¨ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
For the transition period from _______________ to _________________________.
Commission file number: 000-16084
CITIZENS & NORTHERN CORPORATION
(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)
90-92 MAIN STREET, WELLSBORO, PA 16901
(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip code)
(Registrant's telephone number including area code)
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 ¨
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 ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “large accelerated filer,” accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):
Large accelerated filer ¨ Accelerated filer x Non-accelerated filer ¨ Smaller reporting company ¨
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).
Yes ¨ No x
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.
CITIZENS & NORTHERN CORPORATION
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
(In Thousands) (Unaudited)
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Stockholders' Equity
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012 and 2011
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these unaudited consolidated financial statements.
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
1. BASIS OF INTERIM PRESENTATION
The consolidated financial information included herein, with the exception of the consolidated balance sheet dated December 31, 2011, is unaudited. Such information reflects all adjustments (consisting solely of normal recurring adjustments) that are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair presentation of the financial position, results of operations, comprehensive income, cash flows and changes in stockholders’ equity for the interim periods; however, the information does not include all disclosures required by accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”) for a complete set of financial statements. Certain 2011 information has been reclassified for consistency with the 2012 presentation.
Operating results reported for the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012 might not be indicative of the results for the year ending December 31, 2012. The Corporation evaluates subsequent events through the date of filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
2. PER COMMON SHARE DATA
Net income per share is based on the weighted-average number of shares of common stock outstanding. The following data show the amounts used in computing basic and diluted net income per share. As shown in the table that follows, diluted earnings per share is computed using weighted average common shares outstanding, plus weighted-average common shares available from the exercise of all dilutive stock options, less the number of shares that could be repurchased with the proceeds of stock option exercises based on the average share price of the Corporation's common stock during the period.
Stock options that were anti-dilutive were excluded from net income per share calculations. Weighted-average common shares available from anti-dilutive instruments totaled 147,509 shares in the six-month period ended June 30, 2012, 225,245 shares in the six-month period ended June 30, 2011, 210,875 shares in the second quarter 2012 and 224,063 shares in the second quarter 2011.
3. COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
Comprehensive income is the total of (1) net income, and (2) all other changes in equity from non-stockholder sources, which are referred to as other comprehensive income. The components of other comprehensive income, and the related tax effects, are as follows:
Changes in the components of accumulated other comprehensive income are as follows:
4. CASH AND DUE FROM BANKS
Cash and due from banks at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 include the following:
Certificates of deposit are issues by U.S. banks with original maturities greater than three months. Each certificate of deposit is fully FDIC-insured. The Corporation maintains cash and cash equivalents with certain financial institutions in excess of the FDIC insurance limit.
The Corporation is required to maintain reserves against deposit liabilities in the form of cash and balances with the Federal Reserve Bank. The reserves are based on deposit levels, account activity, and other services provided by the Federal Reserve Bank. Required reserves were $13,739,000 at June 30, 2012 and $14,035,000 at December 31, 2011.
5. FAIR VALUE MEASUREMENTS AND FAIR VALUES OF FINANCIAL INSTRUMENTS
The Corporation measures certain assets at fair value. Fair value is defined as the price that would be received to sell an asset in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. FASB ASC topic 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures” establishes a framework for measuring fair value that includes a hierarchy used to classify the inputs used in measuring fair value. The hierarchy prioritizes the inputs used in determining valuations into three levels. 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. The levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:
Level 1 – Fair value is based on unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible to the Corporation for identical assets. These generally provide the most reliable evidence and are used to measure fair value whenever available.
Level 2 – Fair value is based on significant inputs, other than Level 1 inputs, that are observable either directly or indirectly for substantially the full term of the asset through corroboration with observable market data. Level 2 inputs include quoted market prices in active markets for similar assets, quoted market prices in markets that are not active for identical or similar assets and other observable inputs.
Level 3 – Fair value is based on significant unobservable inputs. Examples of valuation methodologies that would result in Level 3 classification include option pricing models, discounted cash flows and other similar techniques.
The Corporation monitors and evaluates available data relating to fair value measurements on an ongoing basis and recognizes transfers among the levels of the fair value hierarchy as of the date of an event or change in circumstances that affects the valuation method chosen. Examples of such changes may include the market for a particular asset becoming active or inactive, changes in the availability of quoted prices, or changes in the availability of other market data.
At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, assets measured at fair value and the valuation methods used are as follows:
Management determined there have been few trades of pooled trust-preferred securities since 2008, except for a limited number of transactions that have taken place as a result of bankruptcies, forced liquidations or similar circumstances. Also, in management’s judgment, there were no available quoted market prices in active markets for assets sufficiently similar to the Corporation’s pooled trust-preferred securities to be reliable as observable inputs. Accordingly, the Corporation follows a method of valuing pooled trust-preferred securities using a Level 3 methodology, based on discounted cash flows.
