UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

þ	Annual report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004

or

o	Transaction report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934

Commission file number: 000-49883

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (530) 283-7305

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

     Securities to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: Common Stock, no par value.

     Indicated 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. þ

     Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is an accelerated filer (as defined in Exchange Act Rule 12b-2).

     As of June 30, 2004, the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $52.6 million, based on the closing price reported to the Registrant on that date of $18.35 per share.

     Shares of Common Stock held by each officer and director have been excluded in that such persons may be deemed to be affiliates. This determination of the affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes.

     The number of shares of Common Stock of the registrant outstanding as of March 28, 2005 was 3,287,829.

     Documents Incorporated by Reference: Portions of the definitive proxy statement for the 2005 Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to SEC Regulation 14A are incorporated by reference in Part III, Items 10-14.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

2

PART I

Forward-Looking Information

This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes forward-looking statements and information is subject to the “safe harbor” provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements (which involve Plumas Bancorp’s (the “Company’s”) plans, beliefs and goals, refer to estimates or use similar terms) involve certain risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially from those in the forward-looking statements. Such risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following factors:

	•	Competitive pressure in the banking industry, competition in the markets the Company operates in and changes in the regulatory environment
	•	Changes in the interest rate environment and volatility of rate sensitive deposits
	•	Declines in the health of the economy, nationally or regionally, which could reduce the demand for loans or reduce the value of real estate collateral securing most of the Company’s loans
	•	Credit quality deterioration, which could cause an increase in the provision for loan and lease losses
	•	Devaluation of fixed income securities
	•	Asset/liability matching risks and liquidity risks
	•	Loss of key personnel
	•	Operational interruptions including data processing systems failure and fraud

The Company undertakes no obligation to revise or publicly release the results of any revision to these forward-looking statements. For additional information concerning risks and uncertainties related to the Company and its operations, please refer to Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7 and other information in this Report.

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

General

The Company. Plumas Bancorp (the “Company”) is a California corporation registered as a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and is headquartered in Quincy, California. The Company was incorporated in January 2002 and acquired all of the outstanding shares of Plumas Bank (the “Bank”) in June 2002. The Company’s principal subsidiary is the Bank, and the Company exists primarily for the purpose of holding the stock of the Bank and of such other subsidiaries it may acquire or establish. At the present time, the Company’s only other subsidiary is Plumas Statutory Trust I, which was formed in September 2002 solely to facilitate the issuance of trust preferred securities.

The Company’s principal source of income is dividends from the Bank, but the Company intends to explore supplemental sources of income in the future. The cash outlays of the Company, including (but not limited to) the payment of dividends to shareholders, if and when declared by the Board of Directors, and the cost of servicing debt, will generally be paid from dividends paid to the Company by the Bank.

At December 31, 2004, the Company had consolidated assets of $417.3 million, deposits of $378.6 million and shareholders’ equity of $27.9 million. The Company’s liabilities include $6.2 million in junior

3

subordinated deferrable interest debentures issued in conjunction with the trust preferred securities issued by Plumas Statutory Trust I (the “Trust”) in September 2002. The Trust is further discussed in the section titled “Trust Preferred Securities.”

References herein to the “Company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to Plumas Bancorp and its consolidated subsidiary, unless the context indicates otherwise. Our operations are conducted at 35 South Lindan Avenue, Quincy, California. Our annual, quarterly and other reports under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 with the Securities and Exchange Commission and are posted and are available at no cost on the Company’s website, www.plumasbank.com, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company files such documents with the SEC. These reports are also available through the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

The Bank. The Bank is a California state-chartered bank that was incorporated in July 1980 and opened for business in December 1980. The Bank’s Administrative Office is also located at 35 South Lindan Avenue, Quincy, California. At December 31, 2004 the Bank had approximately $416.9 million in assets, $266.9 million in loans and $378.6 million in deposits (including a deposit of $29 thousand from the Company). It is currently the largest independent bank headquartered in Plumas County. The Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) up to maximum insurable amounts. The Bank is not a member of the Federal Reserve System.

The Bank’s primary service area covers the Northeastern corner of California, with Lake Tahoe to the South and the Oregon border to the North. The Bank through its twelve branch network, serves the seven contiguous counties of Plumas, Nevada, Sierra, Placer, Lassen, Modoc and Shasta. The branches are located in the communities of Quincy, Portola, Greenville, Westwood, Truckee, Fall River Mills, Alturas, Susanville, Chester, Tahoe City, Kings Beach and Loyalton. Additionally, within our service area, the Bank maintains sixteen automated teller machines (“ATMs”) tied in with major statewide and national networks. The Bank’s primary business is servicing the banking needs of these communities and its marketing strategy stresses its local ownership and commitment to serve the banking needs of individuals living and working in the Bank’s primary service areas.

With a predominant focus on personal service, the Bank has positioned itself as a multi-community independent bank serving the financial needs of individuals and businesses within the Bank’s geographic footprint. Our principal retail lending services include consumer, home equity and home mortgage loans. Our principal commercial lending services include term real estate, land development and construction loans. In addition, we provide commercial and industrial term, government-guaranteed and agricultural loans as well as credit lines.

The Government-guaranteed lending center, headquartered in Truckee, provides Small Business Administration (SBA) lending and USDA Rural Development lending. The Bank produces 9-12 of these types of loans annually and it is anticipated that this will continue at the same level for the foreseeable future. Also in Truckee, we have a senior commercial lender charged with the production and maintenance of a significant participation loan portfolio. $33.5 million in new participations were acquired in 2004.

The Agricultural Credit Centers located in Susanville and Alturas provide a complete line of credit services in support of the agricultural activities which are key to the continued economic development of the communities we serve. “Ag lending” clients include a full range of individual farming customers, small- to medium-sized business farming organizations and corporate farming units.

As of December 31, 2004, the principal areas in which we directed our lending activities, and the percentage of our total loan portfolio for which each of these areas was responsible, were as follows: (i) loans secured by real estate – 50.2%; (ii) commercial and industrial (including SBA) loans – 16.0%; (iii) consumer loans (including residential equity lines of credit) – 22.1%; and (iv) agricultural loans (including agricultural real estate loans) – 11.7%.

4

In addition to the lending activities noted above, we offer a wide range of deposit products for the retail and commercial banking markets including checking, interest-bearing checking, business sweep, savings, time deposit and retirement accounts, as well as telephone banking and internet banking with bill-pay options. As of December 31, 2004, the Bank had 34,969 deposit accounts with balances totaling approximately $378.6 million, compared to 32,812 deposit accounts with balances totaling approximately $355.9 million at December 31, 2003. We attract deposits through our customer-oriented product mix, competitive pricing, convenient locations, extended hours and drive-up banking, all provided with the highest level of customer service.

Most of our deposits are attracted from individuals, business-related sources and smaller municipal entities. This mix of deposit customers resulted in a relatively modest average deposit balance of approximately $11,000 at December 31, 2004, but makes us less vulnerable to adverse effects from the loss of depositors who may be seeking higher yields in other markets or who may otherwise draw down balances for cash needs. We do not accept brokered deposits.

We also offer a multitude of other products and services to our customers to complement the lending and deposit services previously reviewed. These include cashier’s checks, traveler’s checks, bank-by-mail, ATMs, night depository, safe deposit boxes, direct deposit, electronic funds transfers, on-line banking, and other customary banking services.

In order to provide non-deposit investment options we have developed a strategic alliance with Financial Network Investment Corporation (“FNIC”). Through this arrangement, certain employees of the Bank are also registered and licensed representatives of FNIC. These employees provide our customers throughout our branch network with convenient access to annuities, insurance products, mutual funds, and a full range of investment products.

We have not engaged in any material research activities relating to the development of new products or services during the last two fiscal years; however, a substantial investment of time and capital has been devoted to the improvement of existing Bank services during the last twelve months. Specifically, in 2004 the bank hired a Dealer Services Manager to accommodate a growing network of auto dealers. In conjunction with this, the Bank established a dealer loan center to handle the more than 200 applications received each month. The Bank now serves more than 30 auto dealers in the Quincy, Chester, Red Bluff, Corning and Redding areas.

The officers and employees of the Bank are continually engaged in marketing activities, including the evaluation and development of new products and services to enable the Bank to retain and improve its competitive position in its service area. Alternatives for future electronic banking delivery are currently being examined in an effort to keep pace with evolving technology and continue to provide superior customer service.

We hold no patents or licenses (other than licenses required by appropriate bank regulatory agencies), franchises, or concessions. Our business has a modest seasonal component due to the heavy agricultural and tourism orientation of some of the communities we serve. As our branches in less rural areas such as Truckee have expanded, however, the agriculture-related base has become less significant. We are not dependent on a single customer or group of related customers for a material portion of our deposits, nor is a material portion of our loans concentrated within a single industry or group of related industries. There has been no material effect upon our capital expenditures, earnings, or competitive position as a result of Federal, state, or local environmental regulation.

Commitment to our Communities. The Board of Directors and Management believe that the Company plays an important role in the economic well being of the communities it serves. Our Bank has a continuing responsibility to provide a wide range of lending and deposit services to both individuals and businesses. These services are tailored to meet the needs of the communities served by the Company and the Bank.

