COASTAL FINANCIAL CORP - Annual Report: 2019 (Form 10-K)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019

or

☐    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:   001-38589

COASTAL FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

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

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES ☐    NO ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. YES ☐    NO ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). YES ☒    NO ☐

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES ☐     NO ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity of the registrant held by non-affiliates as of June 30, 2019 was $143.1 million.  As of March 9, 2020, the number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s common stock was 11,928,413.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A for its 2020 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

INDEX

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This report contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements reflect our current views with respect to, among other things, future events and our financial performance. Any statements about our management’s expectations, beliefs, plans, predictions, forecasts, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not historical facts and may be forward-looking. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “anticipate,” “believes,” “can,” “could,” “may,” “predicts,” “potential,” “should,” “will,” “estimate,” “plans,” “projects,” “continuing,” “ongoing,” “expects,” “intends” and similar words or phrases. Any or all of the forward-looking statements in this report may turn out to be inaccurate. The inclusion of or reference to forward-looking information in this report should not be regarded as a representation by us or any other person that the future plans, estimates or expectations contemplated by us will be achieved. We have based these forward-looking statements largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our financial condition, results of operations, business strategy and financial needs. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in such forward-looking statements as a result of several factors more fully described under the caption “Item 1A. Risk Factors” and elsewhere in this report, as well as the following factors:

i

The foregoing factors should not be construed as exhaustive and should be read together with the other cautionary statements included in this report. If one or more events related to these or other risks or uncertainties materialize, or if our underlying assumptions prove to be incorrect, actual results may differ materially from what we anticipate. You are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. Further, any forward-looking statement speaks only as of the date on which it is made and we undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events except as required by law.

ii

PART I

Our Company

Coastal Financial Corporation (the Company) is a bank holding company that operates through our wholly owned subsidiary, Coastal Community Bank (the Bank). We are headquartered in Everett, Washington, which by population is the largest city in, and the county seat of, Snohomish County. We focus on providing a wide range of banking products and services to consumers and small to medium sized businesses in the broader Puget Sound region in the state of Washington. We currently operate 14 full-service banking locations, 11 of which are located in Snohomish County, where we are the largest community bank by deposit market share, and three of which are located in neighboring counties (one in King County and two in Island County). As of December 31, 2019, we had total assets of $1.129 billion, total gross loans of $939.1 million, total deposits of $968.0 million and total shareholders’ equity of $124.2 million. In addition to traditional community banking, the Bank also provides Banking as a Service (BaaS) to enable broker dealers and digital financial service providers to offer their clients banking services.

We are a Washington corporation that was formed on July 9, 2003, to become the holding company for the Bank which commenced operations in 1997.  Our executive offices are located at 5415 Evergreen Way, Everett, Washington 98203 and our telephone number is (425) 257-9000. Our website address is www.coastalbank.com. Information on our website should not be considered a part of this report.

Throughout this report, references to “we,” “us” or “our” refer to the Company or the Bank, or both, as the context indicates.

Our Markets

We define our market broadly as the Puget Sound region in the state of Washington, which encompasses King, Kitsap, Pierce, Snohomish, Skagit, Thurston and Island Counties.  The Puget Sound region, which comprises over 60% of the population of the state of Washington as well as the number of businesses located therein, with a population of approximately 4.7 million, over 123,000 businesses and $123.5 billion of deposits.

We are the largest locally headquartered bank by deposit market share in Snohomish County, according to data from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the FDIC) as of June 30, 2019, at which date we had a 6.2% deposit market share in Snohomish County, up from 5.4% in 2018. We aim to continuously enhance our customer base, increase loans and deposits and expand our overall market share in Snohomish County. In light of our market position and our business strategy, we do not regularly compete for commercial or retail deposits in the city of Seattle, and we believe this strategic decision has enabled us to generate low cost core deposits to fund our loan growth.

Our Banking Services

Lending Activities

We focus primarily on commercial lending, with an emphasis on commercial real estate. We offer a variety of loans to business owners, including commercial and industrial loans and commercial real estate loans secured by owner-occupied commercial properties. We also offer non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, multi-family loans, and construction and development loans to investors and developers. We also offer residential real estate loans and to a lesser extent, consumer loans.

3

Commercial and Industrial Loans. As of December 31, 2019, we had $111.4 million of commercial and industrial loans, representing 11.8% of total loans. These loans had a weighted average maturity of approximately 3.8 years. We make commercial and industrial loans, including term loans, Small Business Administration (SBA) loans, commercial lines of credit, working capital loans, equipment financing, borrowing base loans, and other loan products, that are underwritten on the basis of the borrower’s ability to service the debt from income. We take as collateral a lien on general business assets including, among other things, available real estate, accounts receivable, inventory and equipment and generally obtain a personal guaranty from the borrower or principal. Our commercial lines of credit typically have a term of one year and have variable interest rates that adjust monthly based on the prime rate. Other commercial and industrial loans generally have fixed interest rates and terms that typically range from one to five years depending on factors such as the type and size of the loan, the financial strength of the borrower/guarantor and the age, type and value of the collateral. Terms greater than five years may be appropriate in some circumstances, based upon the useful life of the underlying asset being financed or if some form of credit enhancement, such as an SBA guarantee, is obtained.

Commercial and industrial loans are often larger and involve greater risks than other types of lending. Because payments on commercial and industrial loans are often dependent on the operating cash flows of the borrower’s business, repayment of these loans is often more sensitive to adverse conditions in the general economy, which in turn increases repayment risk. We also face the risk that losses incurred on a small number of commercial loans could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations due to (a) the larger average size of commercial loans as compared with other loans, such as residential loans, as well as (b) collateral that is generally less readily marketable than collateral for consumer loans, such as residential real estate and automobiles.

As of December 31, 2019, our total commercial SBA portfolio was $17.1 million, of which $8.9 million was sold, and $1.5 million was guaranteed by the SBA. We participate in the SBA 7(a) program in order to meet the needs of our small business community. As an approved participant in the SBA Preferred Lender’s Program, we enable our clients to obtain SBA loans without being subject to the potentially lengthy SBA approval process necessary for lenders that are not SBA Preferred Lenders. The SBA’s 7(a) program provides up to a 75% guaranty for loans greater than $150,000. For loans $150,000 or less, the program provides up to an 85% guaranty. The maximum 7(a) loan amount is $5 million. The guaranty is conditional and covers a portion of the risk of payment default by the borrower, but not the risk of improper closing and servicing by the lender. As such, prudent underwriting and closing processes are essential to effective utilization of the 7(a) program. We typically sell in the secondary market the SBA -guaranteed portion (generally 75% of the principal balance) of the SBA loans we originate.

As of December 31, 2019, we held $1.1 million, net of the portion sold, of United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) loans.  We participate in the USDA Business and Industry and Community Facilities programs.  Both loan programs provide up to a 90% guarantee.  The guarantee is conditional and covers a portion of the risk of payment default by the borrower but not the risk of improper servicing by the lender.  Unlike the SBA 7(a) program, the USDA guarantee is not issued until after the loan closes.  USDA issues a conditional commitment prior to loan closing and prudent closing processes are essential to effective utilization of the USDA loan programs.   The USDA guaranteed portion of the USDA loans are typically sold in the secondary market. 

Commercial Real Estate. As of December 31, 2019, we had $613.4 million of commercial real estate loans, representing 65.2% of total loans. We make commercial mortgage loans collateralized by owner- and non-owner-occupied real estate, as well as multi-family residential loans. Loans secured by owner-occupied real estate totaled $230.7 million and comprised 37.6% of our commercial real estate portfolio at December 31, 2019. The real estate securing our existing commercial real estate loans includes a wide variety of property types, such as manufacturing and processing facilities, business parks, warehouses, retail centers, convenience stores and gas stations, hotels and motels, office buildings, mixed-use residential and commercial, and other properties. We originate both fixed- and adjustable-rate loans with terms up to 20 years. Fixed-rate loans typically amortize over a 10-to-25 year period with balloon payments at the end of five to ten years. Adjustable-rate loans are generally based on the prime rate and adjust with the prime rate or are based on term equivalent Federal Home Loan Bank rates. At December 31, 2019, approximately 38.3% of the commercial real estate loan portfolio consisted of fixed rate loans. Loan amounts generally do not exceed 75% of the lesser of the appraised value or the purchase price.

4

As of December 31, 2019, we had a total of $14.2 million in commercial real estate SBA loans, of which $8.1 million was sold and $984,000 was guaranteed by the SBA. We make loans under the SBA 504 program to small businesses to provide funding for the purchase of real estate. Under this program, we provide up to 90% financing of the total purchase cost, represented by two loans to the borrower. The first lien loan is generally a long-term, fully amortizing, fixed-rate loan made in the amount of 50% of the total purchase cost. The second lien loan is a short-term, interest only, adjustable rate loan made in the amount of 40% of the total purchase cost, which is generally paid off within three to six months after full receipt of loan proceeds from a certified development corporation that provides long-term financing directly to the borrower. At December 31, 2019, we held $38.7 million in first lien SBA 504 loans, or 4.1% of total loans.

Our multi-family residential loan portfolio is comprised of loans secured by apartment buildings, residential mixed-use buildings and, to a lesser extent, senior living centers. As of December 31, 2019, we had $76.7 million on multi-family residential loans, representing 12.5% of our commercial real estate loans, and 8.2% of total loans.

Commercial real estate lending with respect to non-owner occupied properties typically involves higher loan principal amounts and the repayment is dependent, in large part, on sufficient income from the properties securing the loans to cover operating expenses and debt service. We require our commercial real estate loans to investors to be secured by well-managed properties with adequate margins and generally obtain a guaranty from responsible parties. As of December 31, 2019 we held $382.9 million in non-owner occupied loans, representing 62.4% of our commercial real estate loans and 40.7% of total loans.

Construction, Land and Land Development Loans. As of December 31, 2019, we had $97.0 million in construction, land and land development loans, representing 10.3% of total loans. We make loans to established builders to construct residential properties, loans to developers of commercial real estate investment properties and residential developments and, to a lesser extent, loans to individual clients for construction of single family homes in our market areas. We also make loans for the acquisition of undeveloped land. Construction loans are typically disbursed as construction progresses and carry either fixed or variable interest rates. Our construction and development loans typically have terms that range from six months to two years depending on factors such as the type and size of the development and the financial strength of the borrower/guarantor. Loans are typically structured with an interest only construction period and mature at the completion of construction.

Construction and land development loans typically involve more risk than other types of lending products because repayment of these loans is dependent, in part, on the sale or refinance of the ultimate project rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest. Moreover, these loans are typically based on future estimates of value and economic circumstances, which may differ from actual results or be affected by unforeseen events. If the actual circumstances differ from the estimates made at the time of approval of these loans, we face the risk of having inadequate security for the repayment of the loan. Further, if we foreclose on the loan, we may be required to fund additional amounts to complete the project and may have to hold the property for an unspecified period of time until the foreclosed property is sold.

Residential Real Estate. As of December 31, 2019, we had $115.0 million in residential real estate loans, representing 12.2% of total loans. We originate one-to-four adjustable-rate mortgage, or ARM, loans for our portfolio and operate as a mortgage broker for mortgage lenders we have agreements with for customers who want a 15-year to 30-year, fixed-rate mortgage loan. As of December 31, 2019, the balance of ARM portfolio loans was $11.7 million.  Our ARM loans typically do not meet the guidelines for sale in the secondary market due to characteristics of the property, the loan terms or exceptions from agency underwriting guidelines, which enables us to earn a higher interest rate. We also originate home equity lines of credit and home equity term loans for our portfolio. Home equity lines of credit have variable interest rates, while home equity term loans are fixed for up to 5-1/2 years but can be amortized up to a maximum of 180 months with a balloon payment at maturity.

