Attached files

file filename
EX-31.1 - EX-31.1 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex31d1.htm
EX-99.1 - EX-99.1 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex99d1.htm
EX-32.1 - EX-32.1 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex32d1.htm
EX-31.2 - EX-31.2 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex31d2.htm
EX-32.2 - EX-32.2 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex32d2.htm
EX-23.1 - EX-23.1 - CITIZENS FIRST CORPa11-2470_1ex23d1.htm

Table of Contents

 

 

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC  20549

 

Form 10-K

 

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

 

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2010

 

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

 

For the transition period from          to         

 

Commission File Number 001-33126

 

CITIZENS FIRST CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

Kentucky

 

61-0912615

(State or other jurisdiction of

 

(I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

incorporation or organization)

 

 

 

1065 Ashley Street, Bowling Green, Kentucky

 

42103

(Address of Principal Executive Offices)

 

(Zip Code)

 

Issuer’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code: (270) 393-0700

 

Securities registered under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act:

 

Title of each class

 

Name of each exchange on which registered

Common stock, no par value

 

The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC

 

Securities registered under Section 12(g) of the Exchange Act:  None

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes o  No o

 

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K(Section229.405) 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.  o

 

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

 

Large accelerated filer o

 

Accelerated filer o

 

 

 

Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

 

Smaller reporting company x

 

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

 

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates (for purposes of this calculation, “affiliates” are considered to be the directors and executive officers of the issuer) computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked prices of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter.   $12,490,112 as of June 30, 2010

 

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date:  1,968,777 shares of common stock as of March 25, 2011

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Portions of the registrant’s proxy statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 18, 2011 are incorporated by reference into Part III.

 

 

 



Table of Contents

 

Citizens First Corporation

Table of Contents

 

Part I:

 

 

 

 

 

Item 1

Business

5

 

 

 

Item 2

Properties

38

 

 

 

Item 3

Legal Proceedings

39

 

 

 

Item 4

[Removed and Reserved]

 

 

 

 

Part II:

 

 

 

 

 

Item 5

Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, RelatedStockholder Matters and Issued Purchases of Equity Securities

40

 

 

 

Item 6

Selected Financial Data

41

 

 

 

Item 7

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

42

 

 

 

Item 7A

Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

65

 

 

 

Item 8

Financial Statements and Supplementary Data

67

 

 

 

Item 9

Changes In and Disagreements with Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure

112

 

 

 

Item 9A

Controls and Procedures

112

 

 

 

Part III:

 

 

 

 

 

Item 10

Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance

114

 

 

 

Item 11

Executive Compensation

115

 

 

 

Item 12

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

115

 

 

 

Item 13

Certain Relationships and Related Transactions and Director Independence

115

 

 

 

Item 14

Principal Accounting Fees and Services

115

 

 

 

Part IV:

 

 

 

 

 

Item 15

Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules

116

 

 

 

 

Signatures

118

 

2



Table of Contents

 

Part I

 

Forward-Looking Statements

 

Citizens First Corporation (the “Company”) may from time to time make written or oral statements, including statements contained in this report, which may constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. The words “may”, “expect”, “anticipate”, “intend”, “consider”, “plan”, “believe”, “seek”, “should”, “estimate”, and similar expressions are intended to identify such forward-looking statements, but other statements may constitute forward-looking statements. These statements should be considered subject to various risks and uncertainties. Such forward-looking statements are based on many assumptions and estimates and are not guarantees of future performance.  Such statements are made pursuant to “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

 

Our ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in such forward-looking statements are based on reasonable assumptions, our actual results and performance could differ materially from those set forth in the forward-looking statements. Factors that could cause actual results and performance to differ from those expressed in our forward-looking statements we make or incorporate by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K include, but are not limited to those described below under Item 1A — “Risk Factors” and the following:

 

·                  current and future economic and business conditions, including, without limitation, the recent deterioration of real estate values, the subprime mortgage, credit and liquidity markets, as well as the Federal Reserve’s actions with respect to interest rates, may lead to a deterioration in credit quality, thereby requiring increases in our provision for credit losses, a reduced demand for credit, which would reduce earning assets, and/or a further decline in real estate values;

 

·                  possible changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies, as well as legislative and regulatory changes, including changes in accounting standards and banking, securities and tax laws and our ability to maintain appropriate levels of capital;

 

·                  changes in the interest rate environment and our ability to effectively manage interest rate risk and other market risk, credit risk and operational risk;

 

·                  changes in the quality or composition of our loan or investment portfolios, including adverse developments in the real estate markets, the borrowers’ industries or in the repayment ability of individual borrowers or issuers;

 

3



Table of Contents

 

·                  increases in our nonperforming assets, or our inability to recover or absorb losses created by such nonperforming assets;

 

·                  our ability to manage fluctuations in the value of assets and liabilities and off-balance sheet exposure so as to maintain sufficient capital and liquidity to support our business;

 

·                  the failure of our assumptions underlying the establishment of allowances for loan losses and other estimates, or dramatic changes in those underlying assumptions or judgments in future periods, that, in either case, render the allowance for loan losses inadequate or require that further provisions for loan losses be made;

 

·                  the cost and other effects of material contingencies;

 

·                  our ability to keep pace with technological changes;

 

·                  our ability to develop competitive new products and services in a timely manner and the acceptance of such products and services by our customers and potential customers;

 

·                  the threat or occurrence of war or acts of terrorism and the existence or exacerbation of general geopolitical instability and uncertainty;

 

·                  management’s ability to develop and execute plans to effectively respond to unexpected changes; and

 

·                  other factors and information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and other reports that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) under the Exchange Act.

 

The cautionary statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K also identify important factors and possible events that involve risk and uncertainties that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in the forward-looking statements. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which the statements were made. We do not intend and undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of differences in actual results, changes in assumptions, future events or otherwise.

 

4



Table of Contents

 

Item 1.  Business

 

Overview

 

We are a Kentucky corporation organized in 1975 for the purpose of conducting business as an investment club. We are headquartered in Bowling Green, Kentucky.  In late 1998 and early 1999 we received regulatory approval to serve as the bank holding company for Citizens First Bank, Inc. (the “Bank”), a Kentucky state chartered bank that commenced operations on February 19, 1999. The Bank currently conducts full-service community banking operations from nine locations in the Kentucky counties of Barren, Hart, Simpson and Warren.

 

We are primarily engaged in the business of accepting demand, savings and time deposits insured by the FDIC and providing commercial, consumer and mortgage loans to the general public. We primarily market our products and services to small and medium-sized businesses and to retail consumers. Our strategy is to provide outstanding service through our employees, who are relationship-oriented and committed to customer service. Through this strategy, we intend to grow our business, expand our customer base and improve our profitability.

 

As of December 31, 2010, we had total assets of $349.7 million, net loans of $268.3 million, deposits of $288.7 million and shareholders’ equity of $38.3 million.

 

Lending Activities

 

General.  We offer a variety of loans, including commercial and residential real estate mortgage loans, construction loans, commercial loans and consumer loans to individuals and small to mid-size businesses that are located in or conduct a substantial portion of their business in our market area.  Our underwriting standards vary for each type of loan, as described below. At December 31, 2010, we had total loans of $268.3 million, representing 76.7% of our total assets.

 

Commercial Loans.  We make commercial loans primarily to small and medium-sized businesses. These loans are secured and unsecured and are made available for general operating inventory and accounts receivables, as well as any other purposes considered appropriate. We will generally look to a borrower’s business operations as the principal source of repayment, but will also require, when appropriate, security interests in personal property and personal guarantees. In addition, the majority of commercial loans that are not mortgage loans are secured by a lien on equipment, inventory and other assets of the commercial borrower. These loans are generally considered to have greater risk than first and second mortgages on real estate because these loans may be unsecured or, if they are secured, the value of the collateral may be difficult to assess and more likely to decrease than real estate.  At December 31, 2010, commercial loans amounted to $66.1 million, or 24.6% of our total loan portfolio, excluding for these purposes commercial loans secured by real estate which are included in the commercial real estate category. At December 31, 2010, our commercial loans had an average size of $75,000 and the largest loan was $2.2 million.

 

5



Table of Contents

 

Commercial Real Estate Loans.  We originate and maintain a significant amount of commercial real estate loans. This lending involves loans secured by multi-family residential units, income-producing properties and owner-occupied commercial properties. Loan amounts generally conform to the regulatory loan-to-value guidelines and amortizations match the economic life of the collateral, with a maximum amortization schedule of 20 years. Loans secured by commercial real estate are generally subject to a maximum term of 20 years. At December 31, 2010, total commercial real estate loans amounted to $116.9 million, or 43.6% of our loan portfolio. At December 31, 2010, our commercial real estate loans had an average size of $228,000 and the largest loan was $4.0 million.

 

Residential Real Estate Mortgage Loans.  We originate residential real estate mortgage loans with either fixed or variable interest rates to borrowers to purchase and refinance one-to-four family properties. Real estate mortgage loans are subject to the same general risks as other loans and are particularly sensitive to fluctuations in the value of real estate, which could negatively affect a borrower’s cash flow, creditworthiness and ability to repay the loan.  We also offer home equity loans which are secured by prior liens on the subject residence. Except for home equity loans and lines of credit, substantially all of our residential real estate loans are secured by a first lien on the real estate. Loans secured by residential real estate with variable interest rates will have a maximum term and amortization schedule of 30 years. We sell to the secondary market the majority of our residential fixed-rate mortgage loans, thereby reducing our interest rate risk and credit risk. Loans secured by vacant land are generally subject to a maximum term of five years and a maximum amortization schedule of five years. At December 31, 2010, total residential real estate loans amounted to $75.5 million, or 28.1% of our loan portfolio. At December 31, 2010, our residential real estate mortgage loans had an average size of $58,000 and the largest loan was $2.7 million.

 

We provide customers access to long-term conventional real estate loans through our mortgage loan division, which underwrites loans that are purchased by unaffiliated third party brokers in the secondary market. We receive fees in connection with the sale of mortgage loans, with these fees aggregating $314,000 and $317,000 for the years ending December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively.  We do not retain servicing rights with respect to the secondary market residential mortgage loans that we originate.

 

Consumer.  We make personal loans and lines of credit available to consumers for various purposes, such as the purchase of automobiles, boats and other recreational vehicles, and the making of home improvements and personal investments.   Consumer loans generally have shorter terms and higher interest rates than residential mortgage loans and usually involve more credit risk than mortgage loans because of the type and nature of the collateral. Consumer lending collections are dependent on a borrower’s continuing financial stability and are thus likely to be adversely affected by job loss, illness or personal bankruptcy. In many cases, repossessed collateral for a defaulted consumer loan will not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance because of depreciation of the underlying collateral. We emphasize the amount of the down payment, credit quality and history, employment stability and monthly income. These loans are expected generally to be repaid on a monthly

 

6



Table of Contents

 

repayment schedule with the payment amount tied to the borrower’s periodic income. We believe that the generally higher yields earned on consumer loans help compensate for the increased credit risk associated with such loans and that consumer loans are important to our efforts to serve the credit needs of our customer base. At December 31, 2010, total consumer loans amounted to $9.7 million, or 3.7% of our loan portfolio. At December 31, 2010, our consumer loans had an average size of $6,000, and the largest loan was $454,000.

 

Loan Underwriting and Approval.  We seek to make sound, high quality loans while recognizing that lending money involves a degree of business risk. Our loan policies are designed to assist us in managing this business risk. These policies provide a general framework for our loan operations while recognizing that not all risk activities and procedures can be anticipated. Our loan policies instruct lending personnel to use care and prudent decision making and to seek the guidance of our Vice President, Credit Administration or our President and Chief Executive Officer where appropriate.

 

Deposit Products

 

Our principal source of funds is core deposits. We offer a range of deposit products and services including checking accounts, savings accounts, NOW accounts, money market accounts, sweep accounts, fixed and variable rate IRA accounts, Christmas Club accounts and certificate of deposit accounts. We solicit accounts from a wide variety of customers, including individuals and small- to medium-sized businesses. We actively pursue business checking accounts by offering competitive rates and other convenient services to our business customers. In some cases, we require business customers to maintain minimum balances. We offer a deposit pick-up service to our commercial customers that enable these customers to make daily cash deposits through one of our couriers. At December 31, 2010, we had total deposits of $288.7 million.

 

Other Banking Services

 

Our retail banking strategy is to offer basic banking products and services that are attractively priced and easily understood by the customer. We focus on making our products and services convenient and readily accessible to the customer. In addition to banking during normal business hours, we offer extended drive-through hours, ATMs, and banking by telephone, mail and personal appointment. We have twelve ATMs located within our markets.We also provide debit cards, credit cards, safekeeping and safe deposit boxes, ACH and other direct deposit services, savings bond redemptions, cashier’s checks, travelers’ checks and letters of credit. We have also established relationships with correspondent banks and other independent financial institutions to provide other services requested by customers, including cash management services, wire transfer services, and loan participations where the requested loan amount exceeds the lending limits imposed by law or by our policies. We maintain an internet banking website at www.citizensfirstbank.com, which allows customers to obtain account balances and transfer funds among accounts. The website also provides online bill payment and electronic delivery of customer statements.

 

7



Table of Contents

 

We provide title insurance services to mortgage loan customers for a fee and, through third party providers, we offer other insurance services and trust services and receive a fee for referrals.We offer non-deposit investment services and products through an agreement with a broker-dealer.  We earn advisory fees and commissions from the sale of these services and products.  The objective of offering these products and services is to generate fee income and strengthen relationships with our customers.

 

Competition and Market Area

 

The banking business is highly competitive, and we experience competition in our market from many other financial institutions. Our profitability depends upon our ability to compete in the market area in which our bank offices are located.  We compete for deposits, loans and other banking services generally on the basis of convenient office locations, interest rates offered on deposit accounts and charged on loans, fees and the range of services offered. We compete with existing area financial institutions other than commercial banks and savings banks, including commercial bank loan production offices, mortgage companies, insurance companies, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, credit unions, money market funds and other business entities which have recently entered traditional banking markets.

 

Our market area consists of a ten county region located in south central Kentucky known as the Barren River Area Development District.  This region consists of Allen, Barren, Butler, Edmonson, Hart, Logan, Metcalfe, Monroe, Simpson, and Warren Counties in Kentucky. Our most competitive market is the Bowling Green MSA.  As of June 30, 2010, there were 20 financial institutions operating a total of 57 offices in the Bowling Green MSA. In addition, there are six financial institutions operating a total of 8 offices in Simpson County, four institutions operating a total of 5 offices in Hart County and seven financial institutions operating 18 offices in Barren County.

 

Employees

 

At December 31, 2010, we had 89 full-time equivalent employees. Management considers its relations with its employees to be good. Neither we nor the Bank are a party to any collective bargaining agreement.