Management has calculated the fair value of the Corporation’s pooled trust-preferred securities by applying a discount rate to the estimated cash flows. Management used the cash flow estimates determined using the process described in Note 6 for evaluating pooled trust-preferred securities for other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI). Management used discount rates considered reflective of a market participant’s expectations regarding the extent of credit and liquidity risk inherent in the securities. In establishing the discount rate, management considered: (1) the implied discount rates as of the end of 2007, prior to the market for trust-preferred securities becoming inactive; (2) adjustment to the year-end 2007 discount rates for the change in the spread between indicative market rates over corresponding risk-free rates; and (3) an additional adjustment – an increase of 2% in the discount rate – for liquidity risk. Management considered the additional 2% increase in the discount rate necessary in order to give some consideration to price estimates based on trades made under distressed conditions, as reported by brokers and pricing services.
Loans are classified as impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Corporation will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Foreclosed assets held for sale consist of real estate acquired by foreclosure. For impaired commercial loans secured by real estate and foreclosed assets held for sale, estimated fair values are determined primarily using values from third-party appraisals less estimated selling costs.
Management’s evaluation and selection of valuation techniques and the unobservable inputs used in determining the fair values of assets valued using Level 3 methodologies include sensitive assumptions. Other market participants might use substantially different assumptions, which could result in calculations of fair values that would be substantially different than the amount calculated by management. The following table shows quantitative information regarding significant techniques and inputs used at June 30, 2012 for assets measured using unobservable inputs (Level 3 methodologies) on a recurring basis:
Increases (decreases) in actual or expected issuer defaults tend to decrease (increase) the fair value of the Corporation’s senior and mezzanine tranches of pooled trust preferred securities. The values of the Corporation’s mezzanine tranches of pooled trust preferred securities are also affected by expected future interest rates. However, due to the structure of each security, timing of cash flows, and secondary effects on the financial performance of the underlying issuers, the effects of changes in future interest rates on the fair value of the Corporation’s holdings are not quantifiably estimable. The fair value of servicing rights is affected by expected future interest rates. Increases (decreases) in future expected interest rates tend to increase (decrease) the fair value of the Corporation’s servicing rights because of changes in expected prepayment behavior by the borrowers on the underlying loans.
Following is a reconciliation of activity for Level 3 assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis:
Certain of the Corporation’s financial instruments are not measured at fair value in the consolidated financial statements. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques. Those techniques are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate and estimates of future cash flows. Accordingly, the fair value estimates may not be realized in an immediate settlement of the instrument. Certain financial instruments and all nonfinancial instruments are excluded from disclosure requirements. Therefore, the aggregate fair value amounts presented may not represent the underlying fair value of the Corporation.
The Corporation used the following methods and assumptions in estimating fair value disclosures for financial instruments:
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS - The carrying amounts of cash and short-term instruments approximate fair values.
CERTIFICATES OF DEPOSIT - Fair values for certificates of deposit, included in cash and due from banks in the consolidated balance sheet, are based on quoted market prices for certificates of similar remaining maturities.
SECURITIES - Fair values for securities, excluding restricted equity securities, are based on quoted market prices or other methods as described above. The carrying value of restricted equity securities approximates fair value based on applicable redemption provisions.
LOANS HELD FOR SALE - Fair values of loans held for sale are determined based on applicable sale prices available under the Federal Home Loan Banks’ MPF Xtra program.
LOANS - Fair values are estimated for portfolios of loans with similar financial characteristics. Loans are segregated by type such as commercial, commercial real estate, residential mortgage and other consumer. Each loan category is further segmented into fixed and adjustable rate interest terms and by performing and nonperforming categories. The fair value of performing loans is calculated by discounting contractual cash flows, adjusted for estimated prepayments based on historical experience, using estimated market discount rates that reflect the credit and interest rate risk inherent in the loans. Fair value of nonperforming loans is based on recent appraisals or estimates prepared by the Corporation’s lending officers.
SERVICING RIGHTS - The fair value of servicing rights, included in other assets in the consolidated balance sheet, is determined through a discounted cash flow valuation. Significant inputs include expected net servicing income, the discount rate and the expected prepayment speeds of the underlying loans.
DEPOSITS - The fair value of deposits with no stated maturity, such as noninterest-bearing demand deposits, savings, money market and interest checking accounts, is (by definition) equal to the amount payable on demand at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. The fair value of time deposits, such as certificates of deposit and Individual Retirement Accounts, is based on the discounted value of contractual cash flows. The discount rate is estimated using the rates currently offered for deposits of similar remaining maturities. The fair value estimates of deposits do not include the benefit that results from the low-cost funding provided by the deposit liabilities compared to the cost of borrowing funds in the market, commonly referred to as the core deposit intangible.