We also purchase residential mortgages originated by other financial institutions to hold for investment with the intent to diversify our residential mortgage loan portfolio, meet certain regulatory requirements and increase our interest income. As of December 31, 2019, we held $28.6 million, representing 3.0% of our total loans, in purchased residential real estate mortgage loans. These loans purchased typically have a fixed rate with a term of 15 to 30 years, and are collateralized by one-to-four family residential real estate. We have a defined set of credit guidelines that we use when evaluating these loans. Although purchased loans were originated and underwritten by

5

another institution, our mortgage, credit, and compliance departments conduct an independent review of each underlying loan that includes re-underwriting each of these loans to our credit and compliance standards. We also make one-to-four family loans to investors to finance their rental properties and to business owners to secure their business loans.  As of December 31, 2019, residential real estate loans made to investors and business owners totaled $59.7 million.

Like our commercial real estate loans, our residential real estate loans are secured by real estate, the value of which may fluctuate significantly over a short period of time as a result of market conditions in the area in which the real estate is located. Adverse developments affecting real estate values in our market areas could therefore increase the credit risk associated with these loans, impair the value of property pledged as collateral on loans, and affect our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure without a loss or additional losses.

Consumer and Other Loans. As of December 31, 2019, we had $4.2 million in total consumer loans, representing 0.5% of total loans. We make a variety of loans to individuals for personal and household purposes, including automobile, boat and recreational vehicle loans and secured term loans. We also offer personal lines of credit including overdraft protection. Consumer loans are underwritten based on the individual borrower’s income, current debt level, past credit history and the value of any available collateral. The terms of consumer loans vary considerably based upon the loan type, nature of collateral and size of the loan.

Consumer loans typically have shorter terms, lower balances, higher yields and higher risks of default than residential real estate mortgage loans. Consumer loan collections are dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability and are therefore more likely to be affected by adverse personal circumstances, such as a loss of employment, divorce, or unexpected medical costs.

Credit Administration and Loan Review

We control credit risk both through disciplined underwriting of each transaction, as well as active credit management processes and procedures to manage risk and minimize loss throughout the life of a loan. We seek to maintain a broadly diversified loan portfolio in terms of type of customer, type of loan product, geographic area and industries in which our business customers are engaged. We have developed tailored underwriting criteria and credit management processes and procedures for each of the various loan product types we offer our customers.

Underwriting. In evaluating each potential loan relationship, we adhere to a disciplined underwriting evaluation process that includes the following:

Loan Approval Authority. Our lending activities follow written, non-discriminatory, underwriting standards and loan origination procedures established by our board of directors and management. We have established several levels of lending authority that have been delegated by the board of directors to our management credit committee, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Credit Officer and other personnel in accordance with our loan policy. Authority limits are based on the total exposure of the borrower and are conditioned on the loan conforming to the policies contained in the loan policy. Any loan policy exceptions are fully disclosed to the approving authority.

Ongoing Credit Risk Management. In addition to the tailored underwriting process described above, we perform ongoing risk monitoring and review processes for credit exposures. Although we grade and classify our loans internally, we engage an independent third-party professional firm to perform regular loan reviews and confirm loan classifications. We strive to identify potential problem loans early in an effort to actively seek

6

resolution of these situations before they create a loss. We record any necessary charge-offs promptly and maintain adequate allowance levels for probable loan losses incurred in the loan portfolio.

In general, whenever a particular loan or overall borrower relationship is downgraded from a pass grade to a watch or substandard grade based on one or more standard loan grading factors, our relationship manager (who is typically the loan officer) and credit team members engage in active evaluation of the asset to determine the appropriate resolution strategy. Management regularly reviews the status of the watch list and classified assets portfolio as well as the larger credits in the portfolio.

Concentrations of Credit Risk

Most of our lending activity is conducted with businesses and individuals in our market area. As of December 31, 2019, approximately 94% of the one-to-four family loans in our loan portfolio (measured by dollar amount) were secured by real estate, or made to borrowers who live or conduct business, in the Puget Sound region. A substantial portion of our loan portfolio consists of commercial and industrial loans and real estate loans secured by commercial real estate properties located in the Puget Sound region, and is dependent upon the economic environment of the Puget Sound region. We have a limited number of loans secured by properties located outside of the Puget Sound region, most of which are made to borrowers who are well-known to us.

Our total non-owner-occupied commercial real estate loans, including loans secured by apartment buildings, investor commercial real estate, and construction and land loans totaled $468.9 million and represented 347.9% of the Bank’s total risk-based capital at December 31, 2019. Interagency guidance on commercial real estate concentrations describe sound risk management practices, which include board and management oversight, portfolio management, management information systems, market analysis, portfolio stress testing and sensitivity analysis, credit underwriting standards, and credit risk review functions. We believe that we have adequately implemented these practices in order to monitor concentrations in commercial real estate in our loan portfolio.

Lending Limits

Our lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by federal law. In general, the Bank is subject to a legal lending limit on loans to a single borrower based on the Bank’s capital level. The dollar amounts of the Bank’s lending limit increases or decreases as the Bank’s capital increases or decreases. The Bank is able to sell participations in its larger loans to other financial institutions, which allows it to better manage the risk and exposure involved with larger loans and to meet the lending needs of its customers requiring extensions of credit in excess of Bank or regulatory limits.

The Bank’s legal lending limit as of December 31, 2019 on loans to a single borrower was 20% of capital and surplus, or $26.9 million.

Our loan policies provide general guidelines for loan-to-value ratios that restrict the size of loans to a maximum percentage of the value of the collateral securing the loans, which percentage varies by the type of collateral. Our internal loan-to-value limitations also follow all limits established by applicable law.

Deposit Products

Our deposits serve as the primary funding source for lending, investing and other general banking purposes. We provide a full range of deposit products that have a wide range of interest rates and terms, including a variety of demand and savings accounts, time deposits, and money market accounts. We also provide a wide range of deposit services, including debit cards, remote deposit capture, online banking, mobile banking, and direct deposit services. We also offer business accounts and cash management services, including business checking and savings accounts and treasury services. In addition, in 2019 we added reciprocal deposits to our product offering. This enables us to extend FDIC insurance to customers that have balances in excess of the FDIC insurance limit.  This service trades our customer’s funds in increments under the FDIC insured amount to other participating financial institutions and in exchange we receive investments from participating financial institutions in a reciprocal agreement.  We solicit deposits through our relationship-driven team of dedicated and accessible bankers and through community-focused marketing. We emphasize obtaining deposit relationships at loan origination. Our focus on relationship banking combined with our robust business banking services has led to approximately 80.8% of our loan customers having deposit relationships with us as of December 31, 2019.

7

CCBX Division

Our CCBX Division provides BaaS enabling broker dealers and digital financial service providers to offer their clients banking services. The “X” is indicative of the technology services that our partners provide. Currently, we are in the process of working with five fintech partners, and maintaining a robust pipeline as we look forward. CCBX will be supported by staff we hired late in 2019 to build the infrastructure, and additional hires in 2020 as we expect to add new partners and execute new contracts. Beginning with the quarter ended December 31, 2019, we have changed references made to “wholesale” and "wholesale banking services" to "BaaS" and “BaaS fees” in our financial statements and other information we make publicly available. We have revised prior period financial statements to make this conforming change.

Investments

As of December 31, 2019, the fair value of our investment portfolio, which represented 2.9% of assets, totaled $32.7 million and had an average effective yield of 1.81% and an estimated duration of approximately 1.1 years. The primary objectives of the investment portfolio are to provide a source of liquidity and provide collateral that can be readily sold or pledge for public deposits or other business purposes. At December 31, 2019, 76.3% of our investment portfolio consisted of U.S. Treasury securities. The remainder of our securities portfolio is invested in U.S. Government agency securities, agency collateralized mortgage obligations and mortgage-backed securities, and municipal bonds. We regularly evaluate the composition of our investment portfolio as the interest rate yield curve changes and may sell or pledge investment securities from time to time to adjust our exposure to interest rates or to provide liquidity to meet loan demand.

Competition

We operate in a highly competitive industry and in a highly competitive market. Commercial real estate lending in the Puget Sound region attracts keen competition from large banking institutions with national operations, as well as mid-sized regional banking institutions. We compete with other community banks, savings and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, insurance companies, finance companies and other financial intermediaries. The primary factors driving competition for deposits are customer service, interest rates, fees charged, branch locations and hours, online and mobile banking functionality, and the range of products offered. The primary factors driving competition for our lending products are customer service, range of products offered, price, reputation, and quality of execution. We believe the Bank is a strong competitor in our markets, however other competitors have certain advantages over us. Among them, many large institutions have the ability to finance extensive advertising campaigns, maintain extensive branch networks and make larger technology investments, and to offer services which we do not offer. The higher capitalization of the larger banking institutions permits them to have higher lending limits than those of the Bank. Some of our competitors have other advantages, such as tax exemption in the case of credit unions, and to some extent, lesser regulation in the case of mortgage companies and finance companies.

Information Technology Systems

We have made and continue to make significant investments in our information technology systems and staff for our banking and lending operations and treasury management activities. We believe this investment will support our continued growth and enable us to enhance our capabilities to offer new products and overall customer experience, and to provide scale for future growth and acquisitions. We utilize a nationally recognized software vendor, and their support allows us to outsource our data processing.

The majority of our other systems including our electronic funds transfer, transaction processing and our online banking services are hosted by third-party service providers. The scalability of this infrastructure will support our growth strategy. In addition, the tested capability of these vendors to automatically switch over to standby systems should allow us to recover our systems and provide business continuity quickly in case of a disaster.

8

Our internal network and e-mail systems are outsourced to a third party and we have a back-up site in Phoenix, Arizona. This back-up site provides for redundancy and disaster recovery capabilities.

Emerging Growth Company Status

We are an “emerging growth company” under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act. An emerging growth company may take advantage of reduced reporting requirements and is relieved of certain other significant requirements that are otherwise generally applicable to public companies. As an emerging growth company:

We will cease to be an “emerging growth company” upon the earliest of:

9

We have elected to adopt certain of the reduced disclosure requirements above with respect to the periodic reports we will file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the SEC), and proxy statements that we use to solicit proxies from our shareholders.

In addition, Section 107 of the JOBS Act permits us to take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards affecting public companies. However, we have irrevocably opted out of the extended transition period and, as a result, we will adopt new or revised accounting standards on the relevant dates on which adoption of such standards is required for other public companies.

Our Employees

As of December 31, 2019, we had 195 full-time equivalent employees. None of our employees are parties to a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good and have not experienced interruptions of operations due to labor disagreements.

Available Information

The Company's annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, proxy statements, current reports on Form 8-K, amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Exchange Act), and other filings with the SEC are available free of charge at http://ir.coastalbank.com/ under the heading “News - Documents”, as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the SEC. These reports are also available for free on the SEC's website at http://www.sec.gov. The information contained on the Company's website as referenced in this report should not be considered a part of this report.