5

We offer various loan products which promote home ownership and affordable housing, fuel job growth and support community economic development. Types of loans offered range from personal and commercial loans to real estate, construction, agricultural, mortgage and government-guaranteed community infrastructure loans. Many banking decisions are made locally with the goal of maintaining customer satisfaction.

Recent Developments. In November of 2003, we expanded into Placer County with the opening of our de novo branch in the community of Tahoe City. Also in November 2003, we increased our deposit base by $45 million within our service area through the acquisition of five branches from a competitor. The branch acquisition involved the purchase of deposits and certain fixed and other assets related to the branches located in the communities of Kings Beach, Loyalton, Portola, Quincy and Truckee. The deposits of the Portola, Quincy and Truckee branches were consolidated into our existing branches in those communities while the Kings Beach and Loyalton offices were added to our existing branch network.

Trust Preferred Securities. During the third quarter of 2002, the Company formed a wholly owned Connecticut statutory business trust, Plumas Statutory Trust I (the “Trust”). On September 26, 2002, the Company issued to the Trust, Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Debentures due 2032 (the “Debentures”) in the aggregate principal amount of $6,186,000. In exchange for these debentures the Trust paid the Company $6,186,000. The Trust funded its purchase of debentures by issuing $6,000,000 in floating rate capital securities (“trust preferred securities”), which were sold to a third party. These trust preferred securities qualify as Tier I capital under current Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The Debentures are the only asset of the Trust. The interest rate and terms on both instruments are substantially the same. The rate is based on the three month LIBOR (London Interbank Offered Rate) plus 3.40%, not to exceed 11.9%, adjustable quarterly. The proceeds from the sale of the Debentures were primarily used by the Company to inject capital into the Bank.

The Debentures and trust preferred securities accrue and pay distributions quarterly based on the floating rate described above on the stated liquidation value of $1,000 per security. The Company has entered into contractual agreements which, taken collectively, fully and unconditionally guarantee payment of: (1) accrued and unpaid distributions required to be paid on the capital securities; (2) the redemption price with respect to any capital securities called for redemption by the Trust, and (3) payments due upon voluntary or involuntary dissolution, winding up, or liquidation of the Trust.

The trust preferred securities are mandatorily redeemable upon maturity of the Debentures on September 26, 2032, or upon earlier redemption as provided in the indenture.

The Trust is not consolidated into the Company’s consolidated financial statements and, accordingly, is accounted for under the equity method and the junior subordinated debentures are reflected as debt on the consolidated balance sheet.

Business Concentrations. No individual or single group of related customer accounts is considered material in relation to the Banks’ assets or deposits, or in relation to our overall business. However, at December 31, 2004 approximately 66.9% of the Bank’s total loan portfolio consisted of real estate-secured loans, including real estate mortgage loans, real estate construction loans, consumer equity lines of credit, and agricultural loans secured by real estate. Moreover, our business activities are currently focused in the California counties of Plumas, Nevada, Placer, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta and Sierra. Consequently, our results of operations and financial condition are dependent upon the general trends in these California economies and, in particular, the residential and commercial real estate markets. In addition, the concentration of our operations in these areas of California exposes us to greater risk than other banking companies with a wider geographic base in the event of catastrophes, such as earthquakes, fires and floods in these regions in California.

Competition. With respect to commercial bank competitors, the business is largely dominated by a relatively small number of major banks with many offices operating over a wide geographical area. These

6

banks have, among other advantages, the ability to finance wide-ranging and effective advertising campaigns and to allocate their resources to regions of highest yield and demand. Many of the major banks operating in the area offer certain services that we do not offer directly but may offer indirectly through correspondent institutions. By virtue of their greater total capitalization, such banks also have substantially higher lending limits than we do. For customers whose loan demands exceed our legal lending limit, we attempt to arrange for such loans on a participation basis with correspondent banks.

In addition to other banks, our competitors include savings institutions, credit unions, and numerous non-banking institutions such as finance companies, leasing companies, insurance companies, brokerage firms, and investment banking firms. In recent years, increased competition has also developed from specialized finance and non-finance companies that offer wholesale finance, credit card, and other consumer finance services, including on-line banking services and personal financial software. Strong competition for deposit and loan products affects the rates of those products as well as the terms on which they are offered to customers. Mergers between financial institutions have placed additional pressure on banks within the industry to streamline their operations, reduce expenses, and increase revenues to remain competitive. Competition has also intensified due to federal and state interstate banking laws enacted in the mid-1990’s, which permit banking organizations to expand into other states, and the relatively large California market has been particularly attractive to out-of-state institutions. The Financial Modernization Act, which became effective March 11, 2000, has made it possible for full affiliations to occur between banks and securities firms, insurance companies, and other financial companies, and has also intensified competitive conditions.

Currently, within the Bank’s service area there are 21 traditional banking branch offices of competing institutions, including 15 branches of 4 major banks. As of June 30, 2004, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation estimated the Bank’s market share of insured deposits within the communities it serves to be as follows: Chester 71%, Quincy 68%, Portola 52%, Fall River Mills 47%, Alturas 38%, Kings Beach 35%, Susanville 26%, Truckee 17%, Tahoe City 2% and 100% in the communities of Greenville, Westwood and Loyalton. Tahoe City is the location of our de novo branch, which opened its doors in November 2003.

Technological innovations have also resulted in increased competition in financial services markets. Such innovation has, for example, made it possible for non-depository institutions to offer customers automated transfer payment services that previously were considered traditional banking products. In addition, many customers now expect a choice of delivery systems and channels, including telephone, mail, home computer, ATMs, full-service branches, and/or in-store branches. The sources of competition in such products include traditional banks as well as savings associations, credit unions, brokerage firms, money market and other mutual funds, asset management groups, finance and insurance companies, internet-only financial intermediaries, and mortgage banking firms.

For many years we have countered rising competition by providing our own style of community-oriented, personalized service. We rely on local promotional activity, personal contacts by our officers, directors, employees, and shareholders, automated 24-hour banking, and the individualized service that we can provide through our flexible policies. This appears to be well-received by our customers throughout our service area, who appreciate a more personal and customer-oriented environment in which to conduct their financial transactions. We have also embraced the electronic age and installed telephone banking and personal computer and internet banking with bill payment capabilities to meet the needs of customers with electronic access requirements. This high tech and high touch approach allows the customers to customize their access to our services based on their particular preference.

Employees. At December 31, 2004, the Company and its subsidiary employed 194 persons. On a full-time equivalent basis, we employed 172 persons. We believe our employee relations are excellent.

7

Supervision and Regulation

The Company. As a bank holding company, we are subject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, (the “BHCA”), and are registered with and subject to the supervision of the Federal Reserve Bank (the “FRB”). It is the policy of the FRB, that each bank holding company serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary banks. We are required to file reports with the FRB and provide such additional information as the FRB may require. The FRB has the authority to examine us and our subsidiary, as well as any arrangements between us and our subsidiary, with the cost of any such examination to be borne by us.

The BHCA requires us to obtain the prior approval of the FRB before acquisition of all or substantially all of the assets of any bank or ownership or control of the voting shares of any bank if, after giving effect to the acquisition, we would own or control, directly or indirectly, more than 5% of the voting shares of that bank. Amendments to the BHCA expand the circumstances under which a bank holding company may acquire control of or all or substantially all of the assets of a bank located outside the State of California.

We may not engage in any business other than managing or controlling banks or furnishing services to our subsidiary, with the exception of certain activities which, in the opinion of the FRB, are so closely related to banking or to managing or controlling banks as to be incidental to banking. In addition, we are generally prohibited from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company unless that company is engaged in such authorized activities and the Federal Reserve approves the acquisition.

We and our subsidiary are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with any extension of credit, sale or lease of property or provision of services. For example, with certain exceptions, the bank may not condition an extension of credit on a customer obtaining other services provided by us, the bank or any other subsidiary of ours, or on a promise by the customer not to obtain other services from a competitor. In addition, federal law imposes certain restrictions on transactions between the bank and its affiliates. As affiliates, the bank and we are subject, with certain exceptions, to the provisions of federal law imposing limitations on and requiring collateral for extensions of credit by the bank to any affiliate.

The Bank. As a California state-chartered bank that is not a member of the Federal Reserve, Plumas Bank is subject to primary supervision, examination and regulation by the FDIC, the California Department of Financial Institutions (the “DFI”) and is subject to applicable regulations of the FRB. The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC to applicable limits. As a consequence of the extensive regulation of commercial banking activities in California and the United States, banks are particularly susceptible to changes in California and federal legislation and regulations, which may have the effect of increasing the cost of doing business, limiting permissible activities or increasing competition.

Various other requirements and restrictions under the laws of the United States and the State of California affect the operations of the Bank. Federal and California statutes and regulations relate to many aspects of the Bank’s operations, including reserves against deposits, interest rates payable on deposits, loans, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowings, dividends, branching, capital requirements and disclosure obligations to depositors and borrowers. California law presently permits a bank to locate a branch office in any locality in the state. Additionally, California law exempts banks from California usury laws.

Capital Standards. The FRB and the FDIC have risk-based capital adequacy guidelines intended to provide a measure of capital adequacy that reflects the degree of risk associated with a banking organization’s operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets, and transactions, such as letters of credit and recourse arrangements, which are reported as off-balance-sheet items. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off-balance-sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0.0% for assets with low

8

credit risk, such as certain U.S. government securities, to 100.0% for assets with relatively higher credit risk, such as business loans.