BORROWED FUNDS - The fair value of borrowings is estimated using discounted cash flow analyses based on rates currently available to the Corporation for similar types of borrowing arrangements.
ACCRUED INTEREST - The carrying amounts of accrued interest receivable and payable approximate fair values.
OFF-BALANCE SHEET COMMITMENTS - The Corporation has commitments to extend credit and has issued standby letters of credit. Standby letters of credit are conditional guarantees of performance by a customer to a third party. Estimates of the fair value of these off-balance sheet items were not made because of the short-term nature of these arrangements and the credit standing of the counterparties.
The estimated fair values, and related carrying amounts, of the Corporation’s financial instruments are as follows:
Amortized cost and fair value of available-for-sale securities at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 are summarized as follows:
The following table presents gross unrealized losses and fair value of available-for-sale securities with unrealized loss positions that are not deemed to be other-than-temporarily impaired, aggregated by length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011:
Gross realized gains and losses from available-for-sale securities (including OTTI losses in gross realized losses) and the related income tax provision were as follows:
The amortized cost and fair value of available-for-sale debt securities by contractual maturity are shown in the following table as of June 30, 2012. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because counterparties may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.
The Corporation’s mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations have stated maturities that may differ from actual maturities due to borrowers’ ability to prepay obligations. Cash flows from such investments are dependent upon the performance of the underlying mortgage loans and are generally influenced by the level of interest rates. In the table above, mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations are shown in one period.
Management evaluates securities for OTTI at least on a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic or market conditions warrant such evaluation. Consideration is given to (1) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than cost, (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and (3) whether the Corporation intends to sell the security or more likely than not will be required to sell the security before its anticipated recovery.
The Corporation recognized no impairment losses in earnings in the three-month period ended June 30, 2012. The Corporation recognized an impairment loss in earnings totaling $67,000 in the six-month period ended June 30, 2012, which was related to a bank stock. No impairment losses were recognized in the three-month or six-month periods ended June 30, 2011.
A summary of information management considered in evaluating debt and equity securities for OTTI at June 30, 2012 is provided below.
At June 30, 2012, management performed an assessment for possible OTTI of the Corporation’s debt securities on an issue-by-issue basis, relying on information obtained from various sources, including publicly available financial data, ratings by external agencies, brokers and other sources. The extent of individual analysis applied to each security depended on the size of the Corporation’s investment, as well as management’s perception of the credit risk associated with each security. Based on the results of the assessment, management believes impairment of these debt securities, including municipal bonds with no external ratings, at June 30, 2012 to be temporary.
The credit rating agencies have withdrawn their ratings on numerous municipal bonds held by the Corporation. At June 30, 2012, the total amortized cost basis of municipal bonds with no external credit ratings was $22,977,000, with an aggregate unrealized gain of $65,000. At the time of purchase, each of these bonds was considered investment grade and had been rated by at least one credit rating agency. The bonds for which the ratings were removed were almost all insured by an entity that has reported significant financial problems and declines in its regulatory capital ratios, and most of the ratings were removed in the fourth quarter 2009. However, the insurance remains in effect on the bonds, and none of the affected municipal bonds has failed to make a scheduled interest payment.
The following table provides information related to trust preferred securities issued by individual institutions as of June 30, 2012:
NR = not rated.
Management assesses each of the trust preferred securities issued by individual institutions for the possibility of OTTI by reviewing financial information that is publicly available. Neither Astoria Financial Corporation nor Susquehanna Bancshares, Inc. has deferred or defaulted on payments associated with the Corporation’s securities.
The Corporation recognized OTTI charges in 2009 and 2010 related to its holding of a trust preferred security issued by Carolina First Mortgage Loan Trust, a subsidiary of The South Financial Group, Inc. In the fourth quarter 2010, The Toronto-Dominion Bank acquired The South Financial Group, Inc. After the acquisition, The Toronto-Dominion Bank made a payment for the full amount of previously deferred interest and resumed quarterly payments on the security. The Corporation recognized a material change in the expected cash flows in the fourth quarter 2010. The Corporation recorded accretion income (included in interest income) totaling $398,000 in the three-month period ended June 30, 2012 and $855,000 in the six-month period ended June 30, 2012. The Corporation recorded accretion income totaling $160,000 in the three-month period ended June 30, 2011 and $271,000 in the six-month period ended June 30, 2011. For the year ended December 31, 2011, the Corporation recorded accretion income totaling $825,000. The security had a face amount of $2,000,000 and matured in May 2012.