Regulation and Supervision

General

Insured banks, their holding companies and their affiliates are extensively regulated under federal and state law. As a result, our growth and earnings performance may be affected not only by management decisions and general economic conditions, but also by the requirements of federal and state statutes and by the regulations and policies of various bank regulatory agencies, including the Washington Department of Financial Institutions (Washington DFI), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve (Federal Reserve), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB). Furthermore, tax laws administered by the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), and state taxing authorities, accounting rules developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB), securities laws administered by the SEC and state securities authorities, anti-money laundering laws enforced by the Treasury Department and mortgage related rules, including with respect to loan securitization and servicing by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and entities such as Ginnie Mae and Freddie Mac, and SBA regulations with respect to small business loans, have an impact on our business. The effect of these statutes, regulations, regulatory policies and rules are significant to our operations and results, and the nature and extent of future legislative, regulatory or other changes affecting financial institutions are impossible to predict with any certainty.

Federal and state banking laws impose a comprehensive system of supervision, regulation and enforcement on the operations of insured banks, their holding companies and affiliates that is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC-insured deposits and depositors of banks, rather than their shareholders. These federal and state laws, and the regulations of the bank regulatory agencies issued under them, affect, among other things, the scope of business, the kinds and amounts of investments banks may make, reserve requirements, capital levels relative to operations, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, the ability to merge, consolidate and acquire, dealings with insiders and affiliates and the payment of dividends.

This supervisory and regulatory framework subjects banks and bank holding companies to regular examination by their respective regulatory agencies, which results in examination reports and ratings that, while not

10

publicly available, can impact the conduct and growth of their businesses. These examinations consider not only compliance with applicable laws and regulations, but also capital levels, asset quality and risk, management ability and performance, earnings, liquidity, sensitivity to market risk and various other factors. The regulatory agencies generally have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity where the agencies determine, among other things, that such operations are unsafe or unsound, fail to comply with applicable law or are otherwise inconsistent with laws and regulations or with the supervisory policies of these agencies.

The following is a summary of the material elements of the supervisory and regulatory framework applicable to us and the Bank. It does not describe all of the statutes, regulations and regulatory policies that apply, nor does it restate all of the requirements of those that are described. The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provision.

Bank Holding Company Regulation

Since we own all of the capital stock of the Bank, we are a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the BHC Act). As a result, we are primarily subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the BHC Act and the regulations of the Federal Reserve.

Acquisition of Banks

The BHC Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the Federal Reserve’s prior approval before:

Additionally, the BHC Act provides that the Federal Reserve may not approve any of the above transactions if such transaction would result in or tend to create a monopoly or substantially lessen competition or otherwise function as a restraint of trade, unless the anti-competitive effects of the proposed transaction are clearly outweighed by the public interest in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be served. The Federal Reserve is also required to consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding companies and banks concerned and the convenience and needs of the community to be served. The Federal Reserve’s consideration of financial resources includes a focus on capital adequacy, which is discussed in the section entitled “—Bank Regulation and Supervision—Capital Adequacy.” The Federal Reserve also considers the effectiveness of the institutions in combating money laundering, including a review of the anti-money laundering program of the acquiring bank holding company and the anti-money laundering compliance records of a bank to be acquired as part of the transaction. Finally, the Federal Reserve takes into consideration the extent to which the proposed transaction would result in greater or more concentrated risks to the stability of the U.S. banking or financial system.

Under the BHC Act, if well-capitalized and well-managed, we or any other bank holding company located in Washington may purchase a bank located outside of Washington without regard to whether such transaction is prohibited under state law. Conversely, a well-capitalized and well-managed bank holding company located outside of Washington may purchase a bank located inside Washington without regard to whether such transaction is prohibited under state law. In each case, however, restrictions may be placed under state law on the acquisition of a bank that has only been in existence for a limited amount of time or will result in concentrations of deposits exceeding limits specified by statute. For example, Washington law currently prohibits a bank holding company from acquiring control of a Washington-based financial institution until the target financial institution has been in operation for at least five years.

11

Change in Bank Control

Subject to various exceptions, the BHC Act and the Change in Bank Control Act, together with related regulations, require Federal Reserve approval prior to any person’s or company’s acquiring “control” of a bank holding company. Under a rebuttable presumption established by the Federal Reserve pursuant to the Change in Bank Control Act, the acquisition of 10% or more of a class of voting stock of a bank holding company would constitute acquisition of control of the bank holding company if no other person will own, control, or hold the power to vote a greater percentage of that class of voting stock immediately after the transaction or the bank holding company has registered securities under the Exchange Act. In addition, any person or group of persons acting in concert must obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve under the BHC Act before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is already a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding voting stock of a bank holding company, the right to control in any manner the election of a majority of the company’s directors, or otherwise obtaining control or a “controlling influence” over the bank holding company.

Permitted Activities

Under the BHC Act, a bank holding company is generally permitted to engage in or acquire direct or indirect control of the voting shares of any company engaged in the following activities:

Activities that the Federal Reserve has found to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to the business of banking include:

The Federal Reserve may order a bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any of these activities or to terminate its ownership or control of any subsidiary when it has reasonable cause to believe that the bank holding company’s continued ownership, activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness, or stability of it or any of its bank subsidiaries.

12

In addition to the permissible bank holding company activities listed above, a bank holding company may qualify and elect to become a financial holding company, thereby permitting the bank holding company to engage in activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to financial activity. The BHC Act expressly lists the following activities as financial in nature:

For us to qualify to become a financial holding company, we must be well-capitalized and well-managed. In addition, the Bank and any other depository institution subsidiary we control must be well-capitalized and well-managed and must have a CRA rating of at least “satisfactory.” Additionally, we must file an election with the Federal Reserve to become a financial holding company and must provide the Federal Reserve with 30 days written notice prior to engaging in a permitted financial activity. We have not elected to become a financial holding company at this time.

13

Dividends

The Federal Reserve has issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies, which expresses the Federal Reserve’s view that a bank holding company should pay cash dividends only to the extent that the holding company’s net income for the past year is sufficient to cover both the cash dividends and a rate of earning retention that is consistent with the holding company’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. The Federal Reserve also has indicated that it would be inappropriate for a holding company experiencing serious financial problems to borrow funds to pay dividends. Furthermore, under the prompt corrective action regulations adopted by the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve may prohibit a bank holding company from paying any dividends if one or more of the holding company’s bank subsidiaries is classified as undercapitalized.

Support of Subsidiary Institutions

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act and a Federal Reserve regulation require a bank holding company to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength to its bank subsidiaries. In addition, where a bank holding company has more than one FDIC-insured bank or thrift subsidiary, each of the bank holding company’s subsidiary FDIC-insured depository institutions is responsible for any losses to the FDIC as a result of an affiliated depository institution’s failure. As a result of a bank holding company’s source of strength obligation, a bank holding company may be required to provide funds to a bank subsidiary in the form of subordinate capital or other instruments which qualify as capital under bank regulatory rules and at a time when the bank holding company would not otherwise be inclined to do so.

Repurchase or Redemption of Securities

A bank holding company that is not well capitalized or well managed, or that is subject to any unresolved supervisory issues, is required to give the Federal Reserve prior written notice of any purchase or redemption of its own then-outstanding equity securities if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when combined with the net consideration paid for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding 12 months, is equal to 10% or more of the company’s consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe and unsound practice, or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve order or directive, or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve.

Bank Regulation and Supervision

The Bank is subject to extensive federal and state banking laws and regulations that impose restrictions on and provide for general regulatory oversight of the operations of the Bank. These laws and regulations are generally intended to protect the safety and soundness of the Bank and the Bank’s depositors, rather than our shareholders. The following discussion describes the material elements of the regulatory framework that applies to the Bank.

Since the Bank is a commercial bank chartered under the laws of the state of Washington and is a member of the Federal Reserve System, it is primarily subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the Federal Reserve and the Washington DFI. The Federal Reserve and the Washington DFI regularly examine the Bank’s operations and have the authority to approve or disapprove mergers, the establishment of branches and similar corporate actions. Both regulatory agencies have the power to take enforcement action to prevent the development or continuance of unsafe or unsound banking practices or other violations of law. The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC to the maximum extent provided by law. The Bank is also subject to numerous federal and state statutes and regulations that affect its business, activities and operations.

14

Branching

Under current Washington law, the Bank may open branch offices throughout Washington with the prior approval of the Washington DFI. In addition, with prior regulatory approval, the Bank may acquire branches of existing banks located in Washington. Under federal law, the Bank may establish branch offices with the prior approval of the Federal Reserve. Federal law allows a bank to branch into a new state by setting up a new branch if, under the laws of the state in which the branch is to be located, a state bank chartered by that state would be permitted to establish the branch.

FDIC Insurance and Other Assessments

The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC to the full extent provided in the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (currently $250,000 per deposit account), and the Bank pays assessments to the FDIC for that coverage. Under the FDIC’s risk-based deposit insurance assessment system, an insured institution’s deposit insurance premium is computed by multiplying the institution’s assessment base by the institution’s assessment rate. An institution’s assessment base equals the institution’s average consolidated total assets during a particular assessment period, minus the institution’s average tangible equity capital (that is, Tier 1 capital) during such period. For banks with less than $10.0 billion in total consolidated assets, the assessment rate is calculated using a financial ratios method based on a statistical model estimating the bank’s probability of failure over three years utilizing seven financial ratios (leverage ratio; net income before taxes/total assets; nonperforming loans and leases/gross assets; other real estate owned/gross assets; brokered deposit ratio; one year asset growth; and loan mix index) and a weighted average of supervisory ratings components. The current rule fixes the range of assessment rates from 1.5 basis points for an institution posing the least risk, to 30 basis points for an institution posing the most risk; and will further lower the range of assessment rates if the reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund increases to 2% or more. As of September 30, 2019, which is the most recent information available, the Deposit Insurance Fund was at 1.41%.  Banks with over $10.0 billion in total consolidated assets are required to pay a surcharge of 4.5 basis points on their assessment basis, subject to certain adjustments. The FDIC may also impose special assessments from time to time.

In addition to its risk-based insurance assessments, the FDIC also has imposed Financing Corporation (FICO), assessments to help pay the $780 million in annual interest payments on the approximately $8 billion of bonds issued in the late 1980s as part of the government rescue of the savings and loan industry. FICO assessments ended in 2019 with the maturing of the outstanding bonds.

Termination of Deposit Insurance

The FDIC may terminate its insurance of deposits of a bank if it finds that the bank 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.

Community Reinvestment Act

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) requires that, in connection with examinations of insured depository institutions within their respective jurisdictions, the federal banking agencies will evaluate the record of each financial institution in meeting the credit needs of its local community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The Federal Reserve periodically evaluates the Bank’s record of performance under the CRA, and these evaluations are publicly available. A bank’s CRA performance is considered in evaluating applications seeking approval for mergers, acquisitions, and new offices or facilities. Failure to adequately meet these criteria could result in additional requirements and limitations being imposed on the bank. Certain regulatory advantages, such as expediated processing of applications, are available only to banks with CRA ratings of Satisfactory or Outstanding.  Additionally, we must publicly disclose the terms of certain CRA-related agreements. The Bank received a Satisfactory rating at its most recent evaluation dated September 25, 2017.

Interest Rate Limitations

Interest and other charges collected or contracted for by the Bank are subject to applicable state usury laws and federal laws concerning interest rates.