 

Supervision and Regulation

 

We are subject to extensive state and federal banking laws and regulations that impose restrictions on and provide for general regulatory oversight of our operations.  These laws and regulations are generally intended to protect customers and depositors and not shareholders.  The following summary briefly describes some material provisions of the regulatory framework which apply to us.  It is qualified by reference to the statutory and regulatory provisions discussed, and is not intended to be a complete list of all the activities regulated by the banking laws or of the impact of such laws and regulations on our operations. It is intended only to briefly summarize some material provisions.

 

8



Table of Contents

 

Citizens First Corporation

 

We are a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956.  As such, we are subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (the “Federal Reserve”) under the Bank Holding Company Act and the regulations promulgated thereunder. We are required to file periodic reports of our operations and any additional information the Federal Reserve may require.

 

Acquisitions. A bank holding company must obtain Federal Reserve Board approval before acquiring, directly or indirectly, ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting stock or all or substantially all of the assets of a bank, merging or consolidating with any other bank holding company and before engaging, or acquiring a company that is not a bank but is engaged in certain non-banking activities. Federal law also prohibits a person or group of persons from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company without notifying the Federal Reserve Board in advance and then only if the Federal Reserve Board does not object to the proposed transaction. The Federal Reserve Board has established a rebuttable presumptive standard that the acquisition of 10% or more of the voting stock of a bank holding company with a class of securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 would constitute an acquisition of control of the bank holding company. In addition, any company is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve Board before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of any class of a bank holding company’s voting securities, or otherwise obtaining control or a “controlling influence” over a bank holding company.

 

Permissible Activities. A bank holding company is generally permitted under the Bank Holding Company Act to engage in or acquire direct or indirect control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company engaged in banking or managing or controlling banks, furnishing services to or performing services for our subsidiaries and any activity that the Federal Reserve determines to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to the business of banking.

 

As a bank holding company, we may elect to become a financial holding company, which enables the holding company to conduct activities that are “financial in nature.” Activities that are “financial in nature” include securities underwriting, dealing and market making; sponsoring mutual funds and investment companies; insurance underwriting and agency; merchant banking activities; and activities that the Federal Reserve has determined to be closely related to banking. We have not sought financial holding company status. If we were to elect in writing for financial holding company status, each insured depository institution we controlled would have to be well capitalized, well managed and have at least a satisfactory CRA rating.

 

Participation in Capital Purchase ProgramIn response to the financial crises affecting the banking system and financial markets and going concern threats to investment banks and other financial institutions, on October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (the “EESA”) became law. Pursuant to the EESA, the U.S. Treasury was given the authority to, among other things, purchase up to $700 billion of mortgages, mortgage-backed securities and certain other financial instruments from

 

9



Table of Contents

 

financial institutions for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets.

 

On October 14, 2008, the Secretary of the Department of the Treasury announced that the Department of the Treasury would purchase equity stakes in a wide variety of banks and thrifts. Under the program, known as the Troubled Asset Relief Program Capital Purchase Program (the “Capital Purchase Program”), from the $700 billion authorized by the EESA, the Treasury made $250 billion of capital available to U.S. financial institutions in the form of preferred stock. In conjunction with the purchase of preferred stock, the Treasury received, from participating financial institutions, warrants to purchase common stock with an aggregate market price equal to 15% of the preferred investment. Participating financial institutions were required to adopt the Treasury’s standards for executive compensation and corporate governance for the period during which the Treasury holds equity issued under the Capital Purchase Program.

 

On December 19, 2008, we sold to the U.S. Treasury 250 shares of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, having a liquidation amount per share of $35,116, and a warrant to purchase 254,218 shares of our common stock, at an initial per share exercise price of $5.18, for an aggregate purchase price of $8,779,000.  The Series A Preferred Stock pays cumulative dividends at a rate of 5% per year for the first five years and 9% per year thereafter.  Pursuant to the terms of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) we may, upon prior consultation with Citizen First’s and the Bank’s appropriate regulatory agency, redeem the Series A preferred stock at any time. On February 16, 2011, we repurchased 63 shares of the Series A preferred stock for a purchase price of $2.2 million.  Upon full redemption of the Series A preferred stock, we may also repurchase the associated warrant.  The Series A preferred stock is generally non-voting.

 

As a result of our participation in the Capital Purchase Program, we agreed to various requirements and restrictions imposed on all participants in the Capital Purchase Program. Among the terms of participation was a provision that the Treasury Department could change the terms of participation at any time.

 

The current terms of participation in the Capital Purchase Program include the following:

 

·                  We filed with the SEC a registration statement under the Securities Act of 1933 registering for resale the Warrant and any shares of common stock issuable from time to time upon exercise of the Warrant.

 

·                  As long as the Series A preferred stock remains outstanding, unless all accrued and unpaid dividends for all past dividend periods on the Series A preferred stock are fully paid, we will not be permitted to declare or pay dividends on any common stock, any junior preferred shares or, generally, any preferred shares ranking pari passu with the Series A preferred stock (other than in the case of pari passu preferred shares, dividends on a pro rata basis with the Series A preferred stock), nor will we be permitted to repurchase or redeem any common stock or preferred shares other than the Series A preferred stock.

 

10



Table of Contents

 

·                  Unless the Series A preferred stock has been transferred to unaffiliated third parties or redeemed in whole, until December 19, 2011, the Treasury Department’s approval is required for any increase in common stock dividends or any share repurchases other than repurchases of the Series A preferred stock, repurchases of junior preferred shares or common stock in connection with the administration of any employee benefit plan in the ordinary course of business and consistent with past practice and purchases under certain other limited circumstances.

 

As a recipient of government funding under the Capital Purchase Program, we must also comply with the executive compensation and corporate governance standards imposed by the ARRA for so long as the Treasury Department holds any securities acquired from us.  The Treasury Department adopted rules for these standards in June 2009. The standards imposed by the ARRA include, without limitation, the following:

 

·                                          ensuring that incentive compensation for senior executive officers does not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten the value of the financial institution;

 

·                                          any bonus, retention award or incentive compensation paid (or under a legally binding obligation to be paid) to a senior executive officer based on statements of earnings, revenues, gains or other criteria that are later proven to be materially inaccurate must be subject to recovery or “clawback” by us;

 

·                                          we are prohibited from paying or accruing any bonus, retention award or incentive compensation with respect to our most highly compensated officer, except for certain grants of restricted stock;

 

·                                          severance payments to the senior executive officers or the next five most highly-compensated employees, generally referred to as “golden parachute” payments, are prohibited, except for payments for services performed or benefits accrued;

 

·                                          compensation plans that encourage manipulation of reported earnings are prohibited;

 

·                                          the Treasury Department may retroactively review bonuses, retention awards and other compensation previously paid to a senior executive officer or any of our 20 next most highly-compensated employees that the Treasury Department finds to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Capital Purchase Program or otherwise contrary to the public interest;

 

·                                          our Board of Directors must establish a company-wide policy regarding excessive or luxury expenditures;

 

11



Table of Contents

 

·                                          our proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings must permit a non-binding “say on pay” shareholder vote on the compensation of executives;

 

·                                          compensation in excess of $500,000 for each senior executive officer must not be deducted for federal income tax purposes; and

 

·                                          we must comply with the executive compensation reporting and recordkeeping requirements established by the Treasury Department.

 

The Treasury Department has certain supervisory and oversight duties and responsibilities under the EESA, the Capital Purchase Program and the ARRA. Also, the Special Inspector General for TARP has the duty, among other things, to conduct, supervise and coordinate audits and investigations of the purchase, management and sale of assets by the Treasury Department under the Capital Purchase Program, including the Series A preferred stock purchased from us.

 

Capital Requirements.  We are required to comply with the capital adequacy standards established by the Federal Reserve at the holding company level, and the FDIC at the bank level.  The Federal Reserve has established a risk-based and a leverage measure of capital adequacy for bank holding companies.The risk-based capital standards are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profiles among depository institutions and bank holding companies, to account for off-balance sheet exposure and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets.  Under the guidelines, specific categories of assets are assigned different risk weights, based generally on the perceived credit risk of the asset. These risk weights are multiplied by corresponding asset balances to determine a “risk-weighted” asset base.

 

The guidelines require a minimum total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0%. At least half of the total capital must be composed of common equity, retained earnings, senior perpetual preferred stock issued to the U. S. Treasury under the CPP and qualifying perpetual preferred stock and certain hybrid capital instruments, less certain intangible assets (“Tier 1 capital”). The remainder may consist of certain subordinated debt, certain hybrid capital instruments, qualifying preferred stock and a limited amount of the allowance for loan losses (“Tier 2 capital”). Total capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. To be considered well-capitalized under the risk-based capital guidelines, an institution must maintain a total capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10% and a Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of 6% or greater. As of December 31, 2010, our ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 14.57% and our ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 13.31%.

 

In addition, the Federal Reserve Board has established minimum leverage ratio guidelines for bank holding companies.  These guidelines have a dual structure for (i) bank holding companies that meet specified criteria, including having the highest regulatory rating and implementing the Federal Reserve’s risk-based capital measure for market risk, and (ii) all other bank holding companies, which are typically smaller.  We are subject to the latter, under which we are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 4%.   As of December 31, 2010, our leverage ratio was 10.98%.

 

12



Table of Contents

 

Dividends. We are a legal entity separate and distinct from Citizens First Bank. The majority of our revenue is from dividends paid to us by Citizens First Bank.  Statutory and regulatory limitations apply to the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to us as well as to our ability to pay dividends to our shareholders. We did not pay any dividends to our common shareholders in 2010.

 

We are also subject to the Kentucky Business Corporation Act, which generally prohibits dividends to the extent they result in the insolvency of the corporation from a balance sheet perspective or in the corporation becoming unable to pay debts as they come due.

 

In addition to the limitations on our ability to pay dividends under Kentucky law, our ability to pay dividends on our common stock is also limited by our participation in the Capital Purchase Program.  Prior to December 18, 2011, unless we have redeemed all of the Series A preferred stock issued to the U.S. Treasury in the Capital Purchase Program, or the U.S. Treasury has transferred the Series A preferred stock to a third party, the consent of the U.S. Treasury must be received before we can declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on our common stock above the amount of our last cash dividend of $0.05 per share.   Furthermore, if we are not current in the payment of quarterly dividends on the Series A preferred stock, we cannot pay dividends on our common stock.  Additionally, the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis under certain circumstances may preclude us from paying dividends on our Series A preferred stock or trust preferred securities.  Recent supervisory guidance from the Federal Reserve indicates that Capital Purchase Program participants that are experiencing financial difficulties generally should eliminate, reduce or defer dividends on Tier 1 capital instruments, including trust preferred, preferred stock or common stock, if the holding company needs to conserve capital for safe and sound operation and to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiaries.

 

Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates. Both the Company and the Bank are subject to the provisions of Section 23A and Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act.  Section 23A places limits on the amount of a bank’s loans or extensions of credit to affiliates, a bank’s investment in an affiliate, assets a bank may purchase from affiliates, except for real and personal property exempted by the obligations of affiliates, and a bank’s guarantee, acceptance or letter of credit issued on behalf of an affiliate.

 

Section 23B prohibits an institution from engaging in the above transactions with affiliates unless the transactions are on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the institution or its subsidiaries, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with nonaffiliated companies.

 

Source of Strength.  We are expected to act as a source of financial strength for and to commit resources to support the Bank in circumstances in which might not otherwise do so.  This support may be required at times when, absent such Federal Reserve policy, we may not be inclined to provide it. If the Bank were to become undercapitalized, we would be required to provide a guarantee of the Bank’s plan to return to capital adequacy.  In addition, any loans by a bank holding company to any of its banking

 

13



Table of Contents

 

subsidiaries are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to other indebtedness of such banks.  In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a banking subsidiary will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.

 

Citizens First Bank

 

The Bank is a state bank chartered under the banking laws of the Commonwealth of Kentucky.  As a result, we are subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of both the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions (KDFI) and the FDIC.

 

We also are subject to numerous state and federal statutes and regulations that affect our business activities and operations, including restrictions on loan limits, interest rates, “insider” loans to officers, directors, and principal shareholders, tie-in arrangements and transactions with affiliates, among other things.

 

Federal and state regulators also have authority to impose substantial sanctions on the Bank and its directors and its directors and officers if we engage in unsafe or unsound practices, or otherwise fail to comply with regulatory standards.  Supervisory agreements, such as memoranda of understanding entered into with federal and state bank regulators, may also impose requirements and reporting obligations.

 

Branching.  With prior regulatory approval and/or notices, as applicable, Kentucky law permits banks based in the state to either establish new or acquire existing branch offices throughout Kentucky.  Furthermore, federal legislation permits interstate branching, including out-of-state acquisitions by bank holding companies, interstate branching by banks and interstate merging by banks.  The Dodd-Frank Act removes previous state law restrictions on de novo interstate branching in states such as Kentucky.  This change permits out-of-state banks to open de novo branches in states where the laws of the state where the de novo branch to be opened would permit a bank chartered by that state to open a de novo branch.

 

FDIC Insurance.  The deposits of the Bank are currently insured to the maximum amount allowable per depositor through the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF) administered by the FDIC.  Due to the large number of recent bank failures, and the FDIC’s new Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, the FDIC adopted a revised risk-based deposit insurance assessment schedule in February 2009, which raised deposit insurance premiums.  The FDIC also implemented a five basis point special assessment of each insured depository institution’s assets minus Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009 which special assessment amount was capped at 10 basis points times the institution’s assessment base for the second quarter of 2009.  In addition, the FDIC required financial institutions like us to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010 through and including 2012 to re-capitalize the Deposit Insurance Fund.  The FDIC may exercise its discretion as supervisor and insurer to exempt an institution from the prepayment requirement if the FDIC determines that the prepayment would adversely affect the safety and

 

14



Table of Contents

 

soundness of the institution.  We did not request exemption from the prepayment requirement.  During 2010, we expensed $470,000 in deposit insurance.  The rule also provides for increasing the FDIC assessment rates by three basis points effective January 1, 2011.

 

FDIC insured institutions are required to pay a Financing Corporation assessment, in order to fund the interest on bonds issued to resolve thrift failures in the 1980s.  For the first quarter of 2010, the Financing Corporation assessment equaled 1.14 basis points for domestic deposits.  These assessments, which may be revised based upon the level of deposits, will continue until the bonds mature in the years 2017 through 2019.

 

The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution, including the Bank, if it determines after hearing that the institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC or the OCC.  It may also suspend deposit insurance temporarily during the hearing process for the permanent termination of insurance, if the institution has no tangible capital.  If insurance of accounts is terminated, the accounts at the institution at the time of the termination, less subsequent withdrawals, shall continue to be insured for a period of six months to two years, as determined by the FDIC.  Management of the bank is not aware of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of the bank’s deposit insurance.