Pooled trust-preferred securities are very long-term (usually 30-year maturity) instruments, mainly issued by banks. The Corporation’s investments in pooled trust-preferred securities are each made up of companies with geographic and size diversification. Almost all of the Corporation’s pooled trust-preferred securities are composed of debt issued by banking companies, with a lesser amount issued by insurance companies. Trust-preferred securities typically permit deferral of quarterly interest payments for up to five years, and some of the issuers of trust-preferred securities that are included in the Corporation’s pooled investments have elected to defer payment of interest on these obligations. Some issuers have defaulted.
Management evaluated pooled trust-preferred securities for OTTI by estimating the cash flows expected to be received from each security, taking into account estimated levels of deferrals and defaults by the underlying issuers. In determining cash flows, management assumed all issuers currently deferring or in default would make no future payments, and assigned estimated future default levels for the remaining issuers in each security based on financial strength ratings assigned by a national ratings service. Management calculated the present value of each security based on the current book yield, adjusted for future changes in three-month LIBOR (which is the index rate on the Corporation’s adjustable-rate pooled trust-preferred securities) based on the applicable forward curve. Management’s estimates of cash flows used to evaluate other-than-temporary impairment of pooled trust-preferred securities were based on sensitive assumptions regarding the timing and amounts of defaults that may occur, and changes in the assumptions used could produce different conclusions for each security. Additional information regarding these assumptions is included in Note 5.
The following table provides detailed information related to pooled trust preferred securities – mezzanine tranches held as of June 30, 2012:
As of June 30, 2012, the Corporation’s investment in the senior tranche of MMCAPS Funding I, Ltd. had an investment grade rating. The security, with an amortized cost of $2,516,000, has been subjected to impairment analysis based on estimated cash flows (using the process described above), and management has determined that impairment was temporary as of June 30, 2012.
The table that follows provides additional information related to pooled trust preferred securities as of June 30, 2012:
(1) Fitch has the senior tranche of MMCAPS Funding I, Ltd. on negative outlook.
In the table above, “Excess Subordination as % of Performing Collateral” (Excess Subordination Ratio) was calculated as follows: (Total face value of performing collateral – Face value of all outstanding note balances not subordinate to the Corporation’s investment)/Total face value of performing collateral.
The Excess Subordination Ratio measures the extent to which there may be tranches within the pooled trust preferred structure available to absorb credit losses before the Corporation’s security would be impacted. A positive Excess Subordination Ratio signifies there is available support from subordinate tranches to absorb losses before the Corporation’s investment would be impacted. A negative Excess Subordination Ratio signifies there is no available support from subordinate tranches to absorb losses before the Corporation’s securities would be impacted. The Excess Subordination Ratio is not definitive, in isolation, for determining OTTI or whether the Corporation will receive future payments on a pooled trust preferred security. Other factors affect the timing and amount of cash flows available for payments to the note holders (investors), including the excess interest paid by the issuers, who typically pay higher rates of interest than are paid out to the note holders.
The Corporation separates OTTI related to the trust-preferred securities into (a) the amount of the total impairment related to credit loss, which is recognized in the statement of earnings, and (b) the amount of the total impairment related to all other factors, which is recognized in other comprehensive income. The Corporation measures the credit loss component of OTTI based on the difference between: (1) the present value of estimated cash flows, at the book yield in effect prior to recognition of any OTTI, as of the most recent balance sheet date, and (2) the present value of estimated cash flows as of the previous quarter-end balance sheet date based on management’s cash flow assumptions at that time.
The Corporation recorded no OTTI losses related to pooled trust-preferred securities in the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012 and 2011.
The Corporation’s marketable equity securities at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 consisted exclusively of stocks of banking companies. The Corporation recognized an impairment loss in earnings related to a bank stock of $67,000 in the first quarter 2012. Management’s decision to recognize an impairment loss on this security followed an evaluation of the issuer’s published financial results in which management determined that the recovery of the Corporation’s cost basis within the foreseeable future was uncertain. As a result of this determination, the Corporation recognized an impairment loss to write the stock down to the most recent trade price at March 31, 2012. The Corporation recognized no OTTI losses related to bank stocks in the second quarter 2012. The Corporation recognized no OTTI losses related to bank stocks in the first six months of 2011. At June 30, 2012, management did not intend to sell impaired bank stocks, and based on the intent to hold the securities for the foreseeable future and other factors specific to the securities, has determined that none of the Corporation’s other bank stock holdings at June 30, 2012 were other than temporarily impaired.
The Corporation did not sell any bank stocks or realize any gains or losses from sales of bank stocks during the first six months of 2012. In the three-month period ended June 30, 2011, the Corporation realized a gain of $89,000 from the sale of a bank stock for which OTTI had been previously recognized. Realized gains from sales of bank stocks totaled $91,000 in the six-month period ended June 30, 2011 including $89,000 of realized gains from sales of stocks for which OTTI had been previously recognized.