15

Federal Laws Applicable to Consumer Credit and Deposit Transactions

The Bank’s loan and deposit operations are subject to a number of federal consumer protection laws, including:

Capital Adequacy

The Federal Reserve has adopted risk-based and leverage capital adequacy requirements, pursuant to which they assess the adequacy of capital in examinations and in analyzing bank regulatory applications. Risk-based capital requirements determine the adequacy of capital based on the credit and certain other risks inherent in various classes of assets and off-balance sheet items. The federal banking regulators have adopted regulations implementing the Basel Capital Adequacy Accord (Basel III), which had been approved by the Basel member central bank governors in 2010 as an agreement among the countries’ central banks and bank regulators on the amount of capital banks and their holding companies must maintain as a cushion against losses and insolvency. The U.S. Basel III rule’s minimum capital to risk-weighted assets requirements are a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 4.5%, a Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.0%, and a total capital ratio of 8.0%. The minimum leverage ratio (Tier 1 capital to total assets) is 4.0%. Bank holding companies with assets of less than $3.0 billion that are not engaged in significant nonbanking activities, do not conduct significant off-balance sheet activities and that do not have a material amount of debt or equity securities registered with the SEC, such as the Company, are exempt from the Federal Reserve’s risk-based-capital and leverage rules.

16

In order to avoid limitations on capital distributions, including dividend payments and certain discretionary bonus payments to executive officers, a banking organization must maintain a capital conservation buffer composed of common equity Tier 1 capital above its minimum risk-based capital requirements. The buffer is measured relative to risk-weighted assets. Phase-in of the capital conservation buffer requirements began on January 1, 2016, and the requirements were fully phased in on January 1, 2019. A banking organization with a buffer greater than 2.5% is not subject to limits on capital distributions or discretionary bonus payments; however, a banking organization with a buffer of less than 2.5% would be subject to increasingly stringent limitations as the buffer approaches zero. A banking organization also would be prohibited from making distributions or discretionary bonus payments during any quarter if its eligible retained income is negative in that quarter and its capital conservation buffer ratio was less than 2.5% at the beginning of the quarter. Effectively, the Basel III framework requires the Bank meet minimum risk-based capital ratios of (i) 7% for common equity Tier 1 capital, (ii) 8.5% Tier 1 capital, and (iii) 10.5% total capital. The eligible retained income of a banking organization is defined as its net income for the four calendar quarters preceding the current calendar quarter, based on the organization’s quarterly regulatory reports, net of any distributions and associated tax effects not already reflected in net income. The minimum capital requirements plus the capital conservation buffer will exceed the prompt corrective action (PCA), well-capitalized thresholds, which are described below under “—Prompt Corrective Action.”

The U.S. Basel III rule includes stringent criteria for capital instruments to qualify as Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital. For instance, the rule effectively disallows newly-issued trust preferred securities as a component of a holding company’s Tier 1 capital. However, depository institution holding companies with less than $15 billion in total assets may permanently include non-qualifying instruments that were issued and included in Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital prior to May 19, 2010 in Additional Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital until they redeem such instruments or until the instruments mature. At December 31, 2019, the Company had $3.5 million of non-qualifying instruments includable in Tier 1 capital that were issued prior to May 19, 2010.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee published standards that it described as the finalization of the Basel III post-crisis regulatory reforms, which standards are commonly referred to as Basel IV. Among other things, these standards revise the Basel Committee’s standardized approach for credit risk (including the recalibration of the risk weights and the introduction of new capital requirements for certain “unconditionally cancellable commitments,” such as unused credit card lines of credit) and provides a new standardized approach for operational risk capital. Under the Basel framework, these standards will generally be effective on January 1, 2022, with an aggregate output floor phasing in through January 1, 2027. Under the current U.S. capital rules, operational risk capital requirements and a capital floor apply only to advanced approaches institutions, and are not applicable to the Bank. The impact of Basel IV on us will depend on how it is implemented by the federal bank regulators.

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act (the EGRRCPA) requires the federal banking agencies to develop a community bank leverage ratio (the CBLR) (defined as the ratio of tangible equity capital to average total consolidated assets) for banks and holding companies with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion and an appropriate risk profile. In 2019, the federal banking agencies fixed the CBLR at 9.0%. Qualifying banks that exceed the minimum CBLR will be deemed to be in compliance with all other capital and leverage requirements. The Company and Bank are not planning on adopting the CBLR.

Failure to meet statutorily mandated capital guidelines or more restrictive ratios separately established for a banking institution could subject the institution to a variety of enforcement remedies available to federal regulatory authorities, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, a prohibition on accepting or renewing brokered deposits, limitations on the rates of interest that the institution may pay on its deposits, and other restrictions on its business.

Prompt Corrective Action

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 establishes a system of “prompt corrective action” to resolve the problems of undercapitalized insured depository institutions. Under this system, the federal banking regulators have established five capital categories (well-capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized); all insured depository institutions fall into one of these categories. The federal banking agencies have specified by regulation the relevant capital thresholds and other qualitative requirements for each of the categories. For an insured depository institution to be

17

“well-capitalized” under the PCA framework, it must have a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5%, Tier 1 capital ratio of 8.0%, a total capital ratio of 10.0%, and a leverage ratio of 5.0%, and must not be subject to any written agreement, order or capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive issued by its primary federal regulator to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure. At December 31, 2019, the Bank qualified for the well-capitalized category.

Federal banking regulators are required to take various mandatory supervisory actions and are authorized to take other discretionary actions with respect to institutions in the three undercapitalized categories. An undercapitalized institution has a capital ratio below any one of four thresholds: a common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.5%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0%, a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0%, or a leverage ratio of 4.0%. The severity of the action depends upon the capital category in which the institution is placed. For example, institutions in all three undercapitalized categories are automatically restricted from paying distributions and management fees, whereas only an institution that is significantly undercapitalized or critically undercapitalized is restricted in its compensation paid to senior executive officers. Generally, subject to a narrow exception, the banking regulator must appoint a receiver or conservator for an institution that is critically undercapitalized.

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. Such a plan must include a guarantee from the institution’s bank holding company that the institution will comply with the plan until the institution has been adequately capitalized on average during each of the four consecutive calendar quarters. The holding company’s obligation to fund a capital restoration plan is limited to the lesser of (i) 5% of an undercapitalized subsidiary institution’s assets at the time it became undercapitalized and (ii) 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 under an accepted capital restoration plan or with Federal Reserve approval. A critically undercapitalized bank, one with a ratio of tangible equity to total assets of 2% or less, is presumptively subject to a supervisory acquisition or the appointment of a conservator or receiver.

The regulations also establish procedures for downgrading an institution to a lower capital category based on supervisory factors other than capital.

Liquidity

Financial institutions are subject to significant regulatory scrutiny regarding their liquidity positions. This scrutiny has increased during recent years, as the economic downturn that began in the late 2000s negatively affected the liquidity of many financial institutions. Various bank regulatory publications, including Federal Reserve SR 10-6 (Funding and Liquidity Risk Management), address the identification, measurement, monitoring and control of funding and liquidity risk by financial institutions.

The U.S. federal banking regulators have introduced two new liquidity metrics for large banking organizations. The first metric is the “liquidity coverage ratio,” and it aims to require a financial institution to maintain sufficient high-quality liquid resources to survive an acute stress scenario that lasts for one month. The second metric is the “net stable funding ratio,” and its objective is to require a financial institution to maintain a minimum amount of stable sources relative to the liquidity profiles of the institution’s assets, as well as the potential for contingent liquidity needs arising from off-balance sheet commitments, over a one-year horizon.

The federal banking regulators finalized the liquidity coverage ratio in September 2014, and proposed the net stable funding ratio in May 2016. While the liquidity coverage ratio and the proposed net stable funding ratio only apply to the largest banking organizations in the country, certain elements may filter down and become applicable to or expected of all insured depository institutions.

Payment of Dividends

We are a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. Our principal source of cash flow, including cash flow to pay dividends to our shareholders, is dividends the Bank pays to us as the Bank’s sole shareholder. Statutory and regulatory limitations apply to the Bank’s payment of dividends to us as well as to our payment of dividends to

18

our shareholders. A corollary to the requirement that a bank holding company serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary banks is the Federal Reserve policy that a bank holding company should not maintain a level of cash dividends to its shareholders that places undue pressure on the capital of its bank subsidiaries or that can be funded only through additional borrowings or other arrangements that may undermine the bank holding company’s ability to serve as such a source of strength. Our ability to pay dividends is also subject to the provisions of Washington corporate law that prevent distributions to shareholders if, after giving effect to the distribution, we would not be able to pay our liabilities as they become due in the usual course of business or our total assets would be less than the sum of our total liabilities plus the amount that would be needed, if we were to be dissolved at the time of the distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of shareholders whose preferential rights are superior to those receiving the distribution. In addition, in deciding whether or not to declare a dividend of any particular size, our board of directors must consider our and the Bank’s current and prospective capital, liquidity, and other needs.

The Washington DFI and the Federal Reserve also regulate the Bank’s dividend payments. Under Washington law, a state-chartered bank may not pay a dividend in an amount greater than its retained earnings without approval. Under Federal Reserve regulations, the Bank may not declare or pay a dividend if the total of all dividends declared during the calendar year, including the proposed dividend, exceeds the sum of the Bank’s net income during the current calendar year and the retained net income of the prior two calendar years, unless the dividend has been approved by the Federal Reserve.

The Bank’s payment of dividends may also be affected or limited by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines. 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. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, a depository institution may not pay any dividends if payment would cause it to become undercapitalized or if it already is undercapitalized. Moreover, the federal agencies have issued policy statements providing that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings.

Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders

The Bank is subject to Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act, which places limits on the amount of:

Subject to various exceptions, the total amount of the above transactions is limited in amount, as to any one affiliate, to 10% of a bank’s capital and surplus and, as to all affiliates combined, to 20% of a bank’s capital and surplus. In addition to the limitation on the amount of these transactions, the above transactions also must meet specified collateral requirements and safety and soundness requirements. Under no circumstances may a bank purchase a low-quality asset from an affiliate.

19

The Bank is also subject to Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, which, among other things, prohibits a bank from engaging in the above transactions with affiliates, as well as other types of transactions set forth in Section 23B, unless the transactions are on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the bank, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with nonaffiliated companies.

The Bank is also subject to restrictions on extensions of credit to its executive officers, directors, principal shareholders and their related interests. These extensions of credit (i) must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions between the bank and third parties, and (ii) must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features. There are also individual and aggregate limitations on loans to insiders and their related interests. The aggregate amount of insider loans generally cannot exceed the institution’s total unimpaired capital and surplus. Insiders and banks are subject to enforcement actions for knowingly entering into insider loans in violation of applicable restrictions.

Single Borrower Credit Limits

Under federal law, total loans and extensions of credit to a borrower may not exceed 15% of the Bank’s unimpaired capital and surplus. However, such loans may be in excess of that percentage, but not above 25%, if each loan in excess of 15% is fully collateralized by readily marketable collateral. Under Washington law, total loans and extensions of credit to a borrower may not exceed 20% of the Bank’s capital and surplus.

Commercial Real Estate Concentration Limits

In December 2006, the federal banking regulators issued guidance entitled “Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices” to address increased concentrations in commercial real estate (CRE), loans. In addition, in December 2015, the federal bank agencies issued additional guidance entitled “Statement on Prudent Risk Management for Commercial Real Estate Lending.” Together, these guidelines describe the criteria the agencies will use as indicators to identify institutions potentially exposed to CRE concentration risk. An institution that has (i) experienced rapid growth in CRE lending, (ii) notable exposure to a specific type of CRE, (iii) total reported loans for construction, land development, and other land representing 100% or more of the institution’s capital, or (iv) total CRE loans representing 300% or more of the institution’s capital, and the outstanding balance of the institutions CRE portfolio has increased by 50% or more in the prior 36 months, may be identified for further supervisory analysis of the level and nature of its CRE concentration risk. As of December 31, 2019, the Bank’s total non-owner-occupied commercial real estate loans, including loans secured by apartment buildings, investor commercial real estate, and construction and land loans, represented 347.9% and 333.03% of its capital, at December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively, thus exceeding the 300% target. However, the Bank's Ratio CRE loans to capital has decreased since December 31, 2017 when it was at 354.7%.  