A banking organization’s risk-based capital ratios are obtained by dividing its qualifying capital by its total risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items. The regulators measure risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items against both total qualifying capital (the sum of Tier 1 capital and limited amounts of Tier 2 capital) and Tier 1 capital. Tier 1 capital consists of common stock, retained earnings, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and minority interests in certain subsidiaries, less most other intangible assets. Tier 2 capital may consist of a limited amount of the allowance for loan and lease losses and certain other instruments with some characteristics of equity. The inclusion of elements of Tier 2 capital is subject to certain other requirements and limitations of the federal banking agencies. Since December 31, 1992, the FRB and the FDIC have required a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 8.0%, and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 4.0%.

In addition to the risk-based guidelines, the FRB and FDIC require banking organizations to maintain a minimum amount of Tier 1 capital to average total assets, referred to as the leverage ratio. For a banking organization rated in the highest of the five categories used by regulators to rate banking organizations, the minimum leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is 3.0%. It is improbable, however, that an institution with a 3.0% leverage ratio would receive the highest rating by the regulators since a strong capital position is a significant part of the regulators’ ratings. For all banking organizations not rated in the highest category, the minimum leverage ratio is at least 100 to 200 basis points above the 3.0% minimum. Thus, the effective minimum leverage ratio, for all practical purposes, is at least 4.0% or 5.0%. In addition to these uniform risk-based capital guidelines and leverage ratios that apply across the industry, the FRB and FDIC have the discretion to set individual minimum capital requirements for specific institutions at rates significantly above the minimum guidelines and ratios.

A bank that does not achieve and maintain the required capital levels may be issued a capital directive by the FDIC to ensure the maintenance of required capital levels. As discussed above, we are required to maintain certain levels of capital, as is the Bank. The regulatory capital guidelines as well as our actual capitalization on a consolidated basis and for the Bank and Bancorp as of December 31, 2004 follow:

Prompt Corrective Action. Federal banking agencies possess broad powers to take corrective and other supervisory action to resolve the problems of insured depository institutions, including those institutions that fall below one or more prescribed minimum capital ratios described above. An institution that, based upon its capital levels, is classified as well capitalized, adequately capitalized, or undercapitalized may be treated as though it were in the next lower capital category if the appropriate federal banking agency, after notice and opportunity for hearing, determines that an unsafe or unsound condition or an unsafe or unsound practice warrants such treatment. At each successive lower capital category, an insured depository institution is subject to more restrictions.

In addition to measures taken under the prompt corrective action provisions, commercial banking organizations may be subject to potential enforcement actions by the federal regulators for unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their businesses or for violations of any law, rule, regulation, or any condition imposed in writing by the agency or any written agreement with the agency. Enforcement actions may include the imposition of a conservator or receiver, the issuance of a cease-and-desist order

9

that can be judicially enforced, the termination of insurance of deposits (in the case of a depository institution), the imposition of civil money penalties, the issuance of directives to increase capital, the issuance of formal and informal agreements, the issuance of removal and prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties and the enforcement of such actions through injunctions or restraining orders based upon a judicial determination that the agency would be harmed if such equitable relief was not granted. Additionally, a holding company’s inability to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary banking organizations could serve as an additional basis for a regulatory action against the holding company.

Premiums for Deposit Insurance. Through the Bank Insurance Fund, or BIF, the FDIC insures our customer deposits up to prescribed limits for each depositor. The amount of FDIC assessments paid by each BIF member institution is based on its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other factors. Specifically, the assessment rate is based on the institution’s capitalization risk category and supervisory subgroup category. An institution’s capitalization risk category is based on the FDIC’s determination of whether the institution is well capitalized, adequately capitalized or less than adequately capitalized. An institution’s supervisory subgroup category is based on the FDIC’s assessment of the financial condition of the institution and the probability that FDIC intervention or other corrective action will be required.

The assessment rate currently ranges from zero to 27 cents per $100 of domestic deposits. The FDIC may increase or decrease the assessment rate schedule on a semi-annual basis. Due to continued growth in deposits and some recent bank failures, the BIF is nearing its minimum ratio of 1.25% of insured deposits as mandated by law. If the ratio drops below 1.25%, it is likely the FDIC will be required to assess premiums on all banks. Any increase in assessments or the assessment rate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, depending on the amount of the increase. Furthermore, the FDIC is authorized to raise insurance premiums under certain circumstances.

The FDIC is authorized to terminate a depository institution’s deposit insurance upon a finding by the FDIC that the institution’s financial condition is unsafe or unsound or that the institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices or has violated any applicable rule, regulation, order or condition enacted or imposed by the institution’s regulatory agency. The termination of deposit insurance for the bank would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

All FDIC-insured depository institutions must pay an annual assessment to provide funds for the payment of interest on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation, a federal corporation chartered under the authority of the Federal Housing Finance Board. The bonds, commonly referred to as FICO bonds, were issued to capitalize the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. The FDIC established the FICO assessment rates effective for the first half of 2004 at approximately 1.54 cents for each $100 of assessable deposits. The FICO assessments are adjusted quarterly to reflect changes in the assessment bases of the FDIC’s insurance funds and do not vary depending on a depository institution’s capitalization or supervisory evaluations.

Federal Home Loan Bank System. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (the “FHLB-SF”). Among other benefits, each Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”), serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region. Each FHLB is financed primarily from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB system. Each FHLB makes available loans or advances to its members in compliance with the policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors of the individual FHLB. A new capital plan of the FHLB-SF was approved and implemented by the Federal Housing Finance Board on April 1, 2004. The new capital plan incorporates a single class of stock with a par value of $100 per share, and may be issued, exchanged, redeemed, and repurchased only at par value. As an FHLB member, the bank is required to own capital stock in an FHLB in an amount equal to the greater of:

10

	•	a membership stock requirement with an initial cap of $25 million (100% of “membership asset value” as defined), or
	•	an activity based stock requirement (based on percentage of outstanding advances).

The new capital stock is redeemable on five years’ written notice, subject to certain conditions.

We do not believe that the FHLB-SF’s new capital plan has a material impact upon our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows. However, the bank could be required to purchase as much as 50% additional capital stock or sell as much as 50% of its proposed capital stock requirement at the discretion of the FHLB-SF.

Federal Reserve System. The FRB requires all depository institutions to maintain non-interest bearing reserves at specified levels against their transaction accounts and non-personal time deposits. At December 31, 2004, we were in compliance with these requirements.

Impact of Monetary Policies. The earnings and growth of the Company are subject to the influence of domestic and foreign economic conditions, including inflation, recession and unemployment. The earnings of the Company are affected not only by general economic conditions but also by the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States and federal agencies, particularly the FRB. The FRB can and does implement national monetary policy, such as seeking to curb inflation and combat recession, by its open market operations in United States Government securities and by its control of the discount rates applicable to borrowings by banks from the FRB. The actions of the FRB in these areas influence the growth of bank loans and leases, investments and deposits and affect the interest rates charged on loans and leases and paid on deposits. The FRB’s policies have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks and are expected to continue to do so in the future. The nature and timing of any future changes in monetary policies are not predictable.

Extensions of Credit to Insiders and Transactions with Affiliates. The Federal Reserve Act and FRB Regulation O place limitations and conditions on loans or extensions of credit to:

	•	a bank’s or bank holding company’s executive officers, directors and principal shareholders (i.e., in most cases, those persons who own, control or have power to vote more than 10% of any class of voting securities),
	•	any company controlled by any such executive officer, director or shareholder, or
	•	any political or campaign committee controlled by such executive officer, director or principal shareholder.

Loans and leases extended to any of the above persons must comply with loan-to-one-borrower limits, require prior full board approval when aggregate extensions of credit to the person exceed specified amounts, must be made on substantially the same terms (including interest rates and collateral) as, and follow credit-underwriting procedures that are not less stringent than, those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with non-insiders, and must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features. In addition, Regulation O provides that the aggregate limit on extensions of credit to all insiders of a bank as a group cannot exceed the bank’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. Regulation O also prohibits a bank from paying an overdraft on an account of an executive officer or director, except pursuant to a written pre-authorized interest-bearing extension of credit plan that specifies a method of repayment or a written pre-authorized transfer of funds from another account of the officer or director at the bank.

Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations. The banking regulatory agencies are focusing greater attention on compliance with consumer protection laws and their implementing regulations. Examination and enforcement have become more intense in nature, and insured institutions have been advised to monitor carefully compliance with such laws and regulations. The Company is subject to many federal consumer protection statutes and regulations, some of which are discussed below.

11

The Community Reinvestment Act (the “CRA”) is intended to encourage insured depository institutions, while operating safely and soundly, to help meet the credit needs of their communities. The CRA specifically directs the federal regulatory agencies, in examining insured depository institutions, to assess a bank’s record of helping meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound banking practices. The CRA further requires the agencies to take a financial institution’s record of meeting its community credit needs into account when evaluating applications for, among other things, domestic branches, mergers or acquisitions, or holding company formations. The agencies use the CRA assessment factors in order to provide a rating to the financial institution. The ratings range from a high of “outstanding” to a low of “substantial noncompliance.” In its last examination for CRA compliance, as of October 2002, the Bank was rated “satisfactory.”