C&N Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (FHLB-Pittsburgh), which is one of 12 regional Federal Home Loan Banks. As a member, C&N Bank is required to purchase and maintain stock in FHLB-Pittsburgh. There is no active market for FHLB-Pittsburgh stock, and it must ordinarily be redeemed by FHLB-Pittsburgh in order to be liquidated. C&N Bank’s investment in FHLB-Pittsburgh stock, included in Other Assets in the consolidated balance sheet, was $5,995,000 at June 30, 2012 and $6,643,000 at December 31, 2011. The Corporation evaluated its holding of FHLB-Pittsburgh stock for impairment and deemed the stock to not be impaired at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. In making this determination, management concluded that recovery of total outstanding par value, which equals the carrying value, is expected. The decision was based on review of financial information that FHLB-Pittsburgh has made publicly available.
The loans receivable portfolio is segmented into residential mortgage, commercial and consumer loans. The residential mortgage segment includes the following classes: first and junior lien residential mortgages, home equity lines of credit and residential construction loans. The most significant classes of commercial loans are commercial loans secured by real estate, non-real estate secured commercial and industrial loans, loans to political subdivisions, commercial construction and land loans, and loans secured by farmland.
Loans outstanding at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 are summarized as follows:
Summary of Loans by Type
The Corporation grants loans to individuals as well as commercial and tax-exempt entities. Commercial, residential and personal loans are made to customers geographically concentrated in the Pennsylvania and New York counties that comprise the market serviced by Citizens & Northern Bank. Although the Corporation has a diversified loan portfolio, a significant portion of its debtors’ ability to honor their contracts is dependent on the local economic conditions within the region. There is no concentration of loans to borrowers engaged in similar businesses or activities that exceed 10% of total loans at either June 30, 2012 or December 31, 2011.
The Corporation maintains an allowance for loan losses that represents management’s estimate of the losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date and recorded as a reduction of the investment in loans. The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level considered adequate to provide for losses that can be reasonably anticipated. Management performs a quarterly evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance. The allowance is based on the Corporation’s past loan loss experience, known and inherent risks in the portfolio, adverse situations that may affect the borrower’s ability to repay, the estimated value of any underlying collateral, composition of the loan portfolio, current economic conditions and other relevant factors. This evaluation is inherently subjective as it requires material estimates that may be susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available. In the process of evaluating the loan portfolio, management also considers the Corporation’s exposure to losses from unfunded loan commitments. As of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, management determined that no allowance for credit losses related to unfunded loan commitments was required.
Transactions within the allowance for loan losses, summarized by segment and class, for the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 were as follows:
Six Months Ended June 30, 2011
Three Months Ended June 30, 2012
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011
In the evaluation of the loan portfolio, management determines two major components for the allowance for loan losses – (1) a specific component based on an assessment of certain larger relationships, mainly commercial purpose loans, on a loan-by-loan basis; and (2) a general component for the remainder of the portfolio based on a collective evaluation of pools of loans with similar risk characteristics. The general component is assigned to each pool of loans based on both historical net charge-off experience, and an evaluation of certain qualitative factors. An unallocated component is maintained to cover uncertainties that could affect management’s estimate of probable losses. The unallocated component of the allowance reflects the margin of imprecision inherent in the underlying assumptions used in the above methodologies for estimating specific and general losses in the portfolio.
In determining the larger loan relationships for detailed assessment under the specific allowance component, the Corporation uses an internal risk rating system. Under the risk rating system, the Corporation classifies problem or potential problem loans as “Special Mention,” “Substandard,” or “Doubtful” on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions and values. Substandard loans include those characterized by the distinct possibility that the Corporation will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected. Loans classified as Doubtful have all the weaknesses inherent in those classified as Substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses present make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions and values, highly questionable and improbable. Loans that do not currently expose the Corporation to sufficient risk to warrant classification as Substandard or Doubtful, but possess weaknesses that deserve management’s close attention, are deemed to be Special Mention. Risk ratings are updated any time that conditions or the situation warrants. Loans not classified are included in the “Pass” column in the table below.
The following tables summarize the aggregate credit quality classification of outstanding loans by risk rating as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011:
The general component of the allowance for loan losses covers pools of loans including commercial loans not considered individually impaired, as well as smaller balance homogeneous classes of loans, such as residential real estate, home equity lines of credit and other consumer loans. Accordingly, the Corporation generally does not separately identify individual consumer and residential loans for impairment disclosures, unless such loans are subject to a restructuring agreement. The pools of loans are evaluated for loss exposure based upon three-year average historical net charge-off rates for each loan class, adjusted for qualitative factors. Qualitative risk factors (described in the following paragraph) are evaluated for the impact on each of the three segments (residential mortgage, commercial and consumer) within the loan portfolio. Each qualitative factor is assigned a value to reflect improving, stable or declining conditions based on management’s judgment using relevant information available at the time of the evaluation. The adjustment for qualitative factors is applied as an increase or decrease to the three-year average net charge-off rate to each loan class within each segment.