Privacy

Financial institutions are required to disclose their policies for collecting and protecting non-public personal information of their clients. Clients generally may prevent financial institutions from sharing non-public personal information with nonaffiliated third parties except under certain circumstances, such as the processing of transactions requested by the consumer or when the financial institution is jointly offering a product or service with a nonaffiliated financial institution. Additionally, financial institutions generally are prohibited from disclosing consumer account numbers to any nonaffiliated third party for use in telemarketing, direct mail marketing or other marketing to consumers.

Cybersecurity

Federal banking agencies pay close attention to the cybersecurity practices of banks and their holding companies and affiliates. The interagency council of the agencies, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (FFIEC), has issued several policy statements and other guidance for banks as new cybersecurity threats arise. FFIEC has recently focused on such matters as compromised customer credentials and business continuity

20

planning. Examinations by the banking agencies now include review of an institution’s information technology and its ability to thwart cyberattacks.

Consumer Credit Reporting

The FCRA imposes, among other things:

Anti-Terrorism, Money Laundering Legislation and OFAC

The Bank is subject to the Bank Secrecy Act and the USA Patriot Act. These statutes and related rules and regulations impose requirements and limitations on specified financial transactions and accounts and other relationships intended to guard against money laundering and terrorism financing. The principal requirements for an insured depository institution include (i) establishment of an anti-money laundering program that includes training and audit components, (ii) establishment of a “know your customer” program involving due diligence to confirm the identities of persons seeking to open accounts and to deny accounts to those persons unable to demonstrate their identities, (iii) the filing of currency transaction reports for deposits and withdrawals of large amounts of cash, (iv) additional precautions for accounts sought and managed for non-U.S. persons and (v) verification and certification of money laundering risk with respect to private banking and foreign correspondent banking relationships. For many of these tasks a bank must keep records to be made available to its primary federal regulator. Anti-money laundering rules and policies are developed by a bureau within the Treasury Department, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, but compliance by individual institutions is overseen by its primary federal regulator.

The Bank has established appropriate anti-money laundering and customer identification programs. The Bank also maintains records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments, files reports of certain cash transactions exceeding $10,000 (daily aggregate amount), and reports suspicious activity that might signify money laundering, tax evasion, or other criminal activities pursuant to the Bank Secrecy Act. The Bank otherwise has implemented policies and procedures to comply with the foregoing requirements.

The Treasury Department’s 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 publishes lists of persons, organizations and countries suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. If the Company or the Bank finds a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, the Company or the Bank must freeze or block such account or transaction, file a suspicious activity report, and notify the appropriate authorities.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act represents a comprehensive revision of laws affecting corporate governance, accounting obligations and corporate reporting. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act is applicable to all companies with equity securities registered, or that file reports, under the Exchange Act. In particular, the act established (i) requirements for audit committees, including independence, expertise and responsibilities; (ii) responsibilities regarding financial statements for the chief executive officer and chief financial officer of the reporting company and new requirements for them to certify the accuracy of periodic reports; (iii) standards for auditors and regulation of audits; (iv) disclosure and reporting obligations for the reporting company and its directors and executive officers; and

21

(v) civil and criminal penalties for violations of the federal securities laws. The legislation also established a new accounting oversight board to enforce auditing standards and restrict the scope of services that accounting firms may provide to their publicly traded company audit clients.

Overdraft Fees

Federal Reserve Regulation E restricts banks’ abilities to charge overdraft fees. The rule prohibits financial institutions from charging fees for paying overdrafts on ATM and one-time debit card transactions, unless a consumer consents, or opts in, to the overdraft service for those types of transactions.

The Dodd-Frank Act and the EGRRCPA

As final rules and regulations implementing the Dodd-Frank Act have been adopted, this law has significantly changed and is significantly changing the bank regulatory framework and affected the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of banks and their holding companies.

A number of the effects of the Dodd-Frank Act are described or otherwise accounted for in various parts of this “—Regulation and Supervision” section. The following items provide a brief description of certain other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that may be relevant to us and the Bank.

The EGRRCPA made changes to a variety of rules and regulations, including revisions to the Dodd-Frank Act. For example, the EGRRCPA exempts certain lenders from the “ability to repay” requirements. Other EGRRCPA changes are described elsewhere in this section.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

The Dodd-Frank Act created the CFPB, an independent federal bureau within the Federal Reserve System having broad rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement powers under various federal consumer financial protection laws, including the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Truth in Lending Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, the consumer financial privacy provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and certain other statutes. The CFPB has examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to depository institutions with more than $10.0 billion in assets. Smaller institutions, including the Bank, are subject to rules promulgated by the CFPB but continue to be examined and supervised by federal banking agencies for compliance with federal consumer protection laws and regulations. The CFPB also has authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive practices in connection with the offering of consumer financial products. The Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and standards that are more stringent than those adopted at the federal level and, in certain circumstances, permits state attorneys general to enforce compliance with both the state and federal laws and regulations. The EGRRCPA requires amendments generally intended to narrow the scope of certain of these rules, but we are not currently able to determine how these changes may affect the Bank’s business.

22

The CFPB has proposed or issued a number of important rules affecting a wide range of consumer financial products. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act and CFPB rulemakings and enforcement policies may impact the profitability of our business activities, limit our ability to make, or the desirability of making, certain types of loans, require us to change our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage ratio requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business or profitability. The changes may also require us to dedicate significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make necessary changes to comply with the new statutory and regulatory requirements.

The CFPB has concentrated much of its rulemaking efforts on reforms related to residential mortgage transactions. The CFPB has issued rules related to a borrower’s ability to repay and qualified mortgage standards, mortgage servicing standards, loan originator compensation standards, requirements for high cost mortgages, appraisal and escrow standards and requirements for higher-priced mortgages. The CFPB has also issued rules establishing integrated disclosure requirements for lenders and settlement agents in connection with most closed end, real estate secured consumer loans; and rules which, among other things, expand the scope of information lenders must report in connection with mortgage and other housing-related loan applications under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. These rules, which became effective on a rolling basis through January 1, 2019, include significant regulatory and compliance changes and are expected to have a broad impact on the financial services industry.

With the change in leadership at the CFPB in 2017, the agency has released a new strategic plan and published formal requests for information on possible changes to its supervisory, enforcement and other programs. These developments suggest that the CFPB may be taking a different approach to its implementation of consumer financial protection laws. The EGRRCPA requires the CFPB to make changes to various regulations. We have not been able to assess the impact of these changes on our operations, and the CFPB's approach could change again, depending on the results of the elections in November 2020.

The Volcker Rule

On December 10, 2013, five U.S. financial regulators, including the Federal Reserve, adopted a final rule implementing the “Volcker Rule.” The Volcker Rule was created by Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act and prohibits “banking entities” from engaging in “proprietary trading.” Banking entities also are prohibited from sponsoring or investing in private equity or hedge funds, or extending credit to or engaging in other covered transactions with affiliated private equity or hedge funds. The fundamental prohibitions of the Volcker Rule generally apply to banking entities of any size, including us, the bank and any other “affiliate” under the BHC Act. The EGRRCPA amends Section 619 to exempt from the Volcker Rule any insured depository institution that has $10.0 billion or less in total consolidated assets and whose total trading assets and trading liabilities are 5% or less of total consolidated assets. We are among the exempt institutions.

Limitations on Incentive Compensation

In April 2016, the Federal Reserve and other federal financial agencies re-proposed restrictions on incentive-based compensation pursuant to Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Act for financial institutions with $1 billion or more in total consolidated assets. For institutions with at least $1 billion but less than $50 billion in total consolidated assets, the proposal would impose principles-based restrictions that are broadly consistent with existing interagency guidance on incentive-based compensation. Such institutions would be prohibited from entering into incentive compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risks by the institution (1) by providing an executive officer, employee, director, or principal shareholder with excessive compensation, fees, or benefits, or (2) that could lead to material financial loss to the institution. The proposal would also impose certain governance and recordkeeping requirements on institutions covered by the rule. Whether or when the agencies will finalize the proposal is uncertain.

23

Information About Our Executive Officers

The table below provides information about our executive officers. Ages are as of December 31, 2019.

The following is a brief discussion of the business and banking background and experience of our executive officers, including their business experience during the last five years.

Eric M. Sprink serves as our President and Chief Executive Officer. Mr. Sprink joined the Company in late 2006 as President and Chief Operating Officer and became Chief Executive Officer in 2010. Mr. Sprink began his banking career working for Security Pacific Bank while enrolled at Arizona State University. He assumed increasing levels of responsibility in the areas of retail operations, consumer and commercial lending and wealth management with Security Pacific Bank and its successor, Bank of America. He then moved to Centura Bank, where he held management positions in retail operations and corporate finance. After Centura Bank was acquired, he held senior management positions at Washington Trust Bank and Global Credit Union. Mr. Sprink is active in industry trade groups and is a director and past chairman of the Community Bankers of Washington. Mr. Sprink received a bachelor’s degree from Arizona State University and an M.B.A. from the University of North Carolina. Mr. Sprink brings to our board of directors leadership experience, significant experience in many facets of the financial services business, and familiarity with our market area. Mr. Sprink has been a member of our board of directors since 2006.

Joel G. Edwards has served as Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company since 2012. Mr. Edwards is also the Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Bank. Prior to joining the Company and Bank, Mr. Edwards was a Senior Vice President and Administration Officer at AmericanWest Bank. Prior to that experience, he was Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer at Viking Bank, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer at Rainier Pacific Bank, and President of the Washington Credit Union Share Guaranty Association. He also was employed in the Farm Credit System for eight years including positions as vice president responsible for administration, budget and policy. Mr. Edwards graduated magna cum laude with a bachelor’s degree in business and concentration in economics from, and completed post-graduate studies in accounting at, Eastern Washington University. He also received an M.B.A. from Eastern Washington University.

Russ A. Keithley serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Lending Officer of the Bank, positions he has held since 2015. Mr. Keithley joined the Bank in 2012 and became Senior Vice President and Chief Credit Officer in 2014. Prior to joining the Bank, he served as Senior Vice President and Chief Lending Officer of North County Bank and Manager Team Lead at InterWest Bank. Mr. Keithley graduated from the University of Washington with a bachelor’s degree in political science. He is an honors graduate of the Pacific Coast Banking School at the University of Washington.

John J. Dickson joined the Bank in 2010 and currently serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Bank. Prior to joining the Bank, he served in various roles for Frontier Financial Corporation and Frontier Bank from 1985 to 2010, most recently serving as President of Frontier Bank from 2008 to 2010. In 2010, Frontier Bank was closed by the Washington DFI, and the FDIC was named receiver. Mr. Dickson received a bachelor’s degree in economics from the University of Puget Sound and graduated with honors from the Graduate School of Banking at the University of Wisconsin-Madison. Mr. Dickson practiced accounting as a CPA for three years in the audit division of a large accounting firm. Mr. Dickson is past Chairman of the Washington Bankers Association.