The Equal Credit Opportunity Act (the “ECOA”) generally prohibits discrimination in any credit transaction, whether for consumer or business purposes, on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, marital status, age (except in limited circumstances), receipt of income from public assistance programs, or good faith exercise of any rights under the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

The Truth in Lending Act (the “TILA”) is designed to ensure that credit terms are disclosed in a meaningful way so that consumers may compare credit terms more readily and knowledgeably. As a result of the TILA, all creditors must use the same credit terminology to express rates and payments, including the annual percentage rate, the finance charge, the amount financed, the total of payments and the payment schedule, among other things.

The Fair Housing Act (the “FH Act”) regulates many practices, including making it unlawful for any lender to discriminate in its housing-related lending activities against any person because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, handicap or familial status. A number of lending practices have been found by the courts to be, or may be considered, illegal under the FH Act, including some that are not specifically mentioned in the FH Act itself.

The Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (the “HMDA”), in response to public concern over credit shortages in certain urban neighborhoods, requires public disclosure of information that shows whether financial institutions are serving the housing credit needs of the neighborhoods and communities in which they are located. The HMDA also includes a “fair lending” aspect that requires the collection and disclosure of data about applicant and borrower characteristics as a way of identifying possible discriminatory lending patterns and enforcing anti-discrimination statutes.

The Right to Financial Privacy Act (the “RFPA”) imposes a new requirement for financial institutions to provide new privacy protections to consumers. Financial institutions must provide disclosures to consumers of its privacy policy, and state the rights of consumers to direct their financial institution not to share their nonpublic personal information with third parties.

Finally, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (the “RESPA”) requires lenders to provide borrowers with disclosures regarding the nature and cost of real estate settlements. Also, RESPA prohibits certain abusive practices, such as kickbacks, and places limitations on the amount of escrow accounts.

Penalties for noncompliance or violations under the above laws may include fines, reimbursement and other penalties. Due to heightened regulatory concern related to compliance with CRA, ECOA, TILA, FH Act, HMDA, RFPA and RESPA generally, the Company may incur additional compliance costs or be required to expend additional funds for investments in its local community.

Recent and Proposed Legislation. Our operations and the operations of the Bank are subject to extensive regulation by federal, state, and local governmental authorities and are subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions on part or all of their respective operations. We believe that we are in substantial compliance in all material respects with all applicable federal, state and local laws, rules and regulations. Because our business and the business of the Bank is

12

highly regulated, the laws, rules and regulations applicable to each of them are subject to regular modification and change.

From time to time, legislation is enacted which has the effect of increasing the cost of doing business, limiting or expanding permissible activities or affecting the competitive balance between banks and other financial institutions. Proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the operations and taxation of banks and other financial institutions are frequently made in Congress, in the California legislature and before various bank regulatory agencies. Certain of the potentially significant changes which have been enacted recently and others, which are currently under consideration by Congress or various regulatory agencies, are discussed below.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act. On July 30, 2002, the President signed into law the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 implementing legislative reforms intended to address corporate and accounting fraud. The Act applies to publicly reporting companies. In addition to the establishment of a new accounting oversight board which will enforce auditing, quality control and independence standards and will be funded by fees from all publicly traded companies, the bill restricts provision of both auditing and consulting services by accounting firms. To maintain auditor independence, any non-audit services being provided to an audit client will require pre-approval by the company’s audit committee members. In addition, the audit partners must be rotated.

The Act also requires chief executive officers and chief financial officers, or their equivalent, to certify to the accuracy of periodic reports filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, subject to civil and criminal penalties if they knowingly or willfully violate this certification requirement. In addition, under the Act, legal counsel will be required to report evidence of a material violation of the securities laws or a breach of fiduciary duty by a company to its chief executive officer or its chief legal officer, and, if such officer does not appropriately respond, to report such evidence to the audit committee or other similar committee of the board of directors or the board itself. The Act also requires officers to forfeit certain bonuses and profits under certain circumstances. Specifically, if an issuer is required to prepare an accounting restatement due to the material noncompliance of the issuer, as a result of misconduct, with any financial reporting requirement under the securities laws, the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the issuer shall be required to reimburse the issuer for (1) any bonus or other incentive-based or equity-based compensation received by that person from the issuer during the 12-month period following the first public issuance or filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of the financial document embodying such financial reporting requirement; and (2) any profits realized from the sale of securities of the issuer during that 12-month period.

Longer prison terms and increased penalties will also be applied to corporate executives who violate federal securities laws, the period during which certain types of suits can be brought against a company or its officers has been extended, and bonuses issued to top executives prior to restatement of a company’s financial statements are now subject to disgorgement if such restatement was due to corporate misconduct. Executives are also prohibited from insider trading during retirement plan “blackout” periods, and loans to company executives are restricted. The Act accelerates the time frame for disclosures by public companies, as they must immediately disclose any material changes in their financial condition or operations. Directors and executive officers must also provide information for most changes in ownership in a company’s securities within twenty-four hours.

The Act also prohibits any officer or director of a company or any other person acting under their direction from taking any action to fraudulently influence, coerce, manipulate or mislead any independent public or certified accountant engaged in the audit of the company’s financial statements for the purpose of rendering the financial statements materially misleading. The Act also requires the SEC to prescribe rules requiring inclusion of an internal control report and assessment by management in the annual report to shareholders. In addition, the Act requires that each financial report required to be prepared in accordance with (or reconciled to) accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and filed with the SEC reflect all material correcting adjustments that are identified by a “registered public accounting firm” in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and the rules and regulations of the SEC.

13

USA PATRIOT Act. In the wake of the tragic events of September 11th, on October 26, 2001, the President signed the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001, referred to as the USA PATRIOT Act. Under the USA PATRIOT Act, financial institutions are subject to prohibitions regarding specified financial transactions and account relationships as well as enhanced due diligence and “know your customer” standards in their dealings with foreign financial institutions and foreign customers. For example, the enhanced due diligence policies, procedures, and controls generally require financial institutions to take reasonable steps:

	•	To conduct enhanced scrutiny of account relationships to guard against money laundering and report any suspicious transaction,
	•	To ascertain the identity of the nominal and beneficial owners of, and the source of funds deposited into, each account as needed to guard against money laundering and report any suspicious transactions,
	•	To ascertain for any foreign bank, the shares of which are not publicly traded, the identity of the owners of the foreign bank, and the nature and extent of the ownership interest of each such owner, and
	•	To ascertain whether any foreign bank provides correspondent accounts to other foreign banks and, if so, the identity of those foreign banks and related due diligence information.

The USA PATRIOT Act sets forth minimum standards for anti-money laundering programs, including:

	•	The development of internal policies, procedures, and controls,
	•	The designation of a compliance officer,
	•	An ongoing employee training program, and
	•	An independent audit function to test the programs.

The board of directors of the Bank adopted comprehensive policies and procedures to address the requirements of the USA PATRIOT Act.

Financial Services Modernization Legislation Act. On November 12, 1999 the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act, was signed into law. The Financial Services Modernization Act is intended to modernize the banking industry by removing barriers to affiliation among banks, insurance companies, the securities industry and other financial service providers. It provides financial organizations with the flexibility of structuring such affiliations through a holding company structure or through a financial subsidiary of a bank, subject to certain limitations. The Financial Services Modernization Act establishes a new type of bank holding company known as a financial holding company that may engage in an expanded list of activities that are financial in nature, which include securities and insurance brokerage, securities underwriting, insurance underwriting and merchant banking.

The Financial Services Modernization Act also sets forth a system of functional regulation that makes the FRB the “umbrella supervisor” for holding companies, while providing for the supervision of the holding company’s subsidiaries by other federal and state agencies. A bank holding company may not become a financial holding company if any of its subsidiary financial institutions are not well-capitalized or well-managed. Further, each bank subsidiary of the holding company must have received at least a satisfactory CRA rating. The Financial Services Modernization Act also expands the types of financial activities a national bank may conduct through a financial subsidiary, addresses state regulation of insurance, provides privacy protection for nonpublic customer information of financial institutions, modernizes the FHLB system and makes miscellaneous regulatory improvements. The FRB and the Secretary of the Treasury must coordinate their supervision regarding approval of new financial activities to be conducted through a financial holding company or through a financial subsidiary of a bank. While the provisions of the Financial Services Modernization Act regarding activities that may be conducted through a financial subsidiary directly apply only to national banks, those provisions indirectly apply to state-chartered banks.

14

In addition, the Bank is subject to other provisions of the Financial Services Modernization Act, including those relating to CRA, privacy and safe-guarding confidential customer information, regardless of whether we elect to become a financial holding company or to conduct activities through a financial subsidiary of the bank. We do not, however, currently intend to file a notice with the FRB to become a financial holding company or to engage in expanded financial activities through a financial subsidiary of the Bank.