The qualitative factors used in the general component calculations are designed to address credit risk characteristics associated with each segment. The Corporation’s credit risk associated with all of the segments is significantly impacted by these factors, which include economic conditions within its market area, the Corporation’s lending policies, changes or trends in the portfolio, risk profile, competition, regulatory requirements and other factors. Further, the residential mortgage segment is significantly affected by the values of residential real estate that provide collateral for the loans. The majority of the Corporation’s commercial segment loans (approximately 69% at June 30, 2012) is secured by real estate, and accordingly, the Corporation’s risk for the commercial segment is significantly affected by commercial real estate values. The consumer segment includes a wide mix of loans for different purposes, primarily secured loans, including loans secured by motor vehicles, manufactured housing and other types of collateral.
Loans are classified as impaired, when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Corporation will be unable to collect the scheduled payments of principal or interest when due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Factors considered by management in determining impairment include payment status, collateral value and the probability of collecting scheduled principal and interest payments when due. Loans that experience insignificant payment delays and payment shortfalls generally are not classified as impaired. Management determines the significance of payment delays and payment shortfalls on a case-by-case basis, taking into consideration all of the circumstances surrounding the loan and the borrower, including the length of the delay, the reasons for the delay, the borrower’s prior payment record and the amount of shortfall in relation to the principal and interest owed. Impairment is measured on a loan-by-loan basis for commercial loans, by the fair value of the collateral (if the loan is collateral dependent), by future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective rate or by the loan’s observable market price.
The scope of loans evaluated individually for impairment include all loan relationships greater than $200,000 for which there is at least one extension of credit graded Special Mention, Substandard or Doubtful. Also, all loans classified as troubled debt restructurings (discussed in more detail below) and all loan relationships less than $200,000 in the aggregate, but with an estimated loss of $100,000 or more, are individually evaluated for impairment. Loans that are individually evaluated for impairment, but which are not determined to be impaired, are combined with all remaining loans that are not reviewed on a specific basis, and such loans are included within larger pools of loans based on similar risk and loss characteristics for purposes of determining the general component of the allowance. The loans that have been individually evaluated, but which have not been determined to be impaired, are included in the “Collectively Evaluated” column in the tables summarizing the allowance and associated loan balances as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.
The following tables present a summary of loan balances and the related allowance for loan losses summarized by portfolio segment and class for each impairment method used as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011:
Summary information related to impaired loans as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 is as follows:
The average balance of impaired loans and interest income recognized on impaired loans is as follows:
Loans are placed on nonaccrual status for all classes of loans when, in the opinion of management, collection of interest is doubtful. Any unpaid interest previously accrued on those loans is reversed from income. Interest income is not recognized on specific impaired loans unless the likelihood of further loss is remote. Interest payments received on loans for which the risk of further loss is greater than remote are applied as a reduction of the loan principal balance. Interest income on other nonaccrual loans is recognized only to the extent of interest payments received. Generally, loans are restored to accrual status when the obligation is brought current, has performed in accordance with the contractual terms for a reasonable period of time (generally six months) and the ultimate collectability of the total contractual principal and interest is no longer in doubt. The past due status of all classes of loans receivable is determined based on contractual due dates for loan payments. Also, the amortization of deferred loan fees is discontinued when a loan is placed on nonaccrual status.
The breakdown by portfolio segment and class of nonaccrual loans and loans past due ninety days or more and still accruing is as follows:
The amounts shown in the table immediately above include loans classified as troubled debt restructurings (described in more detail below), if such loans are past due ninety days or more or nonaccrual.
The table below presents a summary of the contractual aging of loans as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011:
Nonaccrual loans are included in the contractual aging immediately above and on the previous page. A summary of the contractual aging of nonaccrual loans at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 is as follows:
Loans whose terms are modified are classified as Troubled Debt Restructurings (TDRs) if the Corporation grants such borrowers concessions and it is deemed that those borrowers are experiencing financial difficulty. Loans classified as TDRs are designated as impaired. In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310) - A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. The Update provides guidance in evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a TDR. The Update was effective for the Corporation in 2011, with retrospective application to January 1, 2011.
The outstanding balance of loans subject to TDRs, as well as contractual aging information at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 is as follows:
Troubled Debt Restructurings (TDRs)
There were no TDRs that occurred during the second quarter 2012. TDRs that occurred during the six-month period ended June 30, 2012 are as follows:
The TDR in the six-month period ended June 30, 2012 was an extension of the final maturity and lowering of monthly payments required on a commercial loan. There was no allowance for loan losses on this loan at June 30, 2012, and no change in the allowance for loan losses resulting from this TDR.