Daniel J. Lee joined the Bank in 2018 and currently serves as Executive Vice President and Chief Credit and Risk Officer.  Prior to joining the Bank, he most recently served as Executive Vice President, Chief Credit

24

Officer for Bank of the Cascades from 2012 to 2017 where he managed all credit administration and loan operations.  After helping Bank of the Cascades to more than double its assets and loans in just five years, Bank of the Cascades was acquired by First Interstate Bank in 2017.  Prior to that, Mr. Lee served in senior leadership roles of both public and privately held banks.  Mr. Lee earned his BS and MBA from the Kelley School of Business, Indiana University.  He attended the ABA Stonier Graduate School of Banking—currently domiciled at the Wharton Business School, University of Pennsylvania. He served as a Director on the Government Relations Council of the American Bankers Association and has a rich history of helping advocate for community resources that benefit new businesses and charitable services.

As a financial services organization, we are subject to a number of risks inherent in our transactions and present in the business decisions we make. Described below are the primary risks and uncertainties that if realized could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows, and our access to liquidity. Consideration should also be given to the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, as well as in the documents incorporated by reference into this Form 10-K. However, other factors not discussed below or elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows and our access to liquidity. Therefore, the risk factors below should not be considered a complete list of potential risks we may face.

Risks Related to Our Business

Our commercial real estate lending activities expose us to increased lending risks and related loan losses.

At December 31, 2019, our commercial real estate loan portfolio totaled $613.4 million, or 65.2% of our total loan portfolio. Our current business strategy is to continue our originations of commercial real estate loans. Commercial real estate loans generally expose a lender to greater risk of non-payment or late payment and loss than one-to-four family residential mortgage loans because repayment of the loans often depends on the successful operation of the properties and the income stream of the borrowers. These loans involve larger loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers compared to one-to-four family residential mortgage loans. To the extent that borrowers have more than one commercial real estate loan outstanding, an adverse development with respect to one loan or one credit relationship could expose us to a significantly greater risk of loss compared to an adverse development with respect to a one-to-four family residential real estate loan. Moreover, if loans that are collateralized by commercial real estate become troubled and the value of the real estate has been significantly impaired, then we may not be able to recover the full contractual amount of principal and interest that we anticipated at the time we originated the loan, which could cause us to increase our provision for loan losses and would adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Imposition of limits by the bank regulators on commercial real estate lending activities could curtail our growth and adversely affect our earnings.

In 2006, the federal banking regulators issued joint guidance entitled “Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices,” or the CRE Guidance. Although the CRE Guidance did not establish specific lending limits, it provides that a bank’s commercial real estate lending exposure could receive increased supervisory scrutiny where total non-owner-occupied commercial real estate loans, including loans secured by apartment buildings, investor commercial real estate, and construction and land loans, represent 300% or more of an institution’s total risk-based capital, and the outstanding balance of the commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased by 50% or more during the preceding 36 months. Our total non-owner-occupied commercial real estate loans, including loans secured by apartment buildings, investor commercial real estate, and construction and land loans, totaled $468.9 million and represented 347.9% of its total risk-based capital at December 31, 2019.  The ratio was 333.03% at December 31, 2018, and has decreased since December 31, 2017 when it was at 354.7%.  

25

In December 2015, the federal banking regulators released a new statement on prudent risk management for commercial real estate lending, referred to herein as the 2015 Statement. In the 2015 Statement, the federal banking regulators, among other things, indicate the intent to continue “to pay special attention” to commercial real estate lending activities and concentrations going forward. If the Federal Reserve, our primary federal regulator, were to impose restrictions on the amount of commercial real estate loans we can hold in our portfolio, for reasons noted above or otherwise, our earnings would be adversely affected.

We may be subject to environmental liabilities in connection with the real properties we own and the foreclosure on real estate assets securing our loan portfolio.

In the course of our business, we may purchase real estate in connection with our acquisition and expansion efforts, or we may foreclose on and take title to real estate or otherwise be deemed to be in control of property that serves as collateral on loans we make. As a result, we could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to those properties. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or we may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, if we are the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property.

The cost of removal or abatement may substantially exceed the value of the affected properties or the loans secured by those properties, we may not have adequate remedies against the prior owners or other responsible parties and we may not be able to resell the affected properties either before or after completion of any such removal or abatement procedures. If material environmental problems are discovered before foreclosure, we generally will not foreclose on the related collateral or will transfer ownership of the loan to a subsidiary. It should be noted, however, that the transfer of the property or loans to a subsidiary may not protect us from environmental liability. Furthermore, despite these actions on our part, the value of the property as collateral will generally be substantially reduced or we may elect not to foreclose on the property and, as a result, we may suffer a loss upon collection of the loan. Any significant environmental liabilities could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our commercial business lending activities expose us to additional lending risks.

As of December 31, 2019, commercial and industrial loans totaled $111.4 million and represented 11.8% of total loans.  We make commercial business loans in our market area to a variety of professionals, sole proprietorships, partnerships and corporations. As compared to commercial real estate loans, which are secured by real property, the value of which tends to be more easily ascertainable, commercial business loans are of higher risk and typically are made on the basis of the borrower’s ability to make repayment from the cash flow of the borrower’s business. As a result, the availability of funds for the repayment of commercial business loans may depend substantially on the success of the business itself and the conditions in the general economy. Further, any losses incurred on a small number of commercial loans could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations due to the larger average size of commercial loans as compared with other loans and the risk that collateral securing such loans may depreciate over time, may be difficult to appraise, may fluctuate in value and may depend on the borrower’s ability to collect receivables. We have increased our focus on commercial business lending in recent years and intend to continue to focus on this type of lending in the future.

26

Our concentration of residential mortgage loans exposes us to increased lending risks.

At December 31, 2019, $115.0 million, or 12.2%, of our loan portfolio was secured by one-to-four family real estate, 94.1% is secured by property in Washington State, and a significant majority of that is located in the Puget Sound region. One-to-four family residential mortgage lending is generally sensitive to regional and local economic conditions that significantly impact the ability of borrowers to meet their loan payment obligations, making loss levels difficult to predict. A decline in residential real estate values as a result of a downturn in the Puget Sound housing market could reduce the value of the real estate collateral securing these types of loans. Declines in real estate values could cause some of our residential mortgages to be inadequately collateralized, which would expose us to a greater risk of loss if we seek to recover on defaulted loans by selling the real estate collateral.

Our origination of construction loans exposes us to increased lending risks.

At December 31, 2019 $97.0 million, or 10.3% of our total loans was construction, land and land development loans.  We originate commercial construction loans primarily to professional builders for the construction of one-to-four family residences, apartment buildings, and commercial real estate properties. To a lesser degree, we also originate land acquisition loans for the purpose of facilitating the ultimate construction of a home or commercial building. Our construction loans present a greater level of risk than loans secured by improved, occupied real estate due to: (1) the increased difficulty at the time the loan is made of estimating the building costs and the selling price of the property to be built; (2) the increased difficulty and costs of monitoring the loan; (3) the higher degree of sensitivity to increases in market rates of interest; and (4) the increased difficulty of working out loan problems. In addition, construction costs may exceed original estimates as a result of increased materials, labor or other costs. Construction loans also often involve the disbursement of funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the project and the ability of the borrower to sell or lease the property or refinance the indebtedness.

The small to medium-sized businesses that we lend to may have fewer resources to endure adverse business developments than larger firms, which may impair our borrowers’ ability to repay loans.

We focus our business development and marketing strategy primarily on small to medium-sized businesses. Small to medium-sized businesses frequently have smaller market shares than larger firms, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience substantial volatility in operating results, any of which may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a loan. In addition, the success of a small and medium-sized business often depends on the management skills, talents and efforts of a small group of people, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these people could have an adverse effect on the business and its ability to repay its loan. If our borrowers are unable to repay their loans, our business, financial condition and earnings could be adversely affected.

We may not be able to adequately measure and limit our credit risk, which could lead to unexpected losses.

The business of lending is inherently risky, including risks that the principal of or interest on any loan will not be repaid timely or at all or that the value of any collateral supporting the loan will be insufficient to cover our outstanding exposure. These risks may be affected by the strength of the borrower’s business sector and local, regional and national market and economic conditions. Many of our loans are made to small to medium-sized businesses that may be less able to withstand competitive, economic and financial pressures than larger borrowers. Our risk management practices, such as monitoring the concentration of our loans within specific industries and our credit approval practices, may not adequately reduce credit risk, and our credit administration personnel, policies and procedures may not adequately adapt to changes in economic or any other conditions affecting customers and the quality of the loan portfolio. A failure to effectively measure and limit the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio could lead to unexpected losses and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

27

If our allowance for loan losses is insufficient to absorb actual loan losses, our results of operations would be negatively affected.

In determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses, we analyze our loss and delinquency experience by loan categories and we consider the effect of existing economic conditions. In addition, we make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. If the actual results are different from our estimates, or our analyses are incorrect, our allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover losses inherent in our loan portfolio, which would require additions to our allowance and would decrease our net income. Our emphasis on loan growth and on increasing our portfolio, as well as any future credit deterioration, will require us to increase our allowance further in the future. While we believe that our allowance for loan losses was adequate at December 31, 2019, there is no assurance that it will be sufficient to cover future loan losses, especially if there is a significant deterioration in economic conditions

In addition, our banking regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and could require us to increase our provision for loan losses. Any increase in our allowance for loan losses or loan charge-offs as required by regulatory authorities may adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Nonperforming assets take significant time and resources to resolve and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Nonperforming assets adversely affect our net income in various ways. We generally do not record interest income on other real estate owned (OREO), or on nonperforming loans, thereby adversely affecting our income and increasing loan administration costs. When we take collateral in foreclosures and similar proceedings, we are required to mark the related asset to the then fair market value of the collateral, which may ultimately result in a loss. An increase in our level of nonperforming assets increases our risk profile and may impact the capital levels regulators believe are appropriate in light of the ensuing risk profile. While we seek to reduce problem assets through loan workouts, restructurings and otherwise, decreases in the value of the underlying collateral, or in these borrowers’ performance or financial condition, whether or not due to economic and market conditions beyond our control, could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, the resolution of nonperforming assets requires significant commitments of time from management, which may materially and adversely impact their ability to perform their other responsibilities. We may not experience future increases in the value of nonperforming assets.

The current economic condition in the market areas we serve may adversely impact our earnings and could increase the credit risk associated with our loan portfolio.

Substantially all of our loan and deposit customers are businesses and individuals in greater Puget Sound area and soft economies in this market area could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. A deterioration in the market areas we serve could result in the following consequences, any of which would have an adverse impact, which could be material, on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects:

A decline in local economic conditions may have a greater effect on our earnings and capital than on the earnings and capital of larger financial institutions whose real estate loans are geographically diverse. Many of the loans in our portfolio are secured by real estate. Deterioration in the real estate markets where collateral for a mortgage loan

28

is located could negatively affect the borrower’s ability to repay the loan and the value of the collateral securing the loan. Real estate values are affected by various other factors, including changes in general or regional economic conditions, governmental rules or policies and natural disasters such as earthquakes and flooding.

In addition, weakening in regional and general economic conditions such as inflation, recession, unemployment, natural disasters, epidemic illness, or other factors beyond our control could reduce our growth rate and negatively affect demand for loans, the performance of our borrowers and our financial condition and results of operations..

Our SBA lending program is dependent upon the U.S. federal government, and we face specific risks associated with originating SBA loans.