 

Capital Adequacy and Prompt Corrective Action.  Similar to the Federal Reserve Board’s requirements for bank holding companies, the FDIC has adopted risk-based capital requirements for assessing state non-member banks’ capital adequacy. The FDIC’s risk-based capital guidelines require that all banks maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8.0% and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 4.0%. To be well-capitalized, a bank must have a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of at least 10.0% and a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 6.0%. As of December 31, 2010, Citizens First Bank’s ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 13.37% and its ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 12.12%.The FDIC also requires a minimum leverage ratio of 3.0% of Tier 1 capital to total assets for the highest rated banks and an additional cushion of approximately 100-200 basis points for all other banks, which will effectively increase the minimum leverage ratio for other banks to 4.0% or 5.0% of Tier 1 capital or more. As of December 31, 2010, Citizens First Bank’s leverage ratio was 9.99%.

 

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) established a system of prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions.  Under this system, the federal banking regulators established five capital categories (well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, and critically undercapitalized), into one of which each institution is placed.  With respect to institutions in the three undercapitalized categories, the regulators must take prescribed supervisory actions and are authorized to take other discretionary actions.  The severity of the action depends upon the capital category into which the institution is placed. Generally, subject

 

15



Table of Contents

 

to a narrow exception, the banking regulator must appoint a receiver or conservator for an institution that is critically undercapitalized.  The federal banking agencies have specified by regulation the relevant capital level for each category.

 

If the bank is not well capitalized, it cannot accept brokered deposits without prior FDIC approval.  Even if approved, rate restrictions apply governing the rate the bank may be permitted to pay on the brokered deposits.  In addition, a bank that is undercapitalized cannot offer an effective yield in excess of 75 basis points over the “national rate” paid on deposits (including brokered deposits, if approval is granted for the bank to accept them) of comparable size and maturity.  The “national rate” is defined as a simple average of rates paid by insured depository institution and branches for which data are available and is published weekly by the FDIC.  Institutions subject to the restrictions that believe they are operating in an area where the rates paid on deposits are higher than the “national rate” can use the local market to determine the prevailing rate if they seek and receive a determination from the FDIC that it is operating in a high-rate area.  Regardless of the determination, institutions must use the national rate to determine conformance for all deposits outside their market area.

 

An institution that is categorized as undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized, or critically undercapitalized is required to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan to its appropriate federal banking agency.  A bank holding company must guarantee that a subsidiary depository institution meets its capital restoration plan, subject to limitations.  The controlling bank holding company’s obligation to fund a capital restoration plan is limited to the lesser of 5% of an undercapitalized subsidiary’s assets or the amount required to meet regulatory capital requirements.  An undercapitalized institution is also generally prohibited from increasing its average total assets, making acquisitions, establishing any branches or engaging in any new line of business, except in accordance with an accepted capital restoration plan or with FDIC approval.  The regulations also establish procedures for downgrading an institution and a lower capital category based on supervisory factors other than capital.

 

An insured depository institution may not pay a management fee to a bank holding company controlling that institution or any other person having control of the institution if, after making the payment, the institution would be undercapitalized.  In addition, an institution cannot make a capital distribution, such as a dividend or other distribution that is in substance a distribution of capital to the owners of the institution if following such a distribution the institution would be undercapitalized.  Thus, if payment of such a management fee or the making of such would cause the bank to become undercapitalized, it could not pay a management fee or dividend to us.

 

Community Reinvestment. The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires that the FDIC in connection with examinations of financial institutions within their respective jurisdictions, a financial institution’s primary regulator, which is the FDIC for the Bank, shall evaluate the record of each financial institution in meeting the credit needs of its local community, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods.  These factors are also considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions and applications to open a branch or facility.  Failure to adequately meet these criteria could impose additional

 

16



Table of Contents

 

requirements and limitations on the Bank.  At our last regulatory examination, the Bank received a “satisfactory” CRA rating.

 

Consumer Protection Laws. The Bank is subject to consumer laws and regulations that are designed to protect consumers.  Interest and other charges collected or contracted for by the bank are subject to state usury laws and federal laws concerning interest rates.  The Bank’s loan operations are also subject to federal laws applicable to credit transactions.  While the list set forth herein is not exhaustive, these laws and regulations include the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Federal Trade Commission Act, among others. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits or making loans to such customers.

 

Privacy. Federal law currently contains extensive customer privacy protections provisions. Under these provisions, a financial institution must provide to its customers, at the inception of the customer relationship and annually thereafter, the institution’s policies and procedures regarding the handling of customers’ nonpublic personal financial information. These provisions also provide that, except for certain limited exceptions, an institution may not provide such personal information to unaffiliated third parties unless the institution discloses to the customer that such information may be so provided and the customer is given the opportunity to opt out of such disclosure. Federal law makes it a criminal offense, except in limited circumstances, to obtain or attempt to obtain customer information of a financial nature by fraudulent or deceptive means.

 

Anti-Money Laundering; USA Patriot Act. Financial institutions must maintain anti-money laundering programs that include established internal policies, procedures, and controls; a designated compliance officer; an ongoing employee training program; and testing of the program by an independent audit function.  We are prohibited from entering into specified financial transactions and account relationships and must meet enhanced standards for due diligence in dealings with foreign financial institutions and foreign customers.  We also must take reasonable steps to conduct enhanced scrutiny of account relationships to guard against money laundering and to report any suspicious transactions.  Recent laws provide law enforcement authorities with increased access to financial information maintained by banks.  Anti-money laundering obligations have been substantially strengthened as a result of the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “USA Patriot Act”), enacted in 2001, renewed in 2006 and extended, in part, in 2011. Bank regulators routinely examine institutions for compliance with these obligations and are required to consider compliance in connection with the regulatory review of applications.

 

The USA Patriot Act amended, in part, the Bank Secrecy Act and provides for the facilitation of information sharing among governmental entities and financial institutions for the purpose of combating terrorism and money laundering.  The statute also creates

 

17



Table of Contents

 

enhanced information collection tools and enforcement mechanics for the U.S. government, including: (1) requiring standards for verifying customer identification at account opening; (2) promulgating rules to promote cooperation among financial institutions, regulators, and law enforcement entities in identifying parties that may be involved in terrorism or money laundering; (3) requiring reports by nonfinancial trades and businesses filed with the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for transactions exceeding $10,000; and (4) mandating the filing of suspicious activities reports if a bank believes a customer may be violating U.S. laws and regulations.  The statute also requires enhanced due diligence requirements for financial institutions that administer, maintain, or manage private bank accounts or correspondent accounts for non-U.S. persons.

 

The Federal Bureau of Investigation may send bank regulatory agencies lists of the names of persons suspected of involvement in terrorist activities.  The Bank may be subject to a request for a search of its records for any relationships or transactions with persons on those lists and may be required to report any identified relationships or transactions.  Furthermore, the Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) is responsible for helping to ensure that U.S. entities do not engage in transactions with certain prohibited parties, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress.  OFAC has sent, and will send, bank regulatory agencies lists of names of persons and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons.  If we find a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, we must freeze such account, file a suspicious activity report and notify the appropriate authorities.

 

Dividends.  Under Kentucky law, dividends by Kentucky banks may be paid only from current or retained net profits. The Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions must approve the declaration of dividends if the total dividends to be declared by a bank for any calendar year would exceed the bank’s total net profits for such year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years, less any required transfers to surplus or a fund for the retirement of preferred stock or debt.

 

The payment of dividends by the Bank may also be affected by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines.  Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, a depository institution may not pay any dividend if payment would cause it to become undercapitalized or if it already is undercapitalized.  If, in the opinion of the FDIC, the Bank was engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice, the FDIC could require, after notice and hearing, that the Bank refrain from engaging in the practice.  The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a depository institution’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice.  The federal agencies have issued policy statements that provide that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings.

 

18



Table of Contents

 

Proposed Legislation and Regulatory Action

 

New regulations and statutes are regularly proposed that contain wide-ranging proposals for altering the structures, regulations and competitive relationships of the nation’s financial institutions.  We cannot predict whether or in what form any proposed regulation or statute will be adopted or the extent to which our business may be affected by any new regulation or statute.

 

Recent Legislative and Regulatory Initiatives to Address Financial and Economic Crises

 

Markets in the United States and elsewhere have experienced extreme volatility and disruption for more than three years. These circumstances have exerted significant downward pressure on prices of equity securities and virtually all other asset classes, and have resulted in substantially increased market volatility, severely constrained credit and capital markets, particularly for financial institutions, and an overall loss of investor confidence. Loan portfolio performances have deteriorated at many institutions resulting from, among other factors, a weak economy and a decline in the value of the collateral supporting their loans. Dramatic slowdowns in the housing industry, due in part to falling home prices and increasing foreclosures and unemployment, have created strains on financial institutions. Many borrowers are now unable to repay their loans, and the collateral securing these loans has, in some cases, declined below the loan balance. In response to the challenges facing the financial services sector, several regulatory and governmental actions have recently been announced including:

 

·                                          EESA allowed the U.S. Treasury to purchase up to $700 billion of mortgages, mortgage-backed securities and certain other financial instruments from financial institutions for the purpose of stabilizing and providing liquidity to the U.S. financial markets. EESA also temporarily raised the basic limit of FDIC deposit insurance from $100,000 to $250,000 through December 31, 2013.

 

·                                          On October 7, 2008, the FDIC approved a plan to increase the rates banks pay for deposit insurance;

 

·                                          On October 14, 2008, the U.S. Treasury announced the creation of the Troubled Asset Relief Program (the “TARP”) Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”) that encourages and allows financial institutions to build capital through the sale of senior preferred shares to the U.S. Treasury on terms that are non-negotiable.

 

·                                          On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced the creation of the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (the “TLGP”), which seeks to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the banking system. The TLGP had two primary components available on a voluntary basis to financial institutions:

 

19



Table of Contents

 

·                                          The Transaction Account Guarantee Program (“TAGP”) provided unlimited deposit insurance coverage through December 31, 2010 for noninterest-bearing transaction accounts (typically business checking accounts) and certain funds swept into noninterest-bearing savings accounts. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) described below, the voluntary TAGP program ended in December 31, 2010, and all institutions are required to provide full deposit insurance on noninterest-bearing transaction accounts until December 31, 2012; and

 

·                                          The Debt Guarantee Program (“DGP”), under which the FDIC guarantees certain senior unsecured debt of FDIC-insured institutions and their holding companies. The guarantee would apply to new debt issued on or before October 31, 2009 and would provide protection until December 31, 2012. Issuers electing to participate would pay a 75 basis point fee for the guarantee.

 

·                                          On February 10, 2009, the U.S. Treasury announced the Financial Stability Plan, which earmarked $350 billion of the TARP funds authorized under EESA. Among other things, the Financial Stability Plan includes:

 

·                                          A capital assistance program that will invest in mandatory convertible preferred stock of certain qualifying institutions determined on a basis and through a process similar to the CPP;

 

·                                          A consumer and business lending initiative to fund new consumer loans, small business loans and commercial mortgage asset-backed securities issuances;

 

·                                          A new public-private investment fund that will leverage public and private capital with public financing to purchase up to $500 billion to $1 trillion of legacy “toxic assets” from financial institutions; and

 

·                                          Assistance for homeowners by providing up to $75 billion to reduce mortgage payments and interest rates and establishing loan modification guidelines for government and private programs.

 

·                                          On February 17, 2009, President Obama signed into law The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”), more commonly known as the economic stimulus or economic recovery package. ARRA includes a wide variety of programs intended to stimulate the economy and provide for extensive infrastructure, energy, health, and education needs. In addition, ARRA imposes certain executive compensation and corporate expenditure limits on all current and future TARP recipients that are in addition to those previously announced by the U.S. Treasury. These new limits are in place until the institution has repaid the Treasury, which is now permitted under ARRA without penalty and without the need to

 

20



Table of Contents

 

raise new capital, subject to the Treasury’s consultation with the recipient institution’s appropriate regulatory agency.

 

·                                          On March 23, 2009, the U.S. Treasury, in conjunction with the FDIC and the Federal Reserve, announced the Public-Private Partnership Investment Program for Legacy Assets which consists of two separate plans, addressing two distinct asset groups:

 

·                                          The first plan is the Legacy Loan Program, which has a primary purpose to facilitate the sale of troubled mortgage loans by eligible institutions, including FDIC-insured federal or state banks and savings associations.

 

·                                          The second plan is the Securities Program, which is administered by the Treasury and involves the creation of public-private investment funds (“PPIFs”) to target investments in eligible residential mortgage-backed securities and commercial mortgage-backed securities issued before 2009 that originally were rated AAA or the equivalent by two or more nationally recognized statistical rating organizations, without regard to rating enhancements.

 

·                                          On November 12, 2009, the FDIC issued a final rule to require banks to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012 and to increase assessment rates effective on January 1, 2011.

 

·                                          In June 2010, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC and the OCC issued a comprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation policies intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking.  The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations, such as the Company, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.”  These reviews will be tailored to each organization based on the scope and complexity of the organization’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements.  The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination.  Deficiencies will be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

 

·                                          On July 21, 2010, the U.S. President signed into law the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”).  The

 

21



Table of Contents

 

Dodd-Frank Act will likely result in dramatic changes across the financial regulatory system, some of which become effective immediately and some of which will not become effective until various future dates. Implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act will require many new rules to be made by various federal regulatory agencies over the next several years. Uncertainty remains as to the ultimate impact of the Dodd-Frank Act until final rulemaking is complete, which could have a material adverse impact either on the financial services industry as a whole or on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows. Provisions in the legislation that affect consumer financial protection regulations, deposit insurance assessments, payment of interest on demand deposits, and interchange fees could increase the costs associated with deposits and place limitations on certain revenues those deposits may generate. The Dodd-Frank Act includes provisions that, among other things, will:

 

·                                          Centralize responsibility for consumer financial protection by creating a new agency, the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection, responsible for implementing, examining, and enforcing compliance with federal consumer financial laws.

 

·                                          Create the Financial Stability Oversight Council that will recommend to the Federal Reserve increasingly strict rules for capital, leverage, liquidity, risk management and other requirements as companies grow in size and complexity.

 

·                                          Provide mortgage reform provisions regarding a customer’s ability to repay, restricting variable-rate lending by requiring that the ability to repay variable-rate loans be determined by using the maximum rate that will apply during the first five years of a variable-rate loan term, and making more loans subject to provisions for higher cost loans, new disclosures, and certain other revisions.

 

·                                          Change the assessment base for federal deposit insurance from the amount of insured deposits to consolidated assets less tangible capital, eliminate the ceiling on the size of the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”), and increase the floor on the size of the DIF, which generally will require an increase in the level of assessments for institutions with assets in excess of $10 billion.

 

·                                          Make permanent the $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance and provide unlimited federal deposit insurance until December 31, 2012 for noninterest-bearing demand transaction accounts at all insured depository institutions.

 

·                                          Implement corporate governance revisions, including with regard to executive compensation and proxy access by shareholders, which apply to all public companies, not just financial institutions.

 

22



Table of Contents

 

·                                          Repeal the federal prohibitions on the payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depository institutions to pay interest on business transactions and other accounts.