We do not believe that the Financial Services Modernization Act will have a material adverse effect on our or the Bank’s operations in the near term. However, to the extent that it permits banks, securities firms, and insurance companies to affiliate, the financial services industry may experience further consolidation. The Financial Services Modernization Act is intended to grant to community banks certain powers as a matter of right that larger institutions have accumulated on an ad hoc basis. Nevertheless, this Act may have the result of increasing the amount of competition that we and the bank face from larger institutions and other types of companies offering financial products, many of which may have substantially more financial resources than us and the Bank.

Other. Various other legislation, including proposals to overhaul the bank regulatory system and to limit the investments that a depository institution may make with insured funds, is introduced into Congress or the California Legislature from time to time. We cannot determine the ultimate effect that any potential legislation, if enacted, or regulations promulgated there under, would have upon the business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows of us or the bank.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Other-Than-Temporary Impairment of Securities

In June 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) ratified Emerging Issues Task Force (EITF) Issue 03-1, The Meaning of Other-than-Temporary Impairment and Its Application to Certain Investments (EITF 03-1). EITF 03-1 includes additional guidance for evaluating and recording impairment losses on debt and equity investments, as well as disclosure requirements for investments that are deemed to be temporarily impaired. The proposed guidance indicates that an investor must have the intent and ability to hold an investment until a forecasted recovery of the fair value up to or beyond the cost of the investment in order to determine that any impairment is temporary. In September 2004, the FASB delayed the effective date of the recognition and measurement guidance of EITF 03-1, pending further deliberations. The disclosures for investments that are deemed temporarily impaired are included in Note 2 to the consolidated financial statements. Once the FASB has reached a final decision on the measurement and recognition provisions, the Company will evaluate the impact of the adoption of EITF 03-1.

Share-Based Payments

In December 2004, the FASB issued Statement Number 123 (revised 2004) (FAS 123 ®), Share-Based Payments. FAS 123 ® requires all entities to recognize compensation expense in an amount equal to the fair value of share-based payments such as stock options granted to employees. The Company is required to apply FAS 123 ® on a modified prospective method. Under this method, the Company is required to record compensation expense (as previous awards continue to vest) for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain outstanding at the date of adoption. In addition, the Company may elect to adopt FAS 123 ® by restating previously issued financial statements, basing the expense on that previously reported in their pro forma disclosures required by FAS 123. FAS 123 ® is effective for the first reporting period beginning after June 15, 2005. Management has not completed its evaluation of the effect that FAS 123 ® will have, but believes that the effect will be consistent with its previous pro forma disclosures.

15

Accounting for Loans or Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer

In December 2003, the Accounting Standards Executive Committee of the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants issued Statement of Position 03-03, Accounting for Certain Loans or Debt Securities Acquired in a Transfer (SOP). This SOP addresses accounting for differences between contractual cash flows and cash flows expected to be collected from an investor’s initial investment in loans or debt securities (loans) acquired in a transfer if those differences are attributable, at least in part, to credit quality. It also includes such loans acquired in purchase business combinations. This SOP does not apply to loans originated by the entity. This SOP limits the yield that may be accreted and requires that the excess of contractual cash flows over cash flows expected to be collected not be recognized as an adjustment of yield, loss accrual, or valuation allowance.

This SOP prohibits “carrying over” or creation of valuation allowances in the initial accounting for loans acquired in a transfer that are within the scope of this SOP. The prohibition of the valuation allowance carryover applies to the purchase of an individual loan, a pool of loans, a group of loans, and loans acquired in a purchase business combination.

This SOP is effective for loans acquired in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2004. In management’s opinion, the adoption of this pronouncement will not have a material impact on the Company’s financial position or results of operations.

ITEM 2. PROPERTIES

Of the Company’s twelve depository branches, nine are owned and three are leased. In addition the Company owns two administrative facilities and leases one administrative lending office. The Company also owns one real estate investment property that is expected to be sold and leases one property related to the 2003 branch acquisition that is expected to be either sub-let to another party or to expire at the end of the lease term in early 2006.

16

Total rental expenses under all leases, including premises, totaled $264,000, $179,000 and $85,000, in 2004, 2003 and 2002 respectively. The expiration dates of the leases vary, with the first such lease expiring during 2006 and the last such lease expiring during 2008. Future minimum lease payments in dollars are as follows:

The Company maintains insurance coverage on its premises, leaseholds and equipment, including business interruption and record reconstruction coverage. The branch properties and non-branch offices are adequate, suitable, in good condition and have adequate parking facilities for customers and employees. The Company and Bank are limited in their investments in real property under Federal and state banking laws. Generally, investments in real property are either for the Company and Bank use or are in real property and real property interests in the ordinary course of the Bank’s business.

ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

From time to time, the Company and/or its subsidiary are a party to claims and legal proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. In the opinion of the Company’s management, the amount of ultimate liability with respect to such proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company taken as a whole.

ITEM 4. SUBMISSION OF MATTERS TO A VOTE OF SECURITY HOLDERS

No matters were submitted to vote of the security holders during the fourth quarter of the period covered by this report.

17

PART II

ITEM 5.	MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

The Company’s common stock is quoted on the Over-The-Counter (OTC) Bulletin Board under the ticker symbol “PLBC”. As of December 31, 2004, there were 3,267,465 shares of the Company’s stock outstanding held by approximately 1,600 shareholders of record as of the same date. The following table shows the high and low prices for the common stock, for each quarter as reported by Yahoo Finance.

Dividends paid to shareholders by the Company are subject to restrictions set forth in California General Corporation Law, which provides that a corporation may make a distribution to its shareholders if retained earnings immediately prior to the dividend payout are at least equal to the amount of the proposed distribution. As a bank holding company without significant assets other than its equity position in the Bank, the Company’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders depends primarily upon dividends it receives from the Bank. Such dividends paid by the Bank to the Company are subject to certain limitations. See “Item 1 Business — Supervision and Regulation — Capital Standards”.

It is the policy of the Company to periodically distribute excess retained earnings to the shareholders through the payment of cash dividends. Such dividends help promote shareholder value and capital adequacy by enhancing the marketability of the Company’s stock. All authority to provide a return to the shareholders in the form of a cash or stock dividend or split rests with the Board of Directors (the “Board). The Board will periodically, but on no regular schedule, review the appropriateness of a cash dividend payment. The Board by resolution shall set the amount, the record date and the payment date of any dividend after considering numerous factors, including the Company’s regulatory capital requirements, earnings, financial condition and the need for capital for expanded growth and general economic conditions. Although no assurance can be given that cash or stock dividends will be paid in the future the Company’s dividend payout ratio over the last five years has averaged approximately 25%.

18

Securities Authorized for Issuance under Equity Compensation Plans. The following table sets forth securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans as for December 31, 2004.

For additional information related to the above plans see Note 10 of the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data of this Annual Report on Form 10K.

19

ITEM 6. SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

The following table presents a summary of selected financial data and should be read in conjunction with the Company’s consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included under Item 8 – Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.

20

ITEM 7. MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

General

We are a bank holding company for Plumas Bank, a California state-chartered commercial bank. We derive our income primarily from interest received on real estate related, commercial and consumer loans and, to a lesser extent, interest on investment securities, fees received in connection with servicing deposit and loan deposit customers and fees from the sale or referral of loans. Our major operating expenses are the interest we pay on deposits and borrowings and general operating expenses. We rely on locally-generated deposits to provide us with funds for making loans.

We are subject to competition from other financial institutions and our operating results, like those of other financial institutions operating in California, are significantly influenced by economic conditions in California, including the strength of the real estate market. In addition, both the fiscal and regulatory policies of the federal and state government and regulatory authorities that govern financial institutions and market interest rates also impact the Bank’s financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

One of our strategic objectives is to expand our banking service activities in the Truckee/Tahoe region and the adjacent communities. Consistent with this objective, in late 2003 we opened a de novo branch in Tahoe City. Also in late 2003 we bought five branches located within our existing service area from Placer Sierra Bank. Of the five branches purchased, two were located in the Truckee/Tahoe region, specifically in the communities of Truckee and Kings Beach. This helped further strengthen our presence in this region.

During 2004 we focused on migrating the liquidity generated from the 2003 branch purchases into higher-yielding loan balances.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our accounting policies are integral to understanding the financial results reported. Our most complex accounting policies require management’s judgment to ascertain the valuation of assets, liabilities, commitments and contingencies. We have established detailed policies and control procedures that are intended to ensure valuation methods are well controlled and applied consistently from period to period. The following is a brief description of our current accounting policies involving significant management valuation judgments.

Allowance for Loan Losses. The allowance for loan losses represents our best estimate of losses inherent in the existing loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses is increased by the provision for loan losses charged to expense and reduced by loans charged off, net of recoveries.

We evaluate our allowance for loan losses quarterly. We believe that the allowance for loan losses is a “critical accounting estimate” because it is based upon management’s assessment of various factors affecting the collectibility of the loans, including current economic conditions, past credit experience, delinquency status, the value of the underlying collateral, if any, and a continuing review of the portfolio of loans.

We determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses, primarily on an analysis of the various components of the loan portfolio, including all significant credits on an individual basis. We segment the loan portfolio into as many components as practical. Each component has similar characteristics, such as risk classification, past due status, type of loan or lease, industry or collateral.

We cannot provide you with any assurance that further economic difficulties or other circumstances which would adversely affect our borrowers and their ability to repay outstanding loans will not occur which would be reflected in increased losses in our loan portfolio, which could result in actual losses that exceed reserves previously established.