As of December 31, 2019, the balance of owned SBA loans and SBA loans net of the sold portion was $15.0 million, of which $2.5 million was guaranteed. As of December 31, 2019 the balance of SBA loans sold and serviced was $18.2 million, resulting in $66,000 in servicing income for the year ended December 31, 2019.  We also recognized $122,000 in income for the year ended December 31, 2019 for the gain on sale of our SBA loans.  Our SBA lending program is dependent upon the U.S. federal government. As an approved participant in the SBA Preferred Lender’s Program, referred to herein as an SBA Preferred Lender, we enable our clients to obtain SBA loans without being subject to the potentially lengthy SBA approval process necessary for lenders that are not SBA Preferred Lenders. The SBA periodically reviews the lending operations of participating lenders to assess, among other things, whether the lender exhibits prudent risk management. When weaknesses are identified, the SBA may request corrective actions or impose enforcement actions, including revocation of the lender’s SBA Preferred Lender status. If we lose our status as an SBA Preferred Lender, we may lose some or all of our customers to lenders who are SBA Preferred Lenders, and as a result we could experience a material adverse effect to our financial results. Any changes to the SBA program, including but not limited to changes to the level of guarantee provided by the federal government on SBA loans, changes to program specific rules impacting volume eligibility under the guaranty program, as well as changes to the program amounts authorized by Congress or exhaustion of the available funding for SBA programs may also have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, any default by the U.S. government on its obligations or any prolonged government shutdown could, among other things, impede our ability to originate SBA loans or sell such loans in the secondary market, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The SBA’s 7(a) Loan Program is the SBA’s primary program for helping start-up and existing small businesses, with financing guaranteed for a variety of general business purposes. Generally, we sell the guaranteed portion of our SBA 7(a) loans in the secondary market. These sales result in premium income for us at the time of sale and create a stream of future servicing income, as we retain the servicing rights to these loans. For the reasons described above, we may not be able to continue originating these loans or sell them in the secondary market. Furthermore, even if we are able to continue to originate and sell SBA 7(a) loans in the secondary market, we might not continue to realize premiums upon the sale of the guaranteed portion of these loans or the premiums may decline due to economic and competitive factors. When we originate SBA loans, we incur credit risk on the non-guaranteed portion of the loans, and if a customer defaults on a loan, we share any loss and recovery related to the loan pro-rata with the SBA. If the SBA establishes that a loss on an SBA guaranteed loan is attributable to significant technical deficiencies in the manner in which the loan was originated, funded or serviced by us, the SBA may seek recovery of the principal loss related to the deficiency from us. Generally, we do not maintain reserves or loss allowances for such potential claims and any such claims could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The laws, regulations and standard operating procedures that are applicable to SBA loan products may change in the future. We cannot predict the effects of these changes on our business and profitability. Because government regulation greatly affects the business and financial results of all commercial banks and bank holding companies and especially our organization, changes in the laws, regulations and procedures applicable to SBA loans could adversely affect our ability to operate profitably.

29

The geographic concentration of our loan portfolio and lending activities makes us vulnerable to a downturn in the economy of the Puget Sound region.

While there is not a single employer or industry in our market area on which a significant number of our customers are dependent, a substantial portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of loans secured by property located in the Puget Sound region. This makes us vulnerable to a downturn in the local economy and real estate markets. Adverse conditions in the local economy such as unemployment, recession, a catastrophic event or other factors beyond our control could impact the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans, which could impact our net interest income. In addition, decreases in local real estate values caused by economic conditions, recent changes in tax laws or other events could adversely affect the value of the property used as collateral for our loans, which could cause us to realize a loss in the event of a foreclosure. Further, deterioration in local economic conditions could drive the level of loan losses beyond the level we have provided for in our allowance for loan losses, which in turn could necessitate an increase in our provision for loan losses and a resulting reduction to our earnings and capital.

National and global economic and other conditions could adversely affect our future results of operations or market price of our stock.

Our business is directly impacted by factors such as economic, political and market conditions, broad trends in industry and finance, changes in government monetary and fiscal policies and inflation, foreign policy, and financial market volatility, all of which are beyond our control. Global economies continue to face significant challenges to achieving normalized economic growth rates and there are continuing concerns related to the level of U.S. government debt and fiscal actions that may be taken to address that debt. There can be no assurance that economic conditions will continue to improve, and these conditions could worsen. Any deterioration in the economies of the nation as a whole or in our markets would have an adverse effect, which could be material, on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and could also cause the market price of our stock to decline. While it is impossible to predict how long challenging economic conditions may exist, a slow or fragile recovery could continue to present risks into the future for the industry and our company. Uncertainties have arisen regarding the potential for a reversal or renegotiation of international trade agreements under the current administration, and the impact such actions and other policies of the current administration may have on economic and market conditions. In addition, concerns about the performance of international economies, especially in Europe and emerging markets, and economic conditions in Asia, particularly the economies of China, South Korea and Japan, can impact the economy and financial markets here in the United States. If the national, regional and local economies experience worsening economic conditions, including high levels of unemployment, our growth and profitability could be constrained. Weak economic conditions are characterized by, among other indicators, deflation, elevated levels of unemployment, fluctuations in debt and equity capital markets, increased delinquencies on mortgage, commercial and consumer loans, residential and commercial real estate price declines, and lower home sales and commercial activity. Further, our business could be adversely affected by the effects of a widespread outbreak of epidemic illness in the human population. All of these factors are generally detrimental to our business. Our business is significantly affected by monetary and other regulatory policies of the U.S. federal government, its agencies and government-sponsored entities. Changes in any of these policies are influenced by macroeconomic conditions and other factors that are beyond our control, are difficult to predict and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, results of operations and growth prospects.

Economic conditions could result in increases in our level of nonperforming loans and/or reduce demand for our products and services, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

Prolonged deteriorating economic conditions could significantly affect the markets in which we do business, the value of our loans and investment securities, and our ongoing operations, costs and profitability. Further, declines in real estate values and sales volumes and elevated unemployment levels may result in higher loan delinquencies, increases in our nonperforming and classified assets and a decline in demand for our products and services. These events may cause us to incur losses and may adversely affect our financial condition and earnings. Reduction in problem assets can be slow, and the process can be exacerbated by the condition of the properties securing nonperforming loans and the lengthy foreclosure process in Washington. To the extent that we must work

30

through the resolution of assets, economic problems may cause us to incur losses and adversely affect our capital, business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows and our access to liquidity.

Our business is subject to the risks of epidemic illnesses, earthquakes, tsunamis, floods, fires and other natural catastrophic events.

A major catastrophe, such as an epidemic illness, earthquake, tsunami, flood, fire or other natural disaster could result in a prolonged interruption of our business. For example, our headquarters are located in Everett, Washington and we serve the broader Puget Sound region, a geographical region that has been or may be affected by earthquake, tsunami and flooding activity. Additionally, our business could be adversely affected by the effects of a widespread outbreak of epidemic illnesses, including the recent outbreak of respiratory illness caused by a novel coronavirus first identified in Wuhan, China and recently identified in King County, which is encompassed in the Puget Sound region. Because we primarily serve individuals and businesses in the Northwest, a natural disaster or epidemic illness likely would have a greater impact on our business, operations and financial condition than if our business were more geographically diverse. The occurrence of any of these natural disasters or epidemic illnesses could negatively impact our performance by disrupting our operations or the operations of our customers, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows and our access to liquidity.

Appraisals and other valuation techniques we use in evaluating and monitoring loans secured by real property, OREO and repossessed personal property may not accurately reflect the net value of the asset.

In considering whether to make a loan secured by real property, we generally require an appraisal of the property. However, an appraisal is only an estimate of the value of the property at the time the appraisal is made, and, as real estate values may change significantly in relatively short periods of time (especially in periods of heightened economic uncertainty), this estimate may not accurately describe the net value of the real property collateral after the loan is made. As a result, we may not be able to realize the full amount of any remaining indebtedness when we foreclose on and sell the relevant property. In addition, we rely on appraisals and other valuation techniques to establish the value of our OREO, and personal property that we acquire through foreclosure proceedings and to determine certain loan impairments. If any of these valuations are inaccurate, our financial statements may not reflect the correct value of our OREO, and our allowance for loan losses may not reflect accurate loan impairments. This could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. As of December 31, 2019, we did not hold any OREO or repossessed property and equipment.

Ineffective liquidity management could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Effective liquidity management is essential for the operation of our business. We require sufficient liquidity to meet customer loan requests, customer deposit maturities/withdrawals, payments on our debt obligations as they come due and other cash commitments under both normal operating conditions and other unpredictable circumstances causing industry or general financial market stress. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities on terms that are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry or economy generally. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a downturn in the geographic markets in which our loans and operations are concentrated or difficult credit markets. Our access to deposits may also be affected by the liquidity needs of our depositors. In particular, a majority of our liabilities are checking accounts and other liquid deposits, which are payable on demand or upon several days’ notice, while by comparison, a substantial majority of our assets are loans, which cannot be called or sold in the same time frame. Although we have historically been able to replace maturing deposits and advances as necessary, we might not be able to replace such funds in the future, especially if a large number of our depositors seek to withdraw their accounts, regardless of the reason. A failure to maintain adequate liquidity could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

31

We derive a percentage of our deposits, total assets and income from deposit accounts generated through our BaaS partnerships.  

Deposit accounts acquired through these relationships totaled $23.6 million, or 2.4% of total deposits at December 31, 2019.  We provide oversight over these relationships which must meet all internal and regulatory requirements.  We may exit relationships where such requirements are not met or be required by our regulators to exit such relationships.  Also, our partner(s) could terminate a relationship with us for many reasons, including being able to obtain better terms from another provider or dissatisfaction with the level or quality of our services.  If a relationship were to be terminated, it could materially reduce our deposits, assets and income.  We cannot assure you that we could replace such relationship. If we cannot replace such relationship, we may be required to seek higher rate funding sources as compared to the existing relationship and interest expense might increase.  We may also be required to sell securities or other assets to meet funding needs which would reduce revenues or potentially generate losses.

Our strategy of partnering with broker dealers and digital financial service providers to offer BaaS has been adopted by other institutions with which we compete.

Several online banking operations as well as the online banking programs of conventional banks have instituted BaaS strategies similar to ours.  As a consequence, we have encountered competition in this area and anticipate that we will continue to do so in the future.  This competition may increase our costs, reduce our revenues or revenue growth or, because we are a relatively small banking operation without the name recognition of other, more established banking operations, make it difficult for us to compete effectively in obtaining these relationships.

Our agreements with BaaS partners may produce limited revenue and may expose us to liability for compliance violations by BaaS partners.

We have entered into agreements with BaaS partners, which includes broker dealers and digital financial service providers, pursuant to which we will provide certain banking services for the BaaS partner customers, including serving as the issuing bank for debit cards issued to their customers and establishing one or more settlement accounts for the purpose of settling customer transactions in the cash management account program. The agreements have varying terms and may be terminated by the parties under certain circumstances. If our BaaS partners are not successful in achieving customer acceptance of their programs or terminate the agreement before the end of its term, our revenue under the agreement may be limited or may cease altogether. In addition, because we will provide banking services with respect to the cash features of our BaaS partner account programs, our bank regulators may hold us responsible for their activities with respect to the marketing or administration of their programs, which may result in increased compliance costs for us or potentially compliance violations as a result of BaaS partner activities.

Our business strategy includes growth, and our business, financial condition and results of operations could be negatively affected if we fail to grow or fail to manage our growth effectively. Growing our operations could also cause our expenses to increase faster than our revenues.