 

·                                          Amend the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (“EFTA”) to, among other things, give the Federal Reserve the authority to establish rules regarding interchange fees charged for electronic debit transactions by payment card issuers having assets over $10 billion and to enforce a new statutory requirement that such fees be reasonable and proportional to the actual cost of a transaction to the issuer.

 

·                                          Internationally, both the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”) and the Financial Stability Board (established in April 2009 by the Group of Twenty (“G-20”) Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors to take action to strengthen regulation and supervision of the financial system with greater international consistency, cooperation, and transparency) have committed to raise capital standards and liquidity buffers within the banking system (“Basel III”). On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision agreed to the calibration and phase-in of the Basel III minimum capital requirements (raising the minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio to 4.5% and minimum Tier 1 equity ratio to 6.0%, with full implementation by January 2015) and introducing a capital conservation buffer of common equity of an additional 2.5% with full implementation by January 2019. The U.S. federal banking agencies support this agreement. In December 2010, the Basel Committee issued the Basel III rules text, outlining the details and time-lines of global regulatory standards on bank capital adequacy and liquidity. According to the Basel Committee, the Framework sets out higher and better-quality capital, better risk coverage, the introduction of a leverage ratio as a backstop to the risk-based requirement, measures to promote the build-up of capital that can be drawn down in periods of stress, and the introduction of two global liquidity standards.

 

·                                          On September 27, 2010, the U.S. President signed into law the Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 (the “Act”). The Small Business Lending Fund (the “SBLF”), which was enacted as part of the Act, is a $30 billion fund that encourages lending to small businesses by providing Tier 1 capital to qualified community banks with assets of less than $10 billion.

 

·                                          In November 2010, the FDIC approved two proposals that amend the deposit insurance assessment regulations. The first proposal implements a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act that changes the assessment base from one based on domestic deposits (as it has been since 1935) to one based on assets. The assessment base changes from adjusted domestic deposits to average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity.  The second proposal changes the deposit insurance assessment system for large institutions in conjunction with the guidance given in the Dodd-Frank Act.

 

23



Table of Contents

 

·                                          In December 2010, the FDIC voted to increase the required amount of reserves for the designated reserve ratio (“DRR”) to 2.0%. The ratio is higher than the 1.35% set by the Dodd-Frank Act in July 2010 and is an integral part of the FDIC’s comprehensive, long-range management plan for the DIF.

 

·                                          In February 2011, the FDIC approved the final rules that, as noted above, change the assessment base from domestic deposits to average assets minus average tangible equity, adopt a new scorecard-based assessment system for financial institutions with more than $10 billion in assets, and finalize the DRR target size at 2.0% of insured deposits.

 

Effects of Governmental Policies and Economic Conditions

 

Our earnings are affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States government, and its agencies.  The Federal Reserve’s monetary policies have had, and are likely to continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through the Federal Reserve’s statutory power to implement national monetary policy in order, among other things, to curb inflation or combat a recession.  The Federal Reserve, through its monetary and fiscal policies, affects the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its control over the issuance of United States government securities, its regulation of the discount rate applicable to member banks and its influence over reserve requirements to which member banks are subject.  We cannot predict the nature and impact of future changes in monetary or fiscal policies.

 

Available Information

 

We file reports with the SEC including our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current event reports on Form 8-K and proxy statements, as well as any amendments to those reports. The public may read and copy any materials the Registrant files with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov . Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are accessible at no cost on our web site at http://www.citizensfirstbank.com, under the Investors Relations section, once they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. A shareholder may also request a copy of our Annual Report or Form 10-K free of charge upon written request to: Chief Financial Officer, Citizens First Corporation, 1065 Ashley Street, Bowling Green, Kentucky 42103.

 

24



Table of Contents

 

Item 1A.  Risk Factors

 

Our business, financial condition, and results of operation could be harmed by any of the following risks, or other risks that have not been identified or which we believe are immaterial or unlikely.  Shareholders should carefully consider the risks described below in conjunction with other information in this Form 10-K and the information incorporated by reference in this Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and related notes.

 

Current market developments could continue to adversely affect our industry, business, and results of operations.

 

We are operating in a challenging and uncertain economic environment, including generally uncertain conditions nationally and locally in our markets. Financial institutions continue to be affected by declines in the real estate market that have negatively impacted the credit performance of mortgage, construction and commercial real estate loans and resulted in significant write-downs of assets by many financial institutions. Concerns over the stability of the financial markets and the economy have resulted in decreased lending by financial institutions to their customers and to each other. We retain direct exposure to the residential and commercial real estate markets, and we are affected by these events. Continued declines in real estate values, home sales volumes and financial stress on borrowers as a result of the uncertain economic environment, including job losses, could have an adverse affect on our borrowers and/or their customers, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

In particular, we face the following risks in connection with these events:

 

·       Further declines in the housing market and the increased volatility of the stock market may adversely affect consumer confidence and may cause adverse changes in loan payment patterns, causing increases in delinquencies and default rates.

 

·       The processes we use to estimate probable losses and impairment of assets, including investment securities, may no longer be reliable because they rely on complex judgments, including forecasts of economic conditions, which may no longer be capable of accurate estimation.

 

·       Declines in consumer confidence could also result in withdrawal of deposit funds by consumers, negatively impacting our liquidity.

 

·       We may be required to pay increasingly higher FDIC premiums because of the increased deposit coverage and the closure of other financial institutions could deplete the insurance fund of the FDIC.

 

Unlike many larger institutions, we are not able to spread the risks of unfavorable economic conditions across a large number of diversified economic and geographic

 

25



Table of Contents

 

locations. As each of the above conditions continues to exist or worsen, we could experience continuing or increased adverse effects on our financial condition.

 

We are exposed to higher credit risk by commercial real estate, commercial and industrial and construction lending.

 

Commercial real estate and commercial and agricultural lending usually involve higher credit risks than that of single-family residential lending. As of December 31, 2010, the following loan types accounted for the stated percentages of our total loan portfolio: commercial real estate—43.6%, commercial and agricultural—24.65%.  These types of loans involve larger loan balances to a single borrower or groups of related borrowers. Commercial real estate loans may be affected to a greater extent than residential loans by adverse conditions in real estate markets or the economy because commercial real estate borrowers’ ability to repay their loans depends on successful development of their properties, in addition to the factors affecting residential real estate borrowers. These loans also involve greater risk because they generally are not fully amortizing over the loan period, but have a balloon payment due at maturity. A borrower’s ability to make a balloon payment typically will depend on being able to either refinance the loan or sell the underlying property in a timely manner.

 

Commercial loans are typically based on the borrowers’ ability to repay the loans from the cash flow of their businesses. These loans may involve greater risk because the availability of funds to repay each loan depends substantially on the success of the business itself. In addition, the collateral securing the loans have the following characteristics: (a) they depreciate over time, (b) they are difficult to appraise and liquidate, and (c) they fluctuate in value based on the success of the business.

 

Risk of loss on a construction loan depends largely upon whether our initial estimate of the property’s value at completion of construction equals or exceeds the cost of the property construction (including interest), the availability of permanent take-out financing, and the builder’s ability to ultimately sell the property. During the construction phase, a number of factors can result in delays and cost overruns. If estimates of value are inaccurate or if actual construction costs exceed estimates, the value of the property securing the loan may be insufficient to ensure full repayment when completed through a permanent loan or by seizure of collateral.

 

Commercial real estate and commercial and agricultural loans are more susceptible to a risk of loss during a downturn in the business cycle. Our underwriting, review and monitoring cannot eliminate all of the risks related to these loans.

 

The banking regulators are giving commercial real estate lending greater scrutiny, and may require banks with higher levels of commercial real estate loans to implement improved underwriting, internal controls, risk management policies and portfolio stress testing, as well as possibly higher levels of allowances for losses and capital levels as a result of commercial real estate lending growth and exposures.

 

26



Table of Contents

 

Current levels of market volatility are unprecedented.

 

The capital and credit markets have been experiencing volatility and disruption for more than two years.  In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit availability for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’ underlying financial strength. If current levels of market disruption and volatility continue or worsen, there can be no assurance that we will not experience further adverse effects, which may be material, on our ability to access capital and on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

Since our business is primarily concentrated in the southcentral Kentucky area, a downturn in the local economy may adversely affect our business.

 

Our lending and deposit gathering activities have been historically concentrated primarily in the southcentral Kentucky area and our success depends on the general economic condition of the area.  Adverse changes in the regional and general economic conditions could reduce our growth rate, impair our ability to collect loans, increase loan delinquencies, increase problem assets and foreclosure, increase claims and lawsuits, decrease the demand for the Bank’s products and services, and decrease the value of collateral for loans, especially real estate, thereby having a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

Our allowance for loan losses may prove to be insufficient to absorb probable incurred losses in our loan portfolio.

 

Lending money is a substantial part of our business. However, every loan we make carries a certain risk of non-payment. This risk is affected by, among other things:

 

·                                cash flow of the borrower and/or the project being financed;

 

·                                in the case of a collateralized loan, the changes and uncertainties as to the future value of the collateral;

 

·                                the credit history of a particular borrower;

 

·                                changes in economic and industry conditions; and

 

·                                the duration of the loan.

 

We maintain an allowance for loan losses that we believe is a reasonable estimate of known and inherent losses within the loan portfolio. We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio. Through a periodic review and consideration of the loan portfolio, management determines the amount of the allowance for loan losses by considering general market conditions, credit quality of the loan portfolio, the collateral supporting the loans and performance of customers relative to their financial obligations with us. The amount of future losses is susceptible to changes in economic, operating and other conditions, including changes in interest

 

27



Table of Contents

 

rates, which may be beyond our control, and these losses may exceed current estimates. In addition, estimating loan loss allowances for growing portfolios is more difficult, and may be more susceptible to changes in estimates, and to losses exceeding estimates, than more seasoned portfolios. We cannot fully predict the amount or timing of losses or whether the loss allowance will be adequate in the future. Excessive loan losses and significant additions to our allowance for loan losses could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

 

In addition, bank regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or recognize further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of our management.  Any increase in our allowance for loan losses or loan charge-offs as required by these regulatory authorities might have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.  Our current and future allowances for loan losses may not be adequate to cover future loan losses given current and future market conditions.

 

Our loan portfolio possesses increased risk due to our relatively high concentration of loans collateralized by real estate.

 

Approximately 71.7% of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2010 was comprised of loans collateralized by real estate. Further adverse changes in the economy affecting values of real estate generally or in our primary market specifically could significantly impair the value of our collateral and our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure. The real estate collateral provides an alternate source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. If real estate values decline, it is also more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance for loan losses. If during a period of reduced real estate values we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt or to increase our allowance for loan losses, it could materially reduce our profitability and adversely affect our financial condition.

 

Recent legislation and administrative actions authorizing the U.S. government to take direct actions within the financial services industry may not stabilize the U.S. financial system.

 

On July 21, 2010, the President signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, a comprehensive regulatory framework that will affect every financial institution in the U.S. The Dodd-Frank Act includes, among other measures, changes to the deposit insurance and financial regulatory systems, enhanced bank capital requirements and provisions designed to protect consumers in financial transactions. Regulatory agencies will implement new regulations in the future which will establish the parameters of the new regulatory framework and provide a clearer understanding of the legislation’s effect on banks. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of our business activities, require changes to certain of our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity, and leverage requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business. In particular, the potential impact of the Dodd-Frank Act on our operations and activities, both currently and prospectively, include, among others:

 

28



Table of Contents

 

·                                          a reduction in our ability to generate or originate revenue-producing assets as a result of compliance with heightened capital standards;

 

·                                          increased cost of operations due to greater regulatory oversight, supervision and examination of banks and bank holding companies, and higher deposit insurance premiums;

 

·                                          the limitation on our ability to raise capital through the use of trust preferred securities as these securities may no longer be included as Tier 1 capital going forward; and

 

·                                          the limitation on our ability to expand consumer product and service offerings due to anticipated stricter consumer protection laws and regulations.

 

Numerous actions have been taken by the U.S. Congress, the Federal Reserve, the U.S. Treasury, the FDIC, the SEC and others to address the current liquidity and credit crisis that followed the sub-prime mortgage crisis that commenced in 2007, including the Financial Stability Program adopted by the U.S. Treasury. We cannot predict the actual effects of EESA, ARRA, the Dodd-Frank Act, and various other governmental, regulatory, monetary and fiscal initiatives which have been and may be enacted on the economy, the financial markets, or on us. The terms and costs of these activities, or the failure of these actions to help stabilize the financial markets, asset prices, market liquidity and a continuation or worsening of current financial market and economic conditions, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and the price of our common stock.

 

Our operations depend upon our continued ability to access Federal Home Loan Bank advances.

 

Due to the high level of competition for deposits in our market, we utilize advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Cincinnati to help fund our asset base. Federal Home Loan Bank advances may generally be more sensitive to changes in interest rates and volatility in the capital markets than retail deposits attracted through our branch network, and our reliance on these sources of funds increases the sensitivity of our portfolio to these external factors.  At December 31, 2010, we had $15.0 million in Federal Home Loan Bank advances.

 

Federal Home Loan Bank advances are only available to borrowers that meet certain conditions.  If the Bank were to cease meeting these conditions, our access to Federal Home Loan Bank advances could be significantly reduced or eliminated.  We rely on these sources of funds because we believe that generating funds through Federal Home Loan Bank advances in many instances decreases our cost of funds, relative to the cost of generating and retaining retail deposits through our branch network.  If our access to Federal Home Loan Bank advances were reduced or eliminated for whatever reason, the resulting decrease in our net interest income or limitation on our ability to fund additional loans would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

29



Table of Contents

 

Certain Federal Home Loan Banks have experienced lower earnings from time to time and paid out lower dividends to its members.  Future problems at the Federal Home Loan Banks may impact the collateral necessary to secure borrowings and limit the borrowings extended to its member banks, as well as require additional capital contributions by its member banks.  Should this occur, our short term liquidity needs could be negatively impacted.  Should we be restricted from using Federal Home Loan Bank advances due to weakness in the system or with the Federal Home Loan Bank, we may be forced to find alternative funding sources.  These alternative funding sources may include seeking lines of credit with third party banks or the Federal Reserve Bank, borrowing under repurchase agreement lines, increasing deposit rates to attract additional funds, accessing brokered deposits, or selling certain investment securities categorized as available-for-sale in order to maintain adequate levels of liquidity.

 

Impairment of goodwill and/or intangible assets could require charges to earnings, which could result in a negative impact on our results of operations.

 

Goodwill arises when a business is purchased for an amount greater than the net fair value of its assets. We recognized goodwill as an asset on our balance sheet in connection with our acquisition of Kentucky Banking Centers, Inc. (see Note 7 “Goodwill and Intangible Assets” of the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8 hereof). When an intangible asset is determined to have an indefinite useful life, it is not amortized, and instead is evaluated for impairment.  We evaluate goodwill and intangibles for impairment at least annually by comparing fair value to carrying amount.  We recorded a goodwill impairment during 2008 but determined that goodwill was not further impaired during 2009 and 2010.  However, a significant and sustained decline in our stock price and market capitalization, a significant decline in our expected future cash flows, a significant adverse change in the business climate, slower growth rates or other factors could result in future impairment of goodwill or other intangible assets.  If we were to conclude that a future write-down of our goodwill or intangible assets is necessary, then we would record the appropriate charge to earnings, which could be materially adverse to our results of operations and financial position.