Available for Sale Securities. Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 115, Accounting for Certain Investments in Debt and Equity Securities, requires that available-for-sale securities be carried at

21

fair value. We believe this is a “critical accounting estimate” in that the fair value of a security is based on quoted market prices or if quoted market prices are not available, fair values are extrapolated from the quoted prices of similar instruments. Adjustments to the available-for-sale securities fair value impact the consolidated financial statements by increasing or decreasing assets and shareholders’ equity.

Deferred Income Taxes. Deferred income taxes reflect the estimated future tax effects of temporary differences between the reported amount of assets and liabilities for financial reporting purposes and such amounts as measured by tax laws and regulations. We use an estimate of future earnings to support our position that the benefit of our deferred tax assets will be realized. If future income should prove non-existent or less than the amount of the deferred tax assets within the tax years to which they may be applied, the asset may not be realized and our net income will be reduced.

Impairment of Core Deposit Intangible. The core deposit intangible represents the excess of the premiums paid over the fair value of the assets and liabilities acquired in the branch acquisitions. In accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (SFAS) No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets and SFAS No. 144 Accounting for the Impairment or Disposal of Long-Lived Assets, the core deposit intangible will be amortized over its expected useful life and will evaluated for impairment at least annually and whenever events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount of an asset may not be recoverable. If the fair value of the asset is determined to be less than the carrying amount, the core deposit intangible will be written down through a charge to operations.

Stock-Based Compensation. The Company accounts for its stock-based compensation under the recognition and measurement principles of Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees, and related interpretations. Since the Company’s stock option plan provides for the issuance of options at a price of no less than the fair market value at the date of the grant, no compensation expense is recognized in the financial statements unless the options are modified after the grant date.

In December 2004, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Statement Number 123 (revised 2004) (“FAS 123 (R)”), Share-Based Payments. FAS 123 (R) requires all entities to recognize compensation expense in an amount equal to the fair value of share-based payments such as stock options granted to employees. The Company is required to apply FAS 123 (R) on a modified prospective method. Under this method, the Company is required to record compensation expense (as previous awards continue to vest) for the unvested portion of previously granted awards that remain outstanding at the date of adoption. Management believes that the effect of FAS 123 (R) will be consistent with its pro forma disclosures included in Note 2 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 — Financial Statements and Supplementary Data. The fair value of each option is estimated on the date of grant and amortized over the service period using an option pricing model. Critical assumptions that affect the estimated fair value of each option include expected stock price volatility, dividend yields, option life and forfeiture rates and the risk-free interest rate.

The following discussion is designed to provide a better understanding of significant trends related to the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, liquidity, capital resources and interest rate sensitivity. It pertains to the Company’s financial condition, changes in financial condition and results of operations as of December 31, 2004 and 2003 and for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2004. The discussion should be read in conjunction with the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements and notes thereto and the other financial information appearing elsewhere herein.

Overview

The Company’s net income increased $365,000, or 11.1%, to $3,646,000 for the year ended December 31, 2004 from $3,281,000 for the same period in 2003. Net income was $3,154,000 for the year ended December 31, 2002. The primary contributors to the increase in net income for 2004 were a $1.7 million increase in interest income and a $1 million increase in non-interest income largely offset by a $2.5 million increase in non-interest expenses.

22

Total assets at December 31, 2004 increased $27 million, or 7%, to $417 million from $390 million at December 31, 2003. Growth in total assets was concentrated in the loan portfolio. The loan portfolio grew $49 million, or 23%, to $264 million during 2004. Growth in loans was funded by growth in deposits and declines in Federal funds sold and cash and due from bank balances. Deposits grew $23 million, or 6%, to $379 million at December 31, 2004 from $356 million at December 31, 2003 while Federal funds sold and cash and due from banks decreased $19 million.

The return on average assets was 0.89% for 2004, down from 0.97% for 2003. The return on average equity was 13.5% for 2004, up from 12.7% for 2003. Although the Company reported its sixteenth consecutive year of earnings growth in 2004, this year’s growth was outpaced by growth in assets. Average assets increased $70 million, or 21%, due in large part to the acquisition, in November 2003 of five branches from Placer Sierra Bank.

Results of Operations

Net Interest Income before Provision for Loan Losses

The following table presents for the years indicated the distribution of consolidated average assets, liabilities and shareholders’ equity. It also presents the amounts of interest income from interest-earning assets and the resultant yields expressed in both dollars and yield percentages, as well as, the amounts of interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities and the resultant cost expressed in both dollars and rate percentages. Nonaccrual loans are included in the calculation of average loans while nonaccrued interest thereon is excluded from the computation of yields earned:

23

24

The following table sets forth changes in interest income and interest expense, for the years indicated and the amount of change attributable to variances in volume, rates and the combination of volume and rates based on the relative changes of volume and rates:

2004 compared to 2003. Net interest income before provision for loan losses is the difference between interest income and interest expense. Net interest income was $17.2 million for 2004, an increase of $1.8 million, or 11%, from $15.4 million for 2003. The increase in net interest income was attributed to volume increases in average loan and investment balances combined with declines in rates paid on deposits, partially offset by declines in loan yields and volume increases in average deposit balances. The average loan balances were $233.6 million for 2004, up $19.5 million, or 9%, from the $214.2 million for 2003. The average investment balances were $113.7 million for 2004, up $40.9 million, or 56%, from the $72.7 million for 2003. Offsetting the benefits of the increased loan volume was the continuing impact of the falling interest rate environment which began in 2001. Although rates began to rise during the second half of 2004, the average loan yield was 7.03% for 2004, down 48 basis points, or 6%, from the 7.51% for 2003.

Interest expense decreased $100,000, or 3%, to $2.9 million for 2004, down from $3.0 million for 2003. The decrease in interest expense was primarily attributed to rate decreases for all interest bearing deposits, with the largest declines in time and savings deposits. The rate decreases were offset by volume increases primarily in savings and time deposit balances. The average rate paid on time deposits was 1.88% for 2004, down 30 basis points, or 14%, from the 2.18% paid for 2003. The average rate paid on savings deposits was 0.45% for 2004, down 18 basis points, or 28%, from the 0.63% paid for 2003. The average savings deposit balances, were $64.5 million for 2004, up $15.6 million, or 32%, from the $48.9 million for 2003. The average time deposit balances, were $93.7 million for 2004, up $10.5 million, or 13%, from the $83.2 million for 2003.

Net interest margin is net interest income expressed as a percentage of average interest-earning assets. The net interest margin for 2004 declined 39 basis points to 4.77%, down from 5.16% for 2003. The adverse effects of the falling interest rate environment, which began in 2001, on the Company’s loan portfolio offset the positive affects of the increasing loan and investment balances and declining cost of funds and resulted in the decline in the net interest margin when comparing the periods of 2004 and 2003.

2003 compared to 2002. Net interest income was $15.4 million for 2003, an increase of $1.0 million, or 7%, from $14.4 million for 2002. The increase in net interest income was attributed to declines in rates paid on deposits combined with volume increases in average loan and investment balances, partially offset

25

by declines in the yields on interest-earning assets. The average loan balances were $214.2 million for 2003, up $16.3 million, or 8%, from the $197.9 million for 2002. Offsetting the benefits of the increased loan volume was the continuing impact of the falling interest rate environment which began in 2001. The average loan yield was 7.51% for 2003, down 60 basis points, or 7%, from the 8.11% for 2002.

Interest expense decreased $1.0 million, or 25%, to $3.0 million for 2003, down from $4.0 million for 2002. The decrease in interest expense was primarily attributed to rate decreases for both time and money market deposits, slightly offset by volume increases in other borrowings. The average rate paid on time deposits was 2.18% for 2003, down 94 basis points, or 30%, from the 3.12% paid for 2002. The average rate paid on money market deposits was 0.85% for 2003, down 65 basis points, or 43%, from the 1.50% paid for 2002. The average other borrowings balances, which primarily represent junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures, were $6.4 million for 2003, up $4.8 million, or 294%, from the $1.6 million for 2002. In September of 2002, $6 million of junior subordinated debentures were issued by the Company.

The net interest margin for 2003 declined 32 basis points to 5.16%, down from 5.48% for 2002. The adverse effects of the falling interest rate environment, which began in 2001, on the Company’s interest-earning assets offset the positive affects of the declining cost of funds and increasing loan and investment balances and resulted in the decline in the net interest margin when comparing the periods of 2003 and 2002.

Provision for Loan Losses

The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level that management believes will be adequate to absorb inherent losses on existing loans based on an evaluation of the collectibility of the loans and prior loan loss experience. The evaluations take into consideration such factors as changes in the nature and volume of the portfolio, overall portfolio quality, review of specific problem loans, and current economic conditions that may affect the borrower’s ability to pay. The allowance for loan losses is based on estimates, and ultimate losses may vary from the current estimates. These estimates are reviewed periodically and, as adjustments become necessary, they are reported in earnings in the periods in which they become known. See the sections titled Asset Quality and Analysis of Allowance for Loan Losses for further discussion of loan quality trends and the provision for loan losses.