The outstanding balance of TDRs at December 31, 2011 included a balance of $466,000 related to six commercial loans secured by real estate stemming from a forbearance agreement entered into with one commercial customer. Under the terms of the forbearance agreement, the Corporation had agreed to accept payment of less than the total principal amount of the loans, assuming payment was received by dates specified within the forbearance agreement. In the first six months of 2012, the loans were not repaid and the forbearance agreement expired. Accordingly, the Corporation’s concession terminated, and the loans were not classified as TDRs at June 30, 2012. The outstanding balance of the loans was $466,000 at June 30, 2012. The loans were in nonaccrual status at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011. At June 30, 2012, the risk rating of the loans was Substandard, while the risk rating of the loans was Doubtful at December 31, 2011. Based on management’s estimate of the value of the underlying collateral, net of selling costs, the Corporation had no allowance for loan losses associated with these loans at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011.
In the second quarter 2012, there were no defaults on loans for which modifications considered to be TDRs were entered into within the previous 12 months. In the six-month period ended June 30, 2012, such defaults are as follows:
Six Months Ended June 30, 2012
The event of default in the table above resulted from the borrowers’ failure to make payments due at maturity, based on a loan maturity date that had been extended from the original due date. The allowance for loan losses on this loan was $274,000 at June 30, 2012, an increase of $209,000 over the allowance on the loan at December 31, 2011.
8. DEFINED BENEFIT PLANS
The Corporation sponsors a defined benefit health care plan that provides postretirement medical benefits and life insurance to employees who meet certain age and length of service requirements. This plan contains a cost-sharing feature, which causes participants to pay for all future increases in costs related to benefit coverage. Accordingly, actuarial assumptions related to health care cost trend rates do not significantly affect the liability balance at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, and are not expected to significantly affect the Corporation's future expenses. The Corporation uses a December 31 measurement date for the postretirement plan.
In an acquisition in 2007, the Corporation assumed the Citizens Trust Company Retirement Plan, a defined benefit pension plan. This plan covers certain employees who were employed by Citizens Trust Company on December 31, 2002, when the plan was amended to discontinue admittance of any future participant and to freeze benefit accruals. Information related to the Citizens Trust Company Retirement Plan has been included in the tables that follow. The Corporation uses a December 31 measurement date for this plan.
The components of net periodic benefit costs from these defined benefit plans are as follows:
In the first six months of 2012, the Corporation funded postretirement contributions totaling $29,000, with estimated annual postretirement contributions of $60,000 expected in 2012 for the full year. The Corporation made a contribution to the defined benefit pension plan of $21,000 in the first quarter of 2012 for the 2011 plan year. Based upon the related actuarial reports, the Corporation made a $23,000 contribution in the second quarter 2012 for the 2012 plan year. No further contributions are required in 2012, though the Corporation may make additional discretionary contributions.
9. STOCK-BASED COMPENSATION PLANS
In January 2012, the Corporation granted options to purchase a total of 64,757 shares of common stock through its Stock Incentive and Independent Directors Stock Incentive Plans. In January 2011, the Corporation granted options to purchase a total of 93,674 shares of common stock. The exercise price for the 2012 awards is $18.54 per share, and the exercise price for the 2011 awards is $15.06 per share, based on the market price as of the date of grant. Stock option expense is recognized over the vesting period of each option. The Corporation expects total stock option expense for the year ending December 31, 2012 will be $247,000, and total stock option expense for the year ended December 31, 2011 was $279,000.
The Corporation records stock option expense based on estimated fair value calculated using an option valuation model. In calculating the 2012 and 2011 fair values, the Corporation utilized the Black-Scholes-Merton option-pricing model. The calculated fair value of each option granted, and significant assumptions used in the calculations, are as follows:
In calculating the estimated fair value of 2012 and 2011 stock option awards, management based its estimates of volatility and dividend yield on the Corporation’s experience over the immediately prior period of time consistent with the estimated lives of the options. The risk-free interest rate was based on the published yield of zero-coupon U.S. Treasury strips with an applicable maturity as of the grant dates. The expected option lives were based on management’s estimates of the average term for all options issued under both plans. In 2012 and 2011, management assumed a 33% forfeiture rate for options granted under the Stock Incentive Plan, and a 0% forfeiture rate for the Directors Stock Incentive Plan. These estimated forfeiture rates were determined based on the Corporation’s historical experience.
In January 2012, the Corporation awarded a total of 42,552 shares of restricted stock under the Stock Incentive and Independent Directors Stock Incentive Plans. In January 2011, a total of 15,622 shares of restricted stock were awarded under the Plans. Compensation cost related to restricted stock is recognized based on the market price of the stock at the grant date over the vesting period. For restricted stock awards granted under the Stock Incentive Plan, the Corporation must meet an annual targeted return on average equity (“ROAE”) performance ratio, as defined, in order for participants to vest. Management has estimated restricted stock expense in the first six months of 2012 based on an assumption that the ROAE target for 2012 will be met. In the first quarter 2010, the Corporation awarded 9,125 shares of restricted stock to the Chief Executive Officer under the Stock Incentive Plan. This award provides that vesting will occur upon the earliest of (i) the third anniversary of the date of grant, (ii) death or disability or (iii) the occurrence of a change in control of the Corporation.