 

The Company’s securities portfolio performance in difficult market conditions could have adverse effects on the Company’s results of operations.

 

Under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, we are required to review our investment portfolio periodically for the presence of other-than-temporary impairment of its securities, taking into consideration current market conditions, the extent and nature of change in fair value, issuer rating changes and trends, volatility of earnings, current analysts’ evaluations, our intent to sell or determination that we will not be required to sell investments until a recovery of fair value, as well as other factors. Adverse developments with respect to one or more of the foregoing factors may require us to deem particular securities to be other-than-temporarily impaired, with the credit loss recognized as a charge to earnings. Recent market volatility has made it extremely difficult to value certain of our securities. Subsequent valuations, in light of factors prevailing at that time, may result in significant changes in the values of these securities in future periods. Any of these factors could require us to recognize further impairments

 

30



Table of Contents

 

in the value of our securities portfolio, which may have an adverse effect on our results of operations in future periods.

 

Our future success is dependent on our ability to compete effectively in the highly competitive banking industry.

 

We face substantial competition in all phases of our operations from a variety of different competitors. Our future growth and success will depend on our ability to compete effectively in this highly competitive environment. To date, we have grown our business by focusing on our geographic market and emphasizing the high level of service and responsiveness desired by our customers. We compete for loans, deposits and other financial services with other commercial banks, thrifts, credit unions, consumer finance companies, insurance companies and brokerage firms. Many of our competitors offer products and services which we do not offer, and many have substantially greater resources, name recognition and market presence that benefit them in attracting business. In addition, larger competitors may be able to price loans and deposits more aggressively than we do, and smaller and newer competitors may also be more aggressive in terms of pricing loan and deposit products than us in order to obtain a larger share of the market. Some of the financial institutions and financial services organizations with which we compete are not subject to the same degree of regulation as is imposed on bank holding companies, federally insured state-chartered banks and national banks and federal savings banks. As a result, these non-bank competitors have certain advantages over us in accessing funding and in providing various services.

 

We also experience competition from a variety of institutions outside of our market area. Some of these institutions conduct business primarily over the Internet and may thus be able to realize certain cost savings and offer products and services at more favorable rates and with greater convenience to the customer.

 

Our business may be adversely affected by the highly regulated environment in which we operate, including the various capital adequacy guidelines we are required to meet.

 

We are subject to extensive federal and state legislation, regulation, examination and supervision. Recently enacted, proposed and future legislation and regulations have had, will continue to have, or may have a material adverse effect on our business and operations. Our success depends on our continued ability to maintain compliance with these regulations. Some of these regulations may increase our costs and thus place other financial institutions in stronger, more favorable competitive positions. We cannot predict what restrictions may be imposed upon us with future legislation.

 

We and the Bank are required to meet certain regulatory capital adequacy guidelines and other regulatory requirements imposed by the FRB, the FDIC and the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions. If we or the Bank fail to meet these minimum capital guidelines and other regulatory requirements, our financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.

 

31



Table of Contents

 

If we are unable to redeem the Series A preferred stock after five years, the cost of this capital to us will increase substantially.

 

If we do not redeem the Series A preferred stock prior to December 19, 2013, the cost of this capital to us will increase substantially on that date, from 5.0% per annum to 9.0% per annum. Depending on our financial condition at the time, this increase in the annual dividend rate on the Series A preferred stock could have a material negative effect on our liquidity.

 

We may be adversely affected by further increases in FDIC insurance or special assessments.

 

Our earnings, liquidity, and capital may be affected by FDIC assessments.  In February 2009, the FDIC adopted an interim rule increasing insurance assessments and also proposed a special 20 basis point one-time emergency special assessment.  The proposed 20 basis point assessment was changed to 5 basis points and was based on total assets rather than deposits.  This special assessment was paid September 30, 2009.  The FDIC has the ability to require additional special assessments if determined necessary.  In November 2009, the FDIC issued a final rule requiring banks to prepay their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012.  These prepayments were collected on December 30, 2009 along with the regular assessment for the third quarter of 2009.  Along with this prepayment, insurance rates were increased three basis points beginning with 2011.  In February 2011, the FDIC approved two rules that amend the deposit insurance assessment regulations. The first rule implements a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act that changes the assessment base from one based on domestic deposits to one based on assets. The assessment base changes from adjusted domestic deposits to average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity. The second rule changes the deposit insurance assessment system for large institutions in conjunction with the guidance given in the Dodd-Frank Act. Since the new base would be much larger than the current base, the FDIC will lower assessment rates, which achieves the FDIC’s goal of not significantly altering the total amount of revenue collected from the industry. Risk categories and debt ratings will be eliminated from the assessment calculation for large banks which will instead use scorecards. The scorecards will include financial measures that are predictive of long-term performance. A large financial institution will continue to be defined as an insured depository institution with at least $10 billion in assets. Both changes in the assessment system will be effective as of April 1, 2011 and will be payable at the end of September.

 

Although we cannot predict what the insurance assessment rates will be in the future, further deterioration in either risk-based capital ratios or adjustments to the base assessment rates could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

 

We may be adversely affected by interest rate changes.

 

Our earnings are largely dependent upon our net interest income. Net interest income is the difference between interest income earned on interest-earning assets such as loans

 

32



Table of Contents

 

and securities and interest expense paid on interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowed funds. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control, including general economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, in particular, the Federal Reserve. Changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, could influence not only the interest we receive on loans and securities and the amount of interest we pay on deposits and borrowings, but such changes could also affect (i) our ability to originate loans and obtain deposits, (ii) the fair value of our financial assets and liabilities, and (iii) the average duration of our loan and mortgage-backed securities portfolios. If the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings increase at a faster rate than the interest rates received on loans and other investments, our net interest income, and therefore earnings, could be adversely affected. Earnings could also be adversely affected if the interest rates received on loans and other investments fall more quickly than the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings.

 

We generally seek to maintain a neutral position in terms of the volume of assets and liabilities that mature or re-price during any period. As such, we have adopted asset and liability management strategies to attempt to minimize the potential adverse effects of changes in interest rates on net interest income, primarily by altering the mix and maturity of loans, investments and funding sources, so that it may reasonably maintain its net interest income and net interest margin. However, interest rate fluctuations, the level and shape of the interest rate yield curve, loan prepayments, loan production and deposit flows are constantly changing and influence the ability to maintain a neutral position. Accordingly, we may not be successful in maintaining a neutral position and, as a result, our net interest margin may be adversely impacted.

 

We may elect or be compelled to seek additional capital in the future, but that capital may not be available when it is needed.

 

We are required by federal and state regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations.  In addition, we may elect to raise additional capital to support our business or to finance acquisitions, if any, or we may otherwise elect or be required to raise additional capital.  In that regard, a number of financial institutions have recently raised considerable amounts of capital in response to deterioration in their results of operations and financial condition arising from the turmoil in the mortgage loan market, deteriorating economic conditions, declines in real estate values and other factors.  Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on conditions in the capital markets, economic conditions and a number of other factors, many of which are outside our control, and on our financial performance. Accordingly, we cannot assure you of our ability to raise additional capital if needed or on terms acceptable to us. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, it may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

 

Our exposure to operational risks may adversely affect us.

 

Similar to other financial institutions, we are exposed to many types of operational risk, including reputational risk, legal and compliance risk, the risk of fraud or theft by employees or outsiders, the risk that sensitive customer or company data is

 

33



Table of Contents

 

compromised, unauthorized transactions by employees or operational errors, including clerical or record-keeping errors. If any of these risks occur, it could result in material adverse consequences for us.

 

We continually encounter technological change, and we may have fewer resources than many of our competitors to continue to invest in technological improvements.

 

The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. In addition to better serving customers, the effective use of technology will increase efficiency and will enable financial institutions to reduce costs. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our clients by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy client demands for convenience, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our clients.

 

As a service to our clients, we currently offer an Internet PC banking product. Use of this service involves the transmission of confidential information over public networks. We cannot be sure that advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other developments will not result in a compromise or breach in the commercially available encryption and authentication technology that we use to protect our clients’ transaction data. If we were to experience such a breach or compromise, we could suffer losses and our operations could be adversely affected.

 

Our accounting policies and methods impact how we report our financial condition and results of operations. Application of these policies and methods may require management to make estimates about matters that are uncertain.

 

Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Our management must exercise judgment in selecting and applying many of these accounting policies and methods so they comply with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles and reflect management’s judgment of the most appropriate manner to report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, management must select the accounting policy or method to apply from two or more alternatives, any of which might be reasonable under the circumstances yet might result in our reporting materially different amounts than would have been reported under a different alternative. For a description of our significant accounting policies, see Note 1 of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements. These accounting policies are critical to presenting our financial condition and results of operations. They may require management to make difficult, subjective or complex judgments about matters that are uncertain. Materially different amounts could be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions.

 

34



Table of Contents

 

Changes in accounting standards could materially impact our consolidated financial statements.

 

The accounting standard setters, including the Financial Accounting Standards Board, SEC and other regulatory bodies, from time to time may change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our consolidated financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in changes to previously reported financial results, or a cumulative charge to retained earnings.

 

Our internal controls may be ineffective.

 

We regularly review and update our internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures and corporate governance policies and procedures. As a result, we may incur increased costs to maintain and improve our controls and procedures. Any system of controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of our controls or procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations or financial condition.

 

We rely on dividends from the Bank for substantially all of our revenue.

 

We receive substantially all of our revenue as dividends from the Bank.  Federal and state regulations limit the amount of dividends that the Bank may pay to us.  In the event the Bank becomes unable to pay dividends to us, we may not be able to service our debt, pay our other obligations or pay dividends on our preferred stock or our common stock.  Accordingly, our inability to receive dividends from the Bank could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

A small number of customers account for a large percentage of our total deposits.

 

At December 31, 2010, our ten largest deposit customers accounted for approximately $17.4 million, or 6.0%, of total deposits. If one or more of these customers move their deposits, our net income may be adversely impacted as a result of decreased levels of liquidity with which to fund growth in our interest earning assets.

 

We rely on certificates of deposit in excess of $100,000 for a significant portion of our deposit funding.

 

At December 31, 2010, $66.3 million, or 23.0% of total deposits, consisted of certificates of deposit in excess of $100,000. These depositors tend to be more active in shopping for better interest rates and therefore are either likely to move their deposits or require

 

35



Table of Contents

 

active repricing to market. In either event, our net income may be adversely impacted as a result of decreased levels of liquidity with which to fund growth in our interest earning assets or increased interest expense.

 

Efforts to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act will involve significant expenditures,and non-compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act may adversely affect us.

 

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and the related rules and regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission that are now applicable to us, have increased the scope, complexity and cost of corporate governance, reporting and disclosure practices.  We have experienced, and we expect to continue to experience, greater compliance costs, including costs related to internal controls, as a result of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act.  Although our external auditors are not required to attest on our internal controls over financial reporting, we expect these rules and regulations to continue to increase our accounting, legal and other costs, and to make some activities more difficult, time consuming and costly.  In the event that we are unable to maintain or achieve compliance with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and related rules, we may be adversely affected.

 

We will face risks with respect to future expansion and acquisitions or mergers.

 

Although we do not have any current plans to do so, we may seek to acquire other financial institutions or parts of those institutions. We may also expand into new markets or lines of business or offer new products or services. These activities would involve a number of risks, including:

 

·                                          the time and expense associated with identifying and evaluating potential acquisitions and merger partners;

 

·                                          using inaccurate estimates and judgments to evaluate credit, operations, management and market risks with respect to the target institution or assets;

 

·                                          diluting our existing shareholders in an acquisition;

 

·                                          the time and expense associated with evaluating new markets for expansion, hiring experienced local management and opening new offices, as there may be a substantial time lag between these activities before we generate sufficient assets and deposits to support the costs of the expansion;

 

·                                          taking a significant amount of time negotiating a transaction or working on expansion plans, resulting in management’s attention being diverted from the operation of our existing business;

 

·                                          the time and expense associated with integrating the operations and personnel of the combined businesses;

 

36



Table of Contents

 

·                                          creating an adverse short-term effect on our results of operations; and

 

·                                          losing key employees and customers as a result of an acquisition that is poorly received

 

The decline in fair value of our stock could adversely affect our ability to raise capital, dilute current shareholders’ ownership or make it more expensive to raise capital.

 

The decline in the market prices of financial stocks in general, and our stock in particular, could make it more expensive for us to raise capital in the public or private markets. In many situations, our Board of Directors has the authority, without any vote of our shareholders, to issue shares of our authorized but unissued securities. In the future, we may issue additional securities, through public or private offerings, in order to raise additional capital. Any such issuance of common stock at current trading prices would significantly dilute the ownership of our current shareholders because we would have to issue more shares than if we had raised the same amount of capital when our share price was higher. A decline in our performance could adversely impact our stock price and the level of interest in an equity offering making it more difficult or expensive to attract investors’ interest. In the case of a debt offering, it could also result in a higher cost of funds, which could negatively impact our future earnings.

 

Because of our participation in the Capital Purchase Program, we are subject to several restrictions including restrictions on our ability to declare or pay dividends and repurchase our shares as well as restrictions on compensation paid to our executive officers.

 

Our ability to declare or pay dividends on any of our shares is limited. Specifically, we are unable to declare or pay dividends on our common stock or pari passu preferred shares if we are in arrears on the payment of dividends on the Series A preferred stock. Further, we are not permitted to increase dividends on our common stock above the amount of our last cash dividend of $0.05 per share without the Treasury Department’s approval until December 19, 2011, unless all of the Series A preferred stock has been redeemed or transferred by the Treasury Department to unaffiliated third parties. In addition, our ability to repurchase shares of our common stock is restricted. The consent of the Treasury Department generally is required for us to make any stock repurchase (other than purchases of Series A preferred stock or purchases of junior preferred shares or common stock in connection with the administration of any employee benefit plan in the ordinary course of business and consistent with past practice) until December 19, 2011, unless all of the Series A preferred stock has been redeemed or transferred by the Treasury Department to unaffiliated third parties. Further, our common stock or pari passu preferred shares may not be repurchased if we are in arrears on the payment of Series A preferred stock dividends.

 

As a recipient of government funding under the Capital Purchase Program, we must comply with the executive compensation and corporate governance standards imposed by the ARRA for so long as the Treasury Department holds any securities acquired from us excluding any period during which the Treasury Department holds only the Warrant.