The Company recorded $750,000 in provision for loan losses for both 2004 and 2003 and $825,000 for 2002. There was no change in the level of the provision for loan losses from 2003 to 2004. Although there was an increase of $49 million, or 22%, in the loan portfolio during 2004, the affects of this loan growth on the provision were offset by a reduction in identified potential risks currently existing in the loan portfolio. Net charge-offs as a percentage of loans improved during 2004, declining to 0.26%, down 4 basis points, or 13%, from the 2003 level of 0.30%. Similarly, the reduction in the provision for loan losses in 2003 from 2002 was attributed to the general improvement in the overall credit quality of the loan portfolio. Nonaccrual loans ended 2003 with a balance of $847 thousand down $864 thousand, or 50%, from the $1.7 million 2002 year end balance. Additionally, loan growth for the year-ended 2003 was fairly modest at $10.2 million, or 5%. Management assesses its loan quality monthly to maintain an adequate allowance for loan losses. Based on information currently available, management believes that the allowance for loan losses is adequate to absorb potential risks in the portfolio. However, no assurance can be given that the Company may not sustain charge-offs which are in excess of the allowance in any given period. The Company’s loan portfolio composition and non-performing assets are further discussed under the financial condition section that begins on page 29.

26

Non-Interest Income

The following table sets forth the components of non-interest income for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.

2004 compared to 2003. During 2004, total non-interest income increased $1,043,000, or 28%, to $4.8 million, up from $3.8 million for 2003. The increase in non-interest income was primarily the result of increases in service charge revenue, increases in the cash surrender value of company-owned life insurance policies (“COLI”) and gains on sale of real estate slightly offset by declines in total gains recorded on the sale of loans and investment securities and fewer commissions on mortgage loans processed.

A large portion of the growth in service charge revenue resulted from an increase in the Company’s overall number of fee generating accounts. As a result of the acquisition in mid-November 2003 of five branches from a competitor, the Company began servicing over 7,300 new deposit accounts. In addition, during April 2004 the Company implemented a new overdraft privilege program for select deposit relationships thereby increasing service charge revenue. Lastly, beginning in 2004 the Company separated fee income from expenses related to its outsourced ATM and debit card activity. Largely as a result of this change, service fee income related to ATM and debit cards increased $332 thousand however, expenses related to these products recorded as outside service fees under non-interest expense increased by $173 thousand.

During the last half of 2003, the Company increased its holding in COLI by $3.2 million to provide additional coverage for an executive officer of the Company. As a result, during 2004 the Company realized a full year’s tax-exempt earnings from these policies as opposed to only half a year in 2003.

The increase in “other income” resulted from the Company recording gains of $135 thousand in June 2004 on the sale of two unused banking offices that were acquired from a competitor as part of the $45.5 million deposit purchase in mid-November 2003.

During the second half of 2004, as the rate environment began to shift upward, opportunities to record gains on the sale of investment securities significantly diminished.

Lastly, the increase in the rate environment also resulted in fewer mortgage loans referrals to our third party processor resulting in a decline in loan origination fee income as well as fewer non-conforming and specialty mortgage loans processed internally and sold by the Company.

27

2003 compared to 2002. During 2003, total non-interest income increased $497,000, or 15%, to $3.8 million, up from $3.3 million for 2002. The increase in non-interest income is primarily attributable to gains on the sale of investment securities, earnings on additional company-owned life insurance policies (“COLI”), mortgage loan referral fees and increases in the number of fee generating accounts. Throughout 2003 the Company took advantage of opportunities to record gains by selling $32.4 million of U.S. treasury and agency available-for-sale investment securities, gains on these securities amounted to $328 thousand. Also during 2003 the Bank increased its investment in COLI by $3.2 million to provide additional coverage for an executive officer of the Company. The increase in COLI balances resulted in an additional $96 thousand in tax-exempt earnings on the policies. Lastly, during 2003 the outsourcing of the mortgage lending unit resulted in commissions of $86 thousand on mortgage loans processed by our third-party mortgage service.

Non-Interest Expense

The following table sets forth the components of other non-interest expense for the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002.

2004 compared to 2003. During 2004, non-interest expense increased $2.5 million, or 19%, to $15.6 million, up from $13.1 million for 2003. The increase in non-interest expense was primarily the result of increases in salaries and employee benefits, occupancy and equipment, professional fees and deposit premium amortization.

During 2004 salaries and employee benefits increased $1.4 million, or 19%, due primarily to the staffing additions related to the full years operations of the Bank’s three new branch offices, expansion of the Company’s centralized lending function, staffing additions to manage the overall growth of the Company and increased employee benefit costs related to health-care and the Company’s salary continuation plans.

Occupancy and equipment expense increased $370 thousand, or 16%, over the prior year primarily as a result of additional depreciation and operating costs associated with the three new branches. These new branches began serving the communities of Tahoe City, Kings Beach and Loyalton in November 2003. Other increases in occupancy and equipment relate to depreciation on capitalized upgrades to the Company’s network systems.

28

Professional fees increased $204 thousand, or 52%, from 2003 to 2004. The increases in professional fees related primarily to several consulting projects conducted in 2004. These projects included an operational and efficiency review of the lending function, development of a plan to enhance the customer relationship management (CRM) process and development and implementation of the new overdraft privilege program.

Lastly, deposit premium amortization increased $138 thousand, or 86%, over the prior year as a result of additional premium amortization related to $45.5 million of deposits purchased in November 2003.

2003 compared to 2002. During 2003, non-interest expense increased $1.5 million, or 13%, to $13.1 million, up from $11.6 million for 2002. The increase in non-interest expense is primarily due to increased salary and benefit costs, occupancy and equipment depreciation expense partially offset by decreases in professional fees.

Salary and benefit costs increased $1.2 million, or 19% from 2002 to 2003. The increase in salary and benefit costs was the result of continued expansion of the Company’s centralized lending efforts, additional personnel as a result of expanding the branch network with the addition of three new branches, other staffing additions to manage the overall growth and expansion of the Company and increased employee benefit costs related to health-care, executive officer salary continuation plans and workers compensation expense.

Occupancy and equipment expense increased $549 thousand, or 31% from 2002 to 2003. The increases to occupancy expense related primarily to lease costs for both the de novo branch in Tahoe City, leased centralized lending facilities in Truckee, depreciation costs associated with the Company’s new credit administration facility and remodeling costs associated with the Company’s administrative headquarters. Although opened for business in November 2003, the Tahoe City office was leased for the majority of 2003. The increases to equipment expense related primarily to additional depreciation and operating costs associated with new network security and monitoring systems, upgrades to the network’s operating system, enhancements to the item processing system and installation of a new automated teller platform system.

Professional fees decreased $281 thousand, or 42%, from 2002 to 2003. The decreases in professional fees related to significant 2002 information technology consulting projects and legal costs incurred to complete the merger and reorganization of Plumas Bank under the Company.

Financial Condition

Loan Portfolio. The Company continues to manage the mix of its loan portfolio consistent with its identity as a community bank serving the financing needs of all sectors of the area it serves. Although the Company offers a broad array of financing options, it continues to concentrate its focus on small to medium sized commercial businesses. These commercial loans offer diversification as to industries and types of businesses, thus limiting material exposure in any industry concentrations. The Company offers both fixed and floating rate loans and obtains collateral in the form of real property, business assets and deposit accounts, but looks to business and personal cash flows as its primary source of repayment.

The Company’s largest historical lending categories are real estate mortgage loans, commercial loans and consumer loans. These categories accounted for approximately 38.3%, 16.0% and 22.1%, respectively of the Company’s total loan portfolio at December 31, 2004, and approximately 31.0%, 23.4% and 21.4% respectively, of the Company’s total loan portfolio at December 31, 2003. In addition, the Company’s real estate-related loans, including real estate mortgage loans, real estate construction loans, consumer equity lines of credit, and agricultural loans secured by real estate comprised 66.9% of the total loan portfolio at December 31, 2004. Moreover, the business activities of the Company currently are focused in the California counties of Plumas, Nevada, Placer, Lassen, Modoc, Shasta, and Sierra. Consequently, the results of operations and financial condition of the Company are dependent upon the general trends in these California economies and, in particular, the residential and commercial real estate markets. In addition, the concentration of the Company’s operations in these areas of California exposes it to greater risk than other

29

banking companies with a wider geographic base in the event of catastrophes, such as earthquakes, fires and floods in these regions in California.

The rates of interest charged on variable rate loans are set at specific increments in relation to the Company’s published lending rate and vary as the Company’s lending rate changes. At December 31, 2004 and 2003, approximately 73% and 70%, respectively, of the Company’s loan portfolio was compromised of variable rate loans. While real estate mortgage, commercial and consumer lending remain the foundation of the Company’s historical loan mix, some changes in the mix have occurred due to the changing economic environment and the resulting change in demand for certain loan types. In addition, the Company remains committed to the agricultural industry in Northeastern California and will continue to pursue high quality agricultural loans as an important component of its overall loan portfolio. Agricultural loans include both commercial and commercial real estate loans. At December 31, 2004, the Company’s agricultural loans increased slightly to $31.1 million, or 11.6% of the Company’s total loan portfolio, from $26.5 million, or 12.2%, at December 31, 2003.

The following table sets forth the amounts of loans outstanding by category as of the dates indicated.