Total stock-based compensation expense is as follows:
10. INCOME TAXES
The net deferred tax asset at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011 represents the following temporary difference components:
The deferred tax asset from realized losses on securities resulted primarily from OTTI charges for financial statement purposes that are not deductible for income tax reporting purposes through June 30, 2012. Of the total deferred tax asset from realized losses on securities, $332,000 is from securities that, if the Corporation were to sell them, would be classified as capital losses for income tax reporting purposes.
The Corporation has available an estimated $130,000 capital loss carryforward at June 30, 2012, expiring in 2015.
The provision for income tax for the three-month and six-month periods ended June 30, 2012 and 2011 is based on the Corporation’s estimate of the effective tax rate expected to be applicable for the full year. The effective tax rates for the Corporation are as follows:
The effective tax rate for each period presented differs from the statutory rate of 35% principally because of the effects of tax-exempt interest income.
The Corporation has no unrecognized tax benefits, nor pending examination issues related to tax positions taken in preparation of its income tax returns. With limited exceptions, the Corporation is no longer subject to examination by the Internal Revenue Service for years prior to 2008.
11. IMPAIRMENT OF LIMITED PARTNERSHIP INVESTMENT
In the first quarter 2011, the Corporation reported an impairment loss of $948,000 related to an investment in a real estate limited partnership. In addition to the limited partnership investment, the Corporation has a loan receivable from the limited partnership with an outstanding balance of $1,029,000 at June 30, 2012. Based on updated financial information, management prepared an estimated valuation based on cash flow analysis. That analysis showed the estimated return to the Corporation would be sufficient to repay the loan in full, but would not provide sufficient additional cash flow for return on the limited partnership investment. Accordingly, management made the decision to completely write-off the limited partnership investment in the first quarter 2011.
In the normal course of business, the Corporation may be subject to pending and threatened lawsuits in which claims for monetary damages could be asserted. In management’s opinion, the Corporation’s financial position and results of operations would not be materially affected by the outcome of such pending legal proceedings.
13. RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS
The FASB issues Accounting Standards Updates (ASUs) to the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC). This section provides a summary description of recent ASUs that have significant implications (elected or required) within the consolidated financial statements, or that management expects may have a significant impact on financial statements issued in the near future.
In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02, Receivables (Topic 310) - A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring Is a Troubled Debt Restructuring. The Update amends ASC Topic 310 to provide guidance in evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a Troubled Debt Restructuring. The main provisions conclude that a creditor must separately conclude that both of the following exist – (1) the restructuring constitutes a concession, and (2) the debtor is experiencing financial difficulties. The amendments then provide guidance on a creditor’s evaluation of each of the requirements for a Troubled Debt Restructuring. For public entities, the Update was effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, including retrospective application to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. Note 7 provides disclosures required by this standard.
In May 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-04, Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820) – Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. The amendments in this Update will result in common fair value measurement and disclosure requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs. The Update includes various amendments, including amendments that: (1) clarify FASB’s intent about the application of existing fair value measurement and disclosure requirements, and (2) change some particular principles or requirements for measuring fair value or disclosing information about fair value measurements. There were no changes in the Corporation’s procedures for determining fair value measurements as a result of this Update, however additional quantitative disclosures about unobservable inputs used in fair value measurements categorized within Level 3 of the fair value hierarchy are provided. The amendments in this ASU are applied prospectively, and Note 5 includes disclosures required by this ASU.
In June 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-05, Comprehensive Income (Topic 220) – Presentation of Comprehensive Income. The intent of this standard is to increase the prominence of comprehensive income in the financial statements. This standard requires the components of comprehensive income be presented either in a single continuous statement of comprehensive income or in two separate but consecutive statements. The single format includes the traditional income statement and the components of other comprehensive income, total other comprehensive income and total comprehensive income. In the two statement approach, the first statement is the traditional income statement, which would be immediately followed by a separate statement which would include the components of other comprehensive income, total other comprehensive income and total comprehensive income. The amendments in this ASU are applied retrospectively, and the Corporation has adopted the two statement approach as reflected in the accompanying financial statements.
In September 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-08, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350) – Testing Goodwill for Impairment. The amendments in this ASU permit an entity to first assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test described in Topic 350. The amendments in this ASU are effective for annual and interim goodwill impairment tests performed for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2011. Early adoption is permitted, and management adopted this ASU in assessing goodwill for impairment as of December 31, 2011.