 

37



Table of Contents

 

These standards include (but are not limited to) (i) ensuring that incentive compensation plans and arrangements for senior executive officers do not encourage unnecessary and excessive risks that threaten our value; (ii) required clawback of any bonus, retention award or incentive compensation paid (or under a legally binding obligation to be paid) to a senior executive officer based on materially inaccurate financial statements or other materially inaccurate performance metric criteria; (iii) prohibitions on making golden parachute payments to senior executive officers, except for payments for services performed or benefits accrued; (iv) prohibitions on paying or accruing any bonus, retention award or incentive compensation with respect to our President, except for certain grants of restricted stock; (v) prohibitions on compensation plans that encourage manipulation of reported earnings; (vi) retroactive review of bonuses, retention awards or other compensation that the Treasury Department finds to be inconsistent with the purposes of the Capital Purchase Program or otherwise contrary to the public interest; (vii) required establishment of a company-wide policy regarding “excessive or luxury expenditures”; (viii) inclusion in our proxy statements for annual shareholder meetings of a non-binding “say on pay” shareholder vote on the compensation of executives; and (ix) agreement not to claim a deduction, for federal income tax purposes, for compensation paid to any of the senior executive officers in excess of $500,000 per year.

 

The Series A preferred stock impacts net income available to holders of our common stock and earnings per share of our common stock, and the Warrant we issued to the Treasury Department may be dilutive to holders of our common stock.

 

While the additional capital we raised through our participation in the Capital Purchase Program provided further funding to our business, it has increased our equity as well as our preferred dividend requirements.  Warrants issued could potentially dilute earnings for shares of common stock currently outstanding.  The dividends declared and the accretion of discount on the Series A preferred stock reduces the net income available to holders of our common stock and our earnings per share.  The Series A preferred stock also receives preferential treatment in the event of our liquidation, dissolution or winding up.  Additionally, the ownership interest of the existing holders of our common stock will be diluted to the extent the Warrant we issued to the Treasury Department is exercised.  The common stock underlying the Warrant represents approximately 11.4% of the shares of our common stock outstanding as of December 31, 2010.  Although the Treasury Department has agreed not to vote any of the common stock it receives upon exercise of the Warrant, a transferee of any portion of the Warrant or of any common stock acquired upon exercise of the Warrant is not bound by this restriction.

 

Item 1B.  Unresolved Staff Comments None.

 

Item 2.  Properties

 

We currently operate from a nine office network in Warren, Simpson, Barren and Hart Counties, Kentucky.

 

38



Table of Contents

 

Type of Office

 

Location

 

Leased or Owned

 

 

 

 

 

Corporate Office

 

1065 Ashley Street

 

Owned

 

 

Bowling Green, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Main Office

 

1805 Campbell Lane

 

Leased(1)

 

 

Bowling Green, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

987 Lehman Avenue

 

Owned

 

 

Bowling Green, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

1200 S. Main Street

 

Owned

 

 

Franklin, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

2451 Fitzgerald-Industrial Drive

 

Owned

 

 

Bowling Green, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

204 East Main Street

 

Owned

 

 

Horse Cave, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

760 West Cherry

 

Owned

 

 

Glasgow, Kentucky

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

607 S L Rogers Well Blvd

 

Leased

 

 

Glasgow, KY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Branch

 

656 North Main Street

 

Leased

 

 

Munfordville, Kentucky

 

 

 


(1)     We sold this branch in the fourth quarter of 2006 to an unrelated party and leased it back.

 

We also own properties located at 2900 Louisville Road and on Gator Drive in Bowling Green which may be used for future branch expansion.  We also own property at 705 N. Main Street in Franklin where an ATM is located.

 

Item 3.  Legal Proceedings

 

In the opinion of management, there is no proceeding pending or, to the knowledge of management, threatened, in which an adverse decision could result in a material adverse change in the consolidated financial condition or results of operations of the Company.

 

39



Table of Contents

 

Part II

 

Item 5.   Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

 

The common stock of the Company is traded in the NASDAQ Global Market under the symbol “CZFC.”  Trading volume in the Company’s common stock is light. As of March 24, 2011, there were approximately 850 beneficial owners of the Company’s common stock, including 143 shareholders and to the best knowledge of the Company,  approximately 666 beneficial owners whose shares are held by securities brokers-dealers or other nominees.

 

The following table shows the reported high and low sales price for the periods:

 

2010

 

High

 

Low

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fourth Quarter

 

$

7.70

 

$

6.36

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Third Quarter

 

7.50

 

6.63

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Second Quarter

 

7.64

 

6.26

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Quarter

 

7.10

 

4.95

 

 

2009

 

High

 

Low

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fourth Quarter

 

$

8.72

 

$

3.75

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Third Quarter

 

5.50

 

4.00

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Second Quarter

 

5.85

 

3.51

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

First Quarter

 

4.44

 

3.71

 

 

No cash dividends were paid on common stock during 2010 and 2009. We paid a cash dividend of $0.05 per share on our common stock in June and December of 2008. Dividends on common stock will be payable in the future at the discretion of the Board of Directors, subject to certain restrictions discussed below and in our financial statements.  Quarterly dividends are payable on our cumulative perpetual preferred stock, prior and in preference to the payment of dividends on our common stock, at an annual fixed rate of 6.5%.  Quarterly dividends are payable on our Series A preferred stock, prior and in preference to the payment of dividends on our common stock , and

 

40



Table of Contents

 

pari passu with the payment of dividends on our cumulative perpetual preferred stock, at an annual fixed rate of 5.0% through December 18, 2013 and at the rate of 9% thereafter.

 

The Company’s 401(K) plan offers employees the opportunity to invest contributions in a fund consisting primarily of the Company’s common stock.  As of December 31, 2010, the common stock fund held 22,315 shares of Company common stock.

 

The following table sets forth certain information as of December 31, 2010, regarding Company compensation plans under which equity securities of the Company are authorized for issuance.

 

Equity Compensation Plan Information

 

Plan Category

 

Number of
Securities
To be Issued Upon
Exercise of
Outstanding
Options,
Warrants and Rights
(a)

 

Weighted-average
Exercise Price of
Outstanding
Options, Warrants
and Rights
(b)

 

Number of Securities
Remaining Available
for
Future Issuance under
equity compensation
plans
(excluding securities
reflected in Column a)
(c)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Equity compensation plans approved by security holders

 

90,664

 

$

15.22

 

84,082

 

Equity compensation plans not approved by security holders

 

0

 

0.00

 

0

 

Total

 

90,664

 

$

15.22

 

84,082

 

 

Item 6.  Selected Financial Data. Not Applicable.

 

41



Table of Contents

 

Item 7.  Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

 

The following discussion and analysis identifies significant factors that have affected our financial position and operating results during the periods included in the accompanying financial statements.  We encourage you to read this discussion and analysis in conjunction with Item 8 “Financial Statements” as well as other information included in this Form 10-K.

 

Overview of 2010

 

For the year ended December 31, 2010, we reported net income of $2.5 million compared to a net loss of $(1.6) million for the year ended December 31, 2009. Basic and diluted income per common share were $0.77 and $0.75, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2010, compared to basic and diluted loss per common share of $(1.34) and $(1.34), respectively, for 2009.

 

Significant developments for the year ended December 31, 2010 were:

 

·                  Net income increased $4.1 million, or $2.09 per share, from a net loss of ($1.6) million in the previous year to $2.5 million in 2010.

 

·                  Total assets increased $5.5 million, or 1.6%, to $349.7 million since the 2009 year-end, led by an increase in loans of $4.4 million.

 

·                  Net interest margin increased to 4.08% for 2010 compared to 3.63% for 2009 as the rates we paid on deposits and other borrowings declined while the yield on earning assets remained steady.

 

·                  Provision expense for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2010 was $1.6 million, a decrease of $3.1 million from the provision expense of $4.7 million for the previous year. Net loan charge-offs were $562 thousand, or 0.21% of average loans for 2010, compared with $4.6 million, or 1.72% of average loans for 2009.

 

Application of Critical Accounting Policies

 

Our consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with United States generally accepted accounting principles and follow general practices within the financial services industry.  The most significant accounting policies followed by the Company are presented in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements.  These policies, along with the disclosures presented in the other financial statement notes and in this financial review, provide information on how significant assets and liabilities are valued in the financial statements and how those values are determined.  Based on the valuation techniques used and the sensitivity of financial statement amounts to the methods, assumptions, and estimates underlying those amounts, management has identified the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the evaluation of our

 

42



Table of Contents

 

goodwill and other intangible assets, and our valuation of deferred tax assets to be the accounting areas that require the most subjective or complex judgments, and as such could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available.

 

Allowance for Loan Losses

 

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of probable credit losses incurred in the loan portfolio. Determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses is considered a critical accounting estimate because it requires significant judgment and the use of estimates related to the amount and timing of expected future cash flows or underlying collateral values on impaired loans, estimated losses on loans based on historical loss experience, and consideration of current economic trends and conditions, all of which may be susceptible to significant change.The loan portfolio also represents the largest asset type on the consolidated balance sheet. Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements describes the methodology used to determine the allowance for loan losses, and a discussion of the factors driving changes in the amount of the allowance for loan losses is included under “Asset Quality and the Allowance for Loan Losses” below.

 

Goodwill and Other Intangibles

 

Management is required to assess goodwill and other intangible assets annually for impairment or more often if certain factors are identified which could imply potential impairment. This assessment involves preparing analyses of market multiples for similar operations, and estimating the fair value of the reporting unit to which the goodwill is allocated. If the analysis results in an estimate of fair value materially less than the carrying value we would be required to take a charge against earnings to write down the asset to the lower fair value. Based on management’s assessment completed with the help of an outside valuation firm, we believe our goodwill of $2.6 million and other identifiable intangibles of $1.0 million are not impaired and are properly recorded in the consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2010.

 

Valuation of Deferred Tax Asset

 

We evaluate deferred tax assets quarterly. We will realize this asset to the extent we are profitable or able to carry back tax losses to periods in which we paid income taxes. Our determination of the realization of the deferred tax asset will be based upon management’s judgment of various future events and uncertainties, including the timing and amount of future income we will earn and the implementation of various tax planning strategies to maximize realization of the deferred tax assets.  Management believes we will generate sufficient operating earnings to realize the deferred tax asset.  Examinations of our income tax returns or changes in tax law may impact the tax liabilities and resulting provisions for income taxes.

 

43



Table of Contents

 

Results of Operations

 

Net Interest Income

 

Net interest income, our principal source of earnings, is the difference between the interest income generated by earning assets, such as loans and securities, and the total interest cost of the deposits and borrowings obtained to fund these assets.  Factors that influence the level of net interest income include the volume of earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, yields earned and rates paid, the level of non-performing loans and non-earning assets, and the amount of non-interest bearing deposits supporting earning assets.

 

For the year ended December 31, 2010, net interest income was $12.5 million, an increase of $1.5 million, or 13.6%, over net interest income of $11.0 million in 2009. The net interest margin in 2010 was 4.08%, compared to 3.63% in 2009. This increase of 45 basis points in the net interest margin resulted primarily from a reduction in interest expense, while interest income remained steady.  The prime rate remained stable throughout 2010 and 2009 at 3.25%. Interest rates were more volatile in 2008, with reductions in the federal funds target rate and seven prime rate cuts that totaled 400 basis points.

 

Net Interest Analysis Summary

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Average yield on interest earning assets

 

5.68

%

5.68

%

Average rate on interest bearing liabilities

 

1.87

%

2.37

%

Net interest spread

 

3.81

%

3.31

%

Net interest margin

 

4.08

%

3.63

%

 

Our average interest-earning assets were $316.1 million for 2010, compared with $313.9 million for 2009, a 0.70% increase primarily attributable to an increase in outstanding loans. Average loans were $266.7 million for 2010, compared with $265.4 million for 2009, a 0.49% increase. Our total interest income increased 1.1% to $17.6 million for 2010, compared with $17.4 million for 2009. The change was due primarily to increased volumes of loans and increased loan yields.

 

Our average interest-bearing liabilities increased by 0.30% to $271.5 million for 2010, compared with $270.7 million for 2009. Our total interest expense decreased 20.31% to $5.1 million for 2010, compared with $6.4 million during 2009.  The change was due primarily to a decrease in the rates of time deposits. Our average volume of time deposits increased 8.57% to $183.5 million for 2010, compared with $169.0 million for 2009. The average interest rate paid on time deposits decreased to 2.37% for 2010, compared with 3.07% for 2009.  The cost of funds in total decreased from 2.37% in 2009 to 1.87% in 2010. The decrease in cost of funds was the result of the continued

 

44



Table of Contents

 

repricing of certificates of deposit at maturity at lower interest rates, and decreased rates on FHLB advances.

 

The following table sets forth for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 information regarding average balances of assets and liabilities as well as the amounts of interest income from average interest-earning assets and interest expense on average interest-bearing liabilities and average yields and costs.  We have calculated the yields and costs for the periods indicated by dividing income or expense by the average balances of assets or liabilities, respectively, for the periods presented.

 

45



Table of Contents

 

Average Consolidated Balance Sheets and Net Interest Analysis(Dollars in thousands)

 

Year Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

Average
Balance

 

Income/
Expense

 

Average
Rate

 

Average
Balance

 

Income/
Expense

 

Average
Rate

 

Interest-earning assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal funds sold and other

 

$

7,250

 

$

22

 

0.30

%

$

5,182

 

$

9

 

0.17

%

Available-for-sale securities: (1)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxable

 

21,380

 

605

 

2.83

%

22,097

 

748

 

3.39

%

Nontaxable(1)

 

18,701

 

1,107

 

5.92

%

19,222

 

1,136

 

5.91

%

FHLB stock

 

2,025

 

89

 

4.37

%

2,025

 

94

 

4.64

%

Loans receivable (2)

 

266,708

 

16,138

 

6.05

%

265,355

 

15,831

 

5.97

%

Total interest-earning assets

 

316,064

 

17,961

 

5.68

%

313,881

 

17,818

 

5.68

%

Non-interest earning assets

 

32,245

 

 

 

 

 

33,181

 

 

 

 

 

Total assets

 

$

348,309

 

 

 

 

 

$

347,062

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing transaction accounts

 

$

47,708

 

202

 

.42

%

$

48,301

 

238

 

.49

%

Savings accounts

 

25,470

 

169

 

.66

%

22,073

 

158

 

.72

%

Time deposits

 

183,524

 

4,343

 

2.37

%

168,961

 

5,191

 

3.07

%

Total interest-bearing deposits

 

256,702

 

4,714

 

1.84

%

239,335

 

5,587

 

2.33

%

Federal funds purchased

 

10

 

0

 

0.00

%

13

 

0

 

0.00

%

Securities sold under repurchase agreements

 

870

 

8

 

0.92

%

3,665

 

99

 

2.70

%

FHLB borrowings

 

8,945

 

250

 

2.79

%

22,644

 

599

 

2.65

%

Subordinated debentures

 

5,000

 

101

 

2.02

%

5,000

 

128

 

2.56

%

Total interest-bearing liabilities

 

271,527

 

5,073

 

1.87

%

270,657

 

6,413

 

2.37

%

Non-interest bearing liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-interest bearing deposits

 

36,805

 

 

 

 

 

35,324

 

 

 

 

 

Other liabilities

 

1,876

 

 

 

 

 

1,893

 

 

 

 

 

Total liabilities

 

310,208

 

 

 

 

 

307,874

 

 

 

 

 

Shareholders’ equity

 

38,101

 

 

 

 

 

39,188

 

 

 

 

 

Total liabilities and shareholders’ equity

 

$

348,309

 

 

 

 

 

$

347,062

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net interest income

 

 

 

$

12,888

 

 

 

 

 

$

11,405

 

 

 

Net interest spread (1)

 

 

 

 

 

3.81

%

 

 

 

 

3.31

%

Net interest margin (1) (3)

 

 

 

 

 

4.08

%

 

 

 

 

3.63

%

Return on average assets ratio

 

 

 

 

 

.73

%

 

 

 

 

(.46

)%

Return on average equity ratio

 

 

 

 

 

6.66

%

 

 

 

 

(4.05

)%

Equity to assets ratio

 

 

 

 

 

10.95

%

 

 

 

 

11.29

%

 


(1)          Income and yield stated at a tax equivalent basis for nontaxable securities using the marginal corporate Federal tax rate of 34.0%.