The following table sets forth the maturity/repricing of gross loan categories as of December 31, 2004. Also provided with respect to such loans are the amounts due after one year, classified according to sensitivity to changes in interest rates:

Analysis of Asset Quality and Allowance for Loan Losses. The Company attempts to minimize credit risk through its underwriting and credit review policies. The Company’s credit review process includes internally prepared credit reviews as well as contracting with an outside firm to conduct periodic credit reviews. The Company’s management and lending officers evaluate the loss exposure of classified and impaired loans on a bi-weekly basis, or more frequently as loan conditions change. The Board of Directors

30

through the loan committee, reviews the asset quality of new and criticized loans on a monthly basis and reports the findings to the full Board of Directors. In management’s opinion, this loan review system facilitates the early identification of potential criticized loans.

Net charge-offs during the year ended December 31, 2004 totaled $552,000, or 0.21% of total loans, compared to $657,000, or 0.30% of total loans, for the comparable period in 2003 and $507,000, or 0.24% of total loan for the comparable period of 2002. The allowance for loan losses stood at 1.03% of total loans as of December 31, 2004, versus 1.18% of total loans as of December 31, 2003.

The allowance for loan losses is established through charges to earnings in the form of the provision for loan losses. Loan losses are charged to and recoveries are credited to the allowance for loan losses. The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level deemed appropriate by management to provide for known and inherent risks in loans. The adequacy of the allowance for loan losses is based upon management’s continuing assessment of various factors affecting the collectibility of loans; including current economic conditions, maturity of the portfolio, size of the portfolio, industry concentrations, borrower credit history, collateral, the existing allowance for loan losses, independent credit reviews, current charges and recoveries to the allowance for loan losses and the overall quality of the portfolio as determined by management, regulatory agencies, and independent credit review consultants retained by the Company. There is no precise method of predicting specific losses or amounts which may ultimately be charged off on particular segments of the loan portfolio. The collectibility of a loan is subjective to some degree, but must relate to the borrower’s financial condition, cash flow, quality of the borrower’s management expertise, collateral and guarantees, and state of the local economy. When determining the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, the Company follows the guidelines set forth in the Interagency Policy Statement on the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (“Statement”) issued jointly by banking regulators during July 2001. The Statement outlines characteristics that should be used in segmentation of the loan portfolio for purposes of the analysis including risk classification, past due status, type of loan, industry or collateral in accordance with Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 5 “Accounting for Contingencies”. It also outlines factors to consider when adjusting the loss factors for various segments of the loan portfolio. In addition, the Company incorporates the Securities and Exchange Commission Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 102, which represents the SEC staff’s view related to methodologies and supporting documentation for the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses that should be observed by all public companies in complying with the federal securities laws and the Commission’s interpretations.

The Company’s methodology for assessing the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses consists of several key elements, which include but are not limited to:

	•	specific allocation for problem graded loans (“classified loans”),
	•	general or formula allocation,
	•	and discretionary allocation based on loan portfolio segmentation

In addition, the Company’s methodology incorporates the following accounting pronouncements in determining the adequacy of the allowance related to impaired loans:

	•	Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“SFAS”) No. 114, “Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan” and
	•	SFAS 118, “Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan — Income Recognition and Disclosures.”

Specific allocations are established based on management’s periodic evaluation of loss exposure inherent in classified, impaired, and other loans in which management believes that the collection of principal and interest under the original terms of the loan agreement are in question. For purposes of this analysis, classified loans are grouped by internal risk classifications which are “special mention”, “substandard”, “doubtful”, and “loss”. Special mention loans are currently performing but are potentially weak, as the borrower has begun to exhibit deteriorating trends, which if not corrected, could jeopardize repayment of the loan and result in further downgrade. Substandard loans have well-defined weaknesses which, if not corrected, could jeopardize the full satisfaction of the debt. A loan classified as “doubtful” has critical

31

weaknesses that make full collection of the obligation improbable. Classified loans, as defined by the Company, include loans categorized as substandard and doubtful. Loans classified as loss are immediately charged off.

Formula allocations are calculated by applying loss factors to outstanding loans with similar characteristics. Loss factors are based on the Company’s historical loss experience and on the internal risk grade of those loans and may be adjusted for significant factors that, in management’s judgment, affect the collectibility of the portfolio as of the evaluation date. The formula allocation analysis incorporates loan losses over the past twelve quarters (three years). Loss factors are adjusted to recognize and quantify the estimated loss exposure resulting from changes in market conditions and trends in the Company’s loan portfolio.

The discretionary allocation is based upon management’s evaluation of various loan segment conditions that are not directly measured in the determination of the formula and specific allowances. The conditions may include, but are not limited to, general economic and business conditions affecting the key lending areas of the Company, credit quality trends, collateral values, loan volumes and concentrations, and other business conditions.

The following table provides certain information for the years indicated with respect to the Company’s allowance for loan losses as well as charge-off and recovery activity.

The Company places loans 90 days or more past due on nonaccrual status unless the loan is well secured and in the process of collection. A loan is considered to be in the process of collection if, based on a probable specific event, it is expected that the loan will be repaid or brought current. Generally, this collection period would not exceed 90 days. When a loan is placed on nonaccrual status the Company’s general policy is to reverse and charge against current income previously accrued but unpaid interest. Interest income on such loans is subsequently recognized only to the extent that cash is received and future collection of principal is deemed by management to be probable. Where the collectibility of the principal or interest on a loan is considered to be doubtful by management, it is placed on nonaccrual status prior to becoming 90 days delinquent.

Impaired loans are measured based on the present value of the expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. The

32

amount of impaired loans is not directly comparable to the amount of nonperforming loans disclosed later in this section. The primary differences between impaired loans and nonperforming loans is that impaired loan recognition considers not only loans 90 days or more past due, restructured loans and nonaccrual loans but also may include problem loans other than delinquent loans.

The following table sets forth the amount of the Company’s nonperforming assets as of the dates indicated. None of the Company’s loans were troubled debt restructurings.

At December 31, 2004 and 2003, the Company’s recorded investment in loans for which impairment has been recognized totaled $1.2 million and $0.8 million, respectively. The specific allowance for loan losses related to impaired loans was $121,000 and $59,000 at December 31, 2004 and 2003, respectively. The average recorded investment in impaired loans was $1.6 million, $2.0 million and $1.4 million during the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, respectively. In most cases, the Company uses the cash basis method of income recognition for impaired loans. For the years ended December 31, 2004, 2003 and 2002, the Company recognized $63,000, $143,000 and $29,000, respectively, of income on such loans.

It is the policy of management to make additions to the allowance for loan losses so that it remains adequate to absorb the inherent risk of loss in the portfolio. Management believes that the allowance at December 31, 2004 is adequate. However, the determination of the amount of the allowance is judgmental and subject to economic conditions which cannot be predicted with certainty. Accordingly, the Company cannot predict whether charge-offs of loans in excess of the allowance may be required in future periods.

Investment Portfolio and Federal Funds Sold. Total investment securities and Federal funds sold decreased $7.9 million, or 7%, to $113.3 million as of December 31, 2004, down from $121.2 million at December 31, 2003. The slight decline in these balances in 2004 directly relates to our planned migration of assets, acquired from the recent branch and deposit purchase, from the investment securities portfolio to the loan portfolio. In late 2003, when the Company initially received funds for assuming the deposit liabilities of the acquired branches, these funds were directed into shorter-term investment securities. However, over time we plan to transition these assets into higher-yielding loan balances.

The composition of the portfolio as of the end of 2004 was fairly consistent with the composition of the portfolio as of the end of 2003. The investment portfolio balances in U.S. Treasuries, U.S. Government agencies, corporate debt securities and municipal obligations comprised 9%, 69%, 9% and 13% respectively, at December 31, 2004 versus 10%, 72%, 11% and 7% respectively, at December 31, 2003.

33

Two trends that continue in the investment portfolio are the growth in holdings of mortgage-backed securities and tax-exempt municipal securities.

During 2003, the Company began investing in mortgage-backed securities of U.S. Government agencies to increase interest income and provide cash flows for liquidity and reinvestment opportunities. At December 31, 2004, total balances in these mortgage-backed securities amounted to $20.6 million. Although these pass-through securities typically have final maturities of between ten and fifteen years, the pass-through nature of the monthly principal and interest payments is expected to significantly reduce the average life of these securities.

Lastly, the Company has continued to expand its holdings in longer-term municipal securities. In addition to providing diversified insured investment holdings, these securities provide attractive tax equivalent yields for the Company. Since the majority of the interest earnings on these securities are not taxable, the growth in municipal securities has resulted in significantly lowering the effective tax rate of the Company.

Investment Portfolio. The Company classifies its investment securities as available-for-sale or held-to-maturity. Plumas Bancorp’s intent is to hold all securities classified as held-to-maturity until maturity and management believes that it has the ability to do so. Securities classified as available-for-sale may be sold to implement the Company’s asset/liability management strategies and in response to changes in interest rates, prepayment rates and similar factors.

The following tables summarize the values of the Company’s investment securities held on the dates indicated:

34

The following tables summarize the maturities of the Company’s securities at their carrying value and their weighted average yields at December 31, 2004. Yields on tax-exempt municipal obligations have been computed using a cost of funds rate of 0.71%.