 

(2)          Average loans include nonperforming loans.  Interest income includes interest and fees on loans, but does not include interest on loans 90 days or more past due.

 

(3)          Net interest income as a percentage of average interest-earning assets.

 

46



Table of Contents

 

Rate/Volume Analysis

 

Net interest income can be analyzed in terms of the impact of changing interest rates and changing volumes.  The following table sets forth the effect which the varying levels of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities and the applicable rates have had on changes in net interest income for the periods presented. Changes in rate-volume are proportionately allocated between rate and volume variances.

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

Twelve Months Ended December 31,

 

 

 

2010 Vs. 2009

 

 

 

Increase (Decrease) Due to

 

 

 

 

 

Rate

 

Volume

 

Net

 

Interest-earning assets:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Federal funds sold

 

$

9

 

$

4

 

$

13

 

Available-for-sale-securities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Taxable

 

(119

)

(24

)

(143

)

Nontaxable (1)

 

2

 

(31

)

(29

)

FHLB stock

 

(5

)

 

(5

)

Loans, net

 

225

 

82

 

307

 

Total net change in income on interest-earning assets

 

112

 

31

 

143

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing liabilities:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest-bearing transaction accounts

 

(33

)

(3

)

(36

)

Savings accounts

 

(13

)

24

 

11

 

Time deposits

 

(1,295

)

447

 

(848

)

Securities sold under repurchase agreements

 

(16

)

(75

)

(91

)

Federal funds purchased

 

 

 

 

FHLB borrowings

 

13

 

(362

)

(349

)

Notes payable

 

 

 

 

Subordinated debentures

 

(27

)

 

(27

)

Total net change in expense on interest-bearing liabilities

 

(1,371

)

31

 

(1,340

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Net change in net interest income

 

$

1,483

 

$

 

$

(1,483

)

Percentage change

 

(100.0

)%

0

%

(100.0

)%

 


(1)     Income stated at a fully tax equivalent basis using the marginal corporate Federal tax rate of 34.0%.

 

Provision for Loan Losses

 

The provision for loan losses for 2010 was $1.6 million, or 0.59% of average loans, compared to a provision of $4.7 million, or 1.79% of average loans during 2009. We had net charge-offs totaling $562,000 during 2010, compared to $4.6 million during 2009. The decrease in the provision for loan losses during 2010 was due to the decrease in charge-offs.

 

47



Table of Contents

 

Non-interest Income

 

Non-interest income totaled $2.9 million in 2010, compared to $3.0 million in 2009, a decrease of $128,000, or 4.3%.  The Company had no gains on the sale of available-for-sale securities for 2010 compared to $361,000 of gains recognized in 2009.  Service charges on deposit accounts increased $191,000 during 2010, while private banking fees increased by $71,000 during 2010. The following table shows the detailed components of non-interest income:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

(Decrease)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Service charges on deposit accounts

 

$

1,542

 

$

1,351

 

$

191

 

Other service charges and fees

 

384

 

372

 

12

 

Gain on the sale of mortgage loans held for sale

 

314

 

317

 

(3

)

BOLI income

 

291

 

302

 

(11

)

Title premium fees

 

35

 

48

 

(13

)

Private banking income

 

131

 

60

 

71

 

Gain on the sale of available-for-sale securities

 

 

361

 

(361

)

Lease income

 

163

 

157

 

6

 

Other

 

14

 

34

 

(20

)

 

 

$

2,874

 

$

3,002

 

$

(128

)

 

Non-interest Expense

 

Non-interest expense decreased 14.7%, or $1.8 million, from $12.3 million in 2009 to $10.5 million in 2010. Salaries and employee benefits decreased $741,000 in 2010 as compared to 2009, due to a reduction in the number of full time equivalent employees. Net occupancy expense decreased $210,000 and equipment expense decreased $121,000, both as a result of the closing of two branches in January, 2010.  Advertising and public relations expense decreased $230,000 in 2010 due to several cost-cutting measures.  Professional and legal expenses decreased $343,000 in 2010 as compared to 2009. During the fourth quarter of 2009, our non-interest expenses included $351,000 of expenses related to an unsuccessful hostile tender offer for the Company’s shares.  FDIC insurance expense decreased $135,000 in 2010 due to the elimination of a special assessment paid in the third quarter of 2009, as well as changes in the FDIC insurance premium assessment calculations.

 

48



Table of Contents

 

The increases and decreases in expense in 2010 by major categories are as follows:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Increase

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

(Decrease)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salaries and employee benefits

 

$

4,636

 

$

5,377

 

$

(741

)

Net occupancy expense

 

1,289

 

1,499

 

(210

)

Equipment expense

 

641

 

762

 

(121

)

Advertising and public relations

 

281

 

511

 

(230

)

Professional and legal

 

542

 

885

 

(343

)

Data processing services

 

737

 

669

 

68

 

FDIC insurance

 

470

 

605

 

(135

)

Franchise shares and deposit tax

 

458

 

448

 

10

 

Postage and office supplies

 

167

 

210

 

(43

)

Telephone and other communications

 

179

 

199

 

(20

)

Other real estate owned expenses

 

236

 

173

 

63

 

Core deposit amortization

 

264

 

276

 

(12

)

Other

 

632

 

733

 

(101

)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total

 

$

10,532

 

$

12,347

 

$

(1,815

)

 

Income Taxes

 

Income tax expense was calculated using the Company’s expected effective rate for 2010 and 2009.  We have recognized deferred tax liabilities and assets to show the tax effects of differences between the financial statement and tax bases of assets and liabilities.  Our statutory federal tax rate was 34.0% in both 2010 and 2009.  The effective tax rate for 2010 was 22.5%, compared to (47.4%) for 2009.  The difference between the statutory and effective rates are impacted by such factors as income from tax-exempt loans, tax-exempt income on state and municipal securities, and income on bank owned life insurance.

 

Balance Sheet Review

 

Our assets at year end 2010 totaled $349.7 million, compared with $344.2 million at December 31, 2009, an increase of $5.5 million, or 1.6%.  Average interest earning assets increased $2.2 million in 2010, from $313.9 million in 2009  to $316.1 million in 2010.

 

Loans

 

Total loans averaged $266.7 million in 2010, compared to $265.4 million in 2009.  At year-end 2010, loans totaled $268.3 million, compared to $263.9 million at year-end 2009, an increase of $4.4 million, or 1.7%.  We experienced small declines in the commercial and consumer segments of our loan portfolio, while enjoying increases in the commercial real estate and residential real estate

 

49



Table of Contents

 

segments.  The following table presents a summary of the loan portfolio by category:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31, 2010

 

December 31, 2009

 

 

 

 

 

% of
Total
Loans

 

 

 

% of
Total
Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial and agricultural

 

$

66,124

 

24.65

%

$

74,944

 

28.40

%

Commercial real estate

 

116,991

 

43.60

%

104,768

 

39.70

%

Residential real estate

 

75,514

 

28.14

%

73,166

 

27.72

%

Consumer

 

9,674

 

3.61

%

11,044

 

4.18

%

 

 

$

268,303

 

100.00

%

$

263,922

 

100.00

%

 

Our commercial real estate loans include financing for industrial developments, residential developments, retail shopping centers, industrial buildings, restaurants, and hotels.  The percentage distribution of our loans by industry as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 is shown in the following table:

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agriculture, forestry, and fishing

 

13.16

%

13.93

%

Mining

 

0.07

%

0.07

%

Construction

 

3.37

%

5.25

%

Manufacturing

 

4.75

%

4.81

%

Transportation, communication, electric, gas, and sanitary services

 

4.35

%

3.70

%

Wholesale trade

 

1.23

%

1.02

%

Retail trade

 

11.96

%

10.28

%

Finance, insurance, and real estate

 

13.21

%

11.82

%

Services

 

15.45

%

16.44

%

Public administration

 

0.76

%

0.78

%

Total commercial and commercial real estate

 

68.31

%

68.10

%

Residential real estate loans

 

28.12

%

27.72

%

Other consumer loans

 

3.57

%

4.18

%

Total loans

 

100.00

%

100.00

%

 

The majority of our loans are to customers located in the Kentucky counties of Barren, Hart, Simpson and Warren.  As of December 31, 2010, the Company’s 20 largest credit relationships consisted of loans and loan commitments ranging from $2.5 million to $5.1 million.  The aggregate amount of these credit relationships was $62.0 million, with total commitments of $66.7 million.

 

Our lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by state and federal law.  Citizens First Bank’s secured legal lending limit to a single borrower was approximately $12.2 million at December 31, 2010.

 

50



Table of Contents

 

As of December 31, 2010, we had $14.9 million of participations in loans purchased from, and $20.1 million of participations in loans sold to, other banks.  As of December 31, 2009, we had $10.2 million of participations in loans purchased from, and $30.8 million of participations in loans sold to, other banks.

 

The following table sets forth the maturity distribution of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2010.  Maturities are based upon contractual terms.  Our policy is to specifically review and approve all loans renewed; loans are not automatically rolled over.

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

Loan Maturities
as of December 31, 2010

 

Within One
Year

 

After One 
but Within 
Five Years

 

After Five
Years

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial and agricultural

 

$

28,253

 

$

29,660

 

$

8,212

 

$

66,125

 

Commercial real estate

 

29,758

 

47,942

 

39,291

 

116,991

 

Residential real estate

 

6,019

 

22,158

 

47,337

 

75,514

 

Consumer

 

2,393

 

6,750

 

530

 

9,673

 

Total

 

$

66,423

 

$

106,510

 

$

95,370

 

$

268,303

 

 

The table below presents loans outstanding as of December 31, 2010 with maturities greater than one year categorized by fixed and variable interest rates:

 

As of December 31, 2010

 

(Dollars in 
Thousands)

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed Rate

 

$

100,219

 

Variable Rate

 

101,661

 

 

 

 

 

Total maturities greater than one year

 

$

201,880

 

 

Asset and Liability Management

 

We manage our assets and liabilities to provide a consistent level of liquidity to accommodate normal fluctuations in loans and deposits. The yield on approximately 47.4% of our earning assets as of December 31, 2010, adjusts simultaneously with changes in an external index, primarily the highest prime rate as quoted in the Wall Street Journal.  A majority of our interest bearing liabilities have been issued with fixed terms and can only be repriced at maturity.  The prime rate remained stable at 3.25% during 2010 and 2009.  The yield on our earning assets remained steady during 2010, while the cost of our interest bearing liabilities declined, which caused an increase in the net interest margin.  If interest rates stabilize for a period of time, the difference between interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities will tend to stabilize.  In a stable rate environment, our net interest margin will be impacted by, among other factors, a

 

51



Table of Contents

 

change in the mix of earning assets, with our deposit growth being invested in federal funds sold, investment securities or loans.

 

Credit Quality and the Allowance for Loan Losses

 

We consider credit quality to be of primary importance.  During the fourth quarter of 2009, the Bank contracted with a third party CPA firm to outsource the Bank’s loan review function, beginning in the first quarter of 2010.  The firm specializes in providing bank consulting and accounting services to financial institutions, focusing on the loan review function.  The scope of the engagement calls for annual review of large loan relationships (in excess of $1 million), problem credits, unsecured loans, insider relationships, a random sample of smaller commercial credits, and a review of consumer credit underwriting, with annual coverage of at least 60% of the average dollar value of the outstanding commercial loan portfolio.  The focus of the reviews is centered in the commercial and commercial real estate portfolios, as they comprise the majority of the Bank’s loan portfolio.  Management addresses any findings raised during the loan review and takes appropriate actions as warranted.

 

Loans that exhibit probable or observed credit weaknesses are subject to individual review.  Where appropriate, allocations for individual loans are included in the allowance calculation based on management’s estimate of the borrower’s ability to repay the loan given the availability of collateral, other sources of cash flow and legal options available to the Company. Included in the review of individual loans are those that are impaired as provided in ASC Topic 310 “Receivables”.  We evaluate the collectability of both principal and interest when assessing the need for a loss accrual. Historical loss rates are applied to other loans not subject to individual allocations. These historical loss rates may be adjusted for significant factors that, in management’s judgment, reflect the impact of any current conditions on loss recognition. Factors which management considers in the analysis include the effects of the national and local economies, trends in the nature and volume of loans (delinquencies, charge-offs and nonaccrual loans), changes in mix, asset quality trends, risk management and loan administration, changes in internal lending policies and credit standards, and examination results from bank regulatory agencies and loan review.

 

We maintain a modest unallocated amount in the allowance to recognize the imprecision in estimating and measuring losses when evaluating allocations for individual loans or pools of loans.  Allocations on individual loans and historical loss rates are reviewed quarterly and adjusted as necessary based on changing borrower and/or collateral conditions and actual collection and charge-off experience.

 

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of probable credit losses incurred in the loan portfolio.  Determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses is considered a critical accounting estimate because it requires significant judgment and the use of estimates related to the amount and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on loans based on historical loss experience, and consideration of current economic trends and conditions, all of which may be susceptible to significant change.

 

52



Table of Contents

 

The allowance for loan losses is established through a provision for loan losses charged to expense.  At December 31, 2010, the allowance was $5.0 million, compared to $4.0 million at the end of 2009.  The ratio of the allowance for loan losses to total loans (excluding mortgage loans held for sale) at December 31, 2010 was 1.86%, compared to 1.51% at December 31, 2009.  The following table sets forth an analysis of our allowance for loan losses for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009.

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31,

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at beginning of year

 

$

3,988

 

$

3,816

 

Provision for loan losses

 

1,575

 

4,747

 

Amounts charged off:

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial

 

149

 

3,468

 

Commercial real estate

 

265

 

556

 

Residential real estate

 

357

 

273

 

Consumer

 

68

 

360

 

Total loans charged off

 

839

 

4,657

 

 Recoveries of amounts previously charged off:

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial

 

233

 

59

 

Commercial real estate

 

6

 

 

Residential real estate

 

25

 

19

 

Consumer

 

13

 

4

 

Total recoveries

 

277

 

82

 

 Net charge-offs

 

562

 

4,575

 

Balance at end of year

 

$

5,001

 

$

3,988

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total loans, net of unearned income:

 

 

 

 

 

Average

 

$

266,708

 

$

265,355

 

At December 31

 

$

268,303

 

$

263,922

 

As a percentage of average loans:

 

 

 

 

 

Net charge-offs

 

0.21

%

1.72

%

Provision for loan losses

 

0.59

%

1.78

%

 

The provision to the allowance for loan losses is based on management’s and the loan committee’s ongoing review and evaluation of the loan portfolio and general economic conditions on a monthly basis, and reviewed by the full board of directors on a quarterly basis.  Management bases its review and evaluation of the allowance for loan losses on an analysis of historical trends, significant problem loans, current market value of real estate or collateral and certain economic and other factors affecting loans and real estate or collateral securing these loans.  Loans are charged off when, in the opinion of management, they are deemed to be uncollectible.  We charge recognized losses against the allowance and add subsequent recoveries to the allowance.  While management uses the best information available to make evaluations, future

 

53



Table of Contents

 

adjustments to the allowance may be necessary if economic conditions differ substantially from the assumptions used in making the evaluation.  The allowance for loan losses is subject to periodic evaluation by various regulatory authorities and may be subject to adjustment based upon information that is available to them at the time of their examination.

 

In 2010, our net charge-offs decreased significantly to $562,000 from $4.6 million in 2009.  One large commercial customer related to the automotive industry ceased business operations during the year of 2009 which contributed to the higher level of net charge-offs in 2009.  We charged-off $3.2 million to this one customer relationship as business assets were being liquidated.

 

The following table sets forth the breakdown of the allowance for loan losses by loan category at the dates indicated.

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31, 2010

 

December 31, 2009

 

 

 

Amount

 

% of 
Loans 
in Each
Category 
to Total 
Loans

 

Amount

 

% of 
Loans 
in Each 
Category 
to Total 
Loans

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Residential real estate loans

 

$

605

 

28.14

%

$

805

 

27.72

%

Consumer and other loans

 

200

 

3.61

%

148

 

4.18

%

Commercial and agricultural

 

3,211

 

24.65

%

2,085

 

28.40

%

Commercial real estate

 

902

 

43.60

%

892

 

39.70

%

Unallocated

 

83

 

0.00

%

58

 

0.00

%

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total allowance for loan losses

 

$

5,001

 

100.00

%

$

3,988

 

100.00

%

 

We believe that the allowance for loan losses at December 31, 2010, provides for probable incurred credit losses in the loan portfolio as of that date.  That determination is based on the best information available to management, but necessarily involves uncertainties and matters of judgment and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision and could be susceptible to significant change in the future.  In addition, bank regulatory authorities, as a part of their periodic examinations, may reach different conclusions regarding the quality of the loan portfolio and the level of the allowance, which could require us to make additional provisions in the future.

 

54



Table of Contents

 

The following table sets forth selected asset quality ratios for the periods indicated:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31, 
2010

 

December 31, 
2009

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Non-performing loans

 

$

1,264

 

$

1,230

 

Non-performing assets

 

2,632

 

2,384

 

Allowance for loan losses

 

5,001

 

3,988

 

Non-performing assets to total assets

 

0.75

%

0.69

%

Net charge-offs to average total loans

 

0.21

%

1.72

%

Allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans

 

395.96

%

324.23

%

Allowance for loan losses to total loans

 

1.86

%

1.51

%

 

Non-performing loans are defined as non-accrual loans, loans accruing but past due 90 days or more, and non-current restructured loans.  Non-performing assets are defined as non-performing loans, other real estate owned, and repossessed assets.  The non-performing loan total at year-end 2010 consisted of 22 non-accrual loans totaling $1.3 million, and six loans over 90 days past due totaling $2,000.  Loans over 90 days past due which are still accruing either have adequate collateral or a definite repayment plan in place.  Non-performing assets also includes other real estate owned of three commercial properties totaling $928,000 and three residential properties and one building lot totaling $440,000.

 

Management classifies commercial and commercial real estate loans as non-accrual when principal or interest is past due 90 days or more and the loan is not adequately collateralized and is in the process of collection, or when, in the opinion of management, principal or interest is not likely to be paid in accordance with the terms of the obligation. We charge off consumer loans after 120 days of delinquency unless they are adequately secured and in the process of collection. Non-accrual loans are not reclassified as accruing until principal and interest payments are brought current and future payments appear reasonably certain.

 

Troubled debt restructurings (TDRs) are modified loans in which a concession is provided to a borrower experiencing financial difficulties. Loan modifications are considered TDRs when the concession provided is not available to the borrower through either normal channels or other sources. However, not all loan modifications are TDRs. Our standards relating to loan modifications consider, among other factors, minimum verified income requirements, cash flow analysis, and collateral valuations. However, each potential loan modification is reviewed individually and the terms of the loan are modified to meet a borrower’s specific circumstances at a point in time.TDRs can be classified as either accrual or nonaccrual loans. Non-accrual TDRs are included in non-accrual loans whereas accruing TDRs are excluded because the borrower remains contractually current.

 

We reported total troubled debt restructurings of $1.9 million and $0 as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, respectively and all loans were current and accruing.  We have no commitments to lend additional amounts as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 to customers with outstanding loans that are classified as troubled debt restructurings.

 

55



Table of Contents

 

Generally, we do not include loans that are current as to principal and interest in our non-performing assets categories.   However, we will still classify a current loan as a potential problem loan if we develop doubts about the borrower’s future performance under the terms of the loan contract.   We categorize loans into risk categories based on relevant information about the ability of borrowers to service their debt such as:  current financial information, historical payment experience, credit documentation, public information, and current economic trends, among other factors.  We analyze loans individually by classifying the loans as to credit risk.  This analysis includes all loans with an outstanding balance greater than $25 thousand and is reviewed on a monthly basis. We use the following definitions for risk ratings:

 

Special Mention.  Loans classified as special mention have a potential weakness that deserves management’s close attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of the repayment prospects for the loan or of the institution’s credit position at some future date.

 

Substandard.  Loans classified as substandard are inadequately protected by the current net worth and paying capacity of the obligor or of the collateral pledged, if any. Loans so classified have a well-defined weakness or weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that the institution will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected.

 

Doubtful.  Loans classified as doubtful have all the weaknesses inherent in those classified as substandard, with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make collection or liquidation in full, on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions, and values, highly questionable and improbable.

 

Loans not meeting the criteria above that are analyzed individually as part of the above described process are considered to be Pass rated loans.  All loans in all loan categories are assigned risk ratings.  As of December 31, 2010, and based on the most recent analysis performed, the risk category of loans by class of loans is as follows:

 

 

 

Pass

 

Special
Mention

 

Substandard

 

Doubtful

 

Total

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Commercial

 

$

56,124

 

$

597

 

$

9,265

 

$

138

 

$

66,124

 

Commercial real estate:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Construction

 

15,232

 

 

191

 

 

15,423

 

Other

 

86,565

 

9,039

 

5,964

 

 

101,568

 

Residential real estate

 

75,104

 

 

294

 

116

 

75,514

 

Consumer

 

9,654

 

 

20

 

 

9,764

 

Total

 

$

242,679

 

$

9,636

 

$

15,734

 

$

254

 

$

268,303

 

 

56



Table of Contents

 

Securities

 

Our securities portfolio serves as a source of liquidity and earnings and contributes to the management of interest rate risk. Our portfolio also provides us with securities to pledge as required collateral for certain governmental deposits and borrowed funds.

 

The investment securities portfolio is comprised primarily of U.S. Government agency securities, mortgage-backed securities, and tax-exempt securities of state and political subdivisions.  Securities are all classified as available-for-sale.  The investment portfolio decreased by $1.6 million, or 3.9%, to $39.5 million at December 31, 2010, compared with $41.1 million at December 31, 2009. We focused new investments in 2010 primarily in agency mortgaged-backed securities as the callable agencies purchased in 2009 and early 2010 were called.

 

The table below presents the carrying value of securities by major category:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31, 
2010

 

December 31, 
2009

 

U.S. Treasury and U.S. Government agencies

 

$

6,516

 

$

19,102

 

Agency mortgage backed securities-residential

 

13,704

 

2,061

 

Municipal securities

 

18,411

 

19,196

 

Other securities

 

900

 

700

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Total available-for-sale securities

 

$

39,531

 

$

41,059

 

 

The table below presents the maturities and yield characteristics of securities as of December 31, 2010.  Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties.

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

December 31, 2010

 

One Year
or Less

 

Over
One Year
Through
Five Years

 

Over
Five Years
Through
Ten Years

 

Over
Ten Years

 

Total
Maturities

 

Fair
Value

 

U.S. Government agencies

 

$

 

$

2,499

 

$

4,011

 

$

 

$

6,510

 

$

6,516

 

Agency mortgage-backed securities: (1)

 

158

 

7,656

 

6,093

 

 

13,907

 

13,704

 

Municipal securities

 

175

 

2,538

 

8,162

 

7,363

 

18,238

 

18,411

 

Other Securities

 

 

 

 

1,863

 

1,863

 

900

 

Total available-for-sale securities

 

$

333

 

$

12,693

 

$

18,266

 

$

9,226

 

$

40,518

 

$

39,531

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Percent of total

 

0.8

%

31.3

%

45.1

%

22.8

%

100.0

%

 

 

Weighted average yield(2)

 

5.80

%

3.05

%

3.78

%

6.09

%

4.11

%

 

 

 


(1)   Agency mortgage-backed securities (residential) are grouped into average lives based on December 2010 prepayment projections.

 

(2)   The weighted average yields are based on amortized cost and municipal securities are calculated on a full tax- equivalent basis.

 

57



Table of Contents

 

Other securities consist of one single issue trust preferred security which has experienced a decline in fair value due to inactivity in the market.  No impairment charge is being taken as no loss of principal is anticipated and all principal and interest payments are being received as scheduled.  All rated securities are investment grade.  For those that are not rated, the financial condition has been evaluated and no adverse conditions were identified related to repayment.  Declines in fair value are a function of rate changes in the market and market illiquidity.  The Company does not intend to sell these securities and does not believe it will be required to sell these securities.

 

Deferred Tax Assets

 

We have a net deferred tax asset of $3.7 million at December 31, 2010.  We evaluate this asset on a quarterly basis.  To the extent we believe it is more likely than not that it will not be utilized, we will establish a valuation allowance to reduce its carrying amount to the amount it expects to be realized.  At December 31, 2010, no valuation allowance has been established against the outstanding deferred tax asset.  The deferred tax asset will be utilized as taxable income is generated in future years.

 

Deposits

 

We offer traditional deposit products, including non-interest-bearing and interest-bearing checking (or NOW accounts), commercial checking, money market accounts, savings accounts and certificates of deposit.  We compete for deposits through our branch network with competitive pricing and advertising.

 

Total deposits averaged $293.5 million during 2010, an increase of $18.8 million, or 6.8%, compared to $274.7 million in 2009.  Average deposits increased during the year, but the cost of funds declined as higher cost deposits matured and were renewed at lower rates. Deposits at December 31, 2010 totaled $288.7 million, an increase of $200 thousand, or 0.01%, from $288.5 million at December 31, 2009.

 

We utilize brokered certificates of deposit and will continue to utilize these sources for deposits when they can be cost-effective.  We have also implemented the use of a deposit listing service and have utilized this service to replace brokered deposits which matured during 2010.  At December 31, 2010 and 2009, brokered deposits totaled $19.2 million and $28.1 million, respectively. At December 31, 2010 and 2009, these brokered deposits constituted approximately 6.6% and 9.7% of our total deposits, respectively.

 

Time deposits of $100,000 or more totaled $66.3 million at December 31, 2010, compared to $78.7 million at December 31, 2009.  Interest expense on time deposits of $100,000 or more was $2.0 million in 2010, compared to $2.5 million in 2009.  A summary of average balances and rates paid on deposits for the years ended December 31, 2010 and 2009 follows.

 

58



Table of Contents

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

 

 

Average

 

Average

 

Average

 

Average

 

 

 

Balance

 

Rate

 

Balance

 

Rate

 

Noninterest bearing demand

 

$

36,805

 

0.00

%

$

35,324

 

0.00

%

Interest bearing demand

 

47,708

 

0.42

%

48,301

 

0.49

%

Savings

 

25,470

 

0.66

%

22,073

 

0.72

%

Time

 

183,524

 

2.37

%

168,961

 

3.07

%

 

 

$

293,507

 

1.61

%

$

274,659

 

2.03

%

 

The following table shows the maturities of time deposits of $100,000 or more as of December 31, 2010:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

December 31, 2010

 

Three months or less

 

$

4,511

 

Over three through six months

 

17,550

 

Over six through twelve months

 

21,387

 

Over one year through three years

 

19,682

 

Over three years through five years

 

3,171

 

Over five years

 

 

Total

 

$

66,301

 

 

Liquidity, Other Borrowings, and Capital Resources

 

Borrowings

 

FHLB Advances. We obtain advances from the Federal Home Bank of Cincinnati (FHLB) for funding and liability management.  These advances are collateralized by a blanket agreement of eligible 1-4 family residential mortgage loans and eligible commercial real estate.  Rates vary based on the term to repayment, and are summarized below as of December 31, 2010:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(Dollars in
Thousands)

 

Type

 

Maturity

 

Rate

 

Amount

 

Fixed

 

August 22, 2012

 

1.09

%

2,000

 

Fixed

 

August 28, 2012

 

4.25

%

500

 

Fixed

 

December 10, 2012

 

0.85

%

2,000

 

Fixed

 

December 24, 2012

 

3.36

%

2,000

 

Fixed

 

October 15, 2013

 

0.81

%

2,500

 

Fixed

 

December 10, 2014

 

1.73

%

2,000

 

Fixed

 

December 24, 2014

 

3.46

%

2,000

 

Fixed

 

February 25, 2015

 

2.85

%

2,000

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

$

15,000

 

 

59



Table of Contents

 

At December 31, 2010, we had available collateral to borrow an additional $11.4 million from the FHLB.

 

At December 31, 2010, we had established Federal Funds lines of credit totaling $21.3 million with four correspondent banks.  No amounts were drawn as of December 31, 2010 or 2009.

 

Repurchase agreements mature in one business day.  The rate paid on these accounts is variable at our discretion and is based on a tiered balance calculation.

 

We issued $5.0 million in subordinated debentures in October, 2006.  These subordinated debentures bear an interest rate, which reprices each calendar quarter, of 165 basis points over 3-month LIBOR (London Inter Bank Offering Rate).  The rate as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 was 1.94%.

 

Information regarding our borrowings as of December 31, 2010 and 2009 is presented below:

 

 

 

(Dollars in Thousands)

 

 

 

2010

 

2009

 

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements:

 

 

 

 

 

Balance at year end

 

$

712

 

$

800