Our business strategy includes growth in assets, deposits and the scale of our operations. Achieving such growth will require us to attract customers that currently bank at other financial institutions in our market area. Our ability to successfully grow will depend on a variety of factors, including our ability to attract and retain experienced bankers, the continued availability of desirable business opportunities, competition from other financial institutions in our market area and our ability to manage our growth. Growth opportunities may not be available or we may not be able to manage our growth successfully. If we do not manage our growth effectively, our financial condition and operating results could be negatively affected. Furthermore, there can be considerable costs involved in expanding deposit and lending capacity that generally require a period of time to generate the necessary revenues to offset their costs, especially in areas in which we do not have an established presence and that require alternative delivery methods. Accordingly, any such business expansion can be expected to negatively impact our earnings for some period of time until certain economies of scale are reached. Our expenses could be further increased if we encounter delays in modernizing existing facilities, opening new branches or deploying new services.

32

We may not be able to implement our expansion strategy, which may adversely affect our ability to maintain our historical earnings trends.

Our expansion strategy focuses on organic growth, supplemented by BaaS, expansion of the Bank’s banking location network, or de novo branching, and strategic acquisitions. We may not be able to execute on aspects of our expansion strategy, which may impair our ability to sustain our historical rate of growth or prevent us from growing at all. More specifically, we may not be able to generate sufficient new loans and deposits within acceptable risk and expense tolerances, obtain the personnel or funding necessary for additional growth or find suitable acquisition candidates. Various factors, such as economic conditions and competition with other financial institutions, may impede or prohibit the growth of our operations, the opening of new banking locations and the consummation of acquisitions. Further, we may be unable to attract and retain experienced bankers, which could adversely affect our growth. The success of our strategy also depends on our ability to effectively manage growth, which is dependent upon a number of factors, including our ability to adapt our credit, operational, technology and governance infrastructure to accommodate expanded operations. If we fail to implement one or more aspects of our strategy, we may be unable to maintain our historical earnings trends, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The building of market share through our branch office strategy, and our ability to achieve profitability on new branch offices, may increase our expenses and negatively affect our earnings.

We believe there are branch expansion opportunities within our market area and adjacent markets and will seek to grow our deposit base by adding branches to our existing network. There are considerable costs involved in opening branch offices, especially in light of the capabilities needed to compete in today’s environment. Moreover, new branch offices generally require a period of time to generate sufficient revenues to offset their costs, especially in areas in which we do not have an established presence. Accordingly, new branch offices could negatively impact our earnings and may do so for some period of time. Our investments in products and services, and the related personnel required to implement new policies and procedures, take time to earn returns and can be expected to negatively impact our earnings for the foreseeable future. The profitability of our expansion strategy will depend on whether the income that we generate from the new branch offices will offset the increased expenses resulting from operating these branch offices.

Strong competition within our market area could hurt our profits and slow growth.

Our profitability depends upon our continued ability to compete successfully in our market area. We face intense competition both in making loans and attracting deposits. Our competitors for commercial real estate loans include other community banks and commercial lenders, some of which are larger than us and have greater resources and lending limits than we have and offer services that we do not provide. We face stiff competition for one-to-four family residential loans from other financial service providers, including large national residential lenders and local community banks. Other competitors for one-to-four family residential loans include credit unions and mortgage brokers which keep overhead costs and mortgage rates down by selling loans and not holding or servicing them. Price competition for loans and deposits might result in us earning less on our loans and paying more on our deposits, which reduces net interest income. We expect competition to remain strong in the future.

The Washington DFI recently entered into a multi-state agreement with six other states that is intended to streamline the licensing process for money service businesses, which include money transmitters and payment service providers. Increasing the relative ease of obtaining a license to operate a money service business within the state of Washington may encourage financial technology, or fintech, companies to offer services in the state, thereby increasing competition for such services.

33

We are subject to certain risks in connection with growing through mergers and acquisitions.

It is possible that we could acquire other banking institutions, other financial services companies or branches of banks in the future. Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and trading values and, therefore, may result in the dilution of our tangible book value per share and/or our earnings per share. Our ability to engage in future mergers and acquisitions depends on various factors, including: (1) our ability to identify suitable merger partners and acquisition opportunities; (2) our ability to finance and complete transactions on acceptable terms and at acceptable prices; and (3) our ability to receive the necessary regulatory and, when required, shareholder approvals. Our inability to engage in an acquisition or merger for any of these reasons could have an adverse impact on the implementation of our business strategies. Furthermore, mergers and acquisitions involve a number of risks and challenges, including our ability to achieve planned synergies and to integrate the branches and operations we acquire, and the internal controls and regulatory functions into our current operations, as well as the diversion of management’s attention from existing operations, which may adversely affect our ability to successfully conduct our business and negatively impact our financial results.

We rely heavily on our executive management team and other key employees, and we could be adversely affected by the unexpected loss of their services.

Our success depends in large part on the performance of our executive management team and other key personnel, as well as on our ability to attract, motivate and retain highly qualified senior and middle management and other skilled employees. Competition for qualified employees is intense, and the process of locating key personnel with the combination of skills, attributes and business relationships required to execute our business plan may be lengthy. We may not be successful in retaining our key employees, and the unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could have an adverse effect on our business because of their skills, knowledge of and business relationships within our primary markets, years of industry experience and the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel. If the services of any of our key personnel should become unavailable for any reason, we may not be able to identify and hire qualified persons on terms acceptable to us, or at all, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, and such capital may not be available when needed or at all.

We may need to raise additional capital, in the form of additional debt or equity, in the future to have sufficient capital resources and liquidity to meet our commitments and fund our business needs and future growth, particularly if the quality of our assets or earnings were to deteriorate significantly. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial condition. Economic conditions and a loss of confidence in financial institutions may increase our cost of funding and limit access to certain customary sources of capital or make such capital only available on unfavorable terms, including interbank borrowings, repurchase agreements and borrowings from the discount window of the Federal Reserve. We may not be able to obtain capital on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets, such as a decline in the confidence of debt purchasers, depositors of our bank or counterparties participating in the capital markets or other disruption in capital markets, may adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, in turn, our liquidity. Further, if we need to raise capital in the future, we may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would then have to compete with those institutions for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

34

The potential volatility of the price of our common stock and limited trading market of our common stock may make it difficult for you to resell shares of common stock owned by you at times or at prices you find attractive.

The stock market and, in particular, the market for financial institution stocks, can experience significant volatility.  The trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur.  This may make it difficult for you to resell shares of common stock owned by you at times or at prices you find attractive.  The limited trading market in our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market means that our shares may have less liquidity than other publicly traded companies.  We cannot ensure that the volume of trading in our common shares will be maintained or will increase in the future.

The Company’s dependence on dividends from the Bank could affect the Company’s liquidity and ability to pay dividends.  

We are dependent, in large part, on the Bank for dividends. Our principal source of cash flows, including cash flows to pay dividends to our shareholders and principal and interest on our outstanding debt, is dividend income from the Bank. The ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Company is limited by federal and state banking laws, regulations and policies. Subject to the Bank meeting or exceeding regulatory capital requirements, regulatory approval is required if the total of all dividends declared by the Bank in any calendar year would exceed the sum of the Bank’s net income for that year and its retained earnings for the preceding two years. Federal law also prohibits the Bank from paying dividends that would be greater than its undivided profits. In addition, Federal Reserve guidance sets forth the supervisory expectation that bank holding companies will inform and consult with the Federal Reserve in advance of issuing a dividend that exceeds earnings for the quarter and should not pay dividends in a rolling four quarter period in an amount that exceeds net income for the period.

Our corporate organizational documents and provisions of federal and state law to which we are subject contain certain provisions that could have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, make more difficult or prevent an attempted acquisition that shareholders may favor or an attempted replacement of our board of directors or management.

Our second amended and restated articles of incorporation and our amended and restated bylaws, (bylaws), may have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, discourage or prevent an attempted acquisition or change of control or a replacement of our incumbent board of directors or management. Our governing documents include provisions that:

In addition, certain provisions of Washington law, including a provision which restricts certain business combinations between a Washington corporation and certain affiliated shareholders, may delay, discourage or prevent an attempted acquisition or change in control. Furthermore, banking laws impose notice, approval, and

35

ongoing regulatory requirements on any shareholder or other party that seeks to acquire direct or indirect “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or its holding company. These laws include the BHC Act, and the Change in Bank Control Act. These laws could delay or prevent an acquisition.

We are subject to interest rate risk and fluctuations in interest rates may adversely affect our earnings.

The majority of our banking assets and liabilities are monetary in nature and subject to risk from changes in interest rates. Like most financial institutions, our earnings are significantly dependent on our net interest income, the principal component of our earnings, which is the difference between interest earned by us from our interest-earning assets, such as loans and investment securities, and interest paid by us on our interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. We expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-bearing liabilities will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-earning assets, or vice versa. In either event, if market interest rates should move contrary to our position, this “gap” will negatively impact our earnings. The impact on earnings is more adverse when the slope of the yield curve flattens, that is, when short-term interest rates increase more than long-term interest rates or when long-term interest rates decrease more than short-term interest rates. Many factors impact interest rates, including governmental monetary policies, inflation, recession, changes in unemployment, the money supply and international economic weakness and disorder and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets. Our interest rate sensitivity profile was asset sensitive as of December 31, 2019, meaning that we estimate our net interest income would increase more from rising interest rates than from falling interest rates.

Interest rate increases often result in larger payment requirements for our borrowers, which increases the potential for default and could result in a decrease in the demand for loans. At the same time, the marketability of the property securing a loan may be adversely affected by any reduced demand resulting from higher interest rates. In a declining interest rate environment, there may be an increase in prepayments on loans as borrowers refinance their loans at lower rates. In addition, in a low interest rate environment, loan customers often pursue long-term fixed rate credits, which could adversely affect our earnings and net interest margin if rates increase. Changes in interest rates also can affect the value of loans, securities and other assets. An increase in interest rates that adversely affects the ability of borrowers to pay the principal or interest on loans may lead to an increase in nonperforming assets and a reduction of income recognized, which could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and cash flows. Further, when we place a loan on nonaccrual status, we reverse any accrued but unpaid interest receivable, which decreases interest income. At the same time, we continue to have a cost to fund the loan, which is reflected as interest expense, without any interest income to offset the associated funding expense. Thus, an increase in the amount of nonperforming assets would have an adverse impact on net interest income. If short-term interest rates continue to remain at their historically low levels for a prolonged period, and assuming longer-term interest rates fall further, we could experience net interest margin compression as our interest-earning assets would continue to reprice downward while our interest-bearing liability rates could fail to decline in tandem. Such an occurrence would have an adverse effect on our net interest income and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Uncertainty relating to the LIBOR calculation process and phasing out of LIBOR may adversely affect our results of operations.

On July 27, 2017, the Chief Executive of the United Kingdom Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit rates for the calibration of LIBOR to the administrator of LIBOR after 2021. The announcement indicates that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot and will not be guaranteed after 2021. It is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions to the administrator of LIBOR or whether any additional reforms to LIBOR may be enacted in the United Kingdom or elsewhere. Several domestic and international groups, including the Alternative Reference Rate Committee and the International Swaps and Derivatives Association, have begun to develop LIBOR replacements, and a consensus appears to have emerged that the SOFR as observed by the Federal Reserve Bank of New York should be the successor rate. Nevertheless, uncertainty surrounding the transition away from LIBOR may adversely affect LIBOR rates and the value of LIBOR-based loans, and may impact rates we pay on our junior subordinated debentures. If LIBOR rates are no longer available, and we are required to implement substitute indices for the calculation of interest rates under our loan agreements with our borrowers or our existing borrowings, we may incur additional expenses in effecting the transition, and may be subject to disputes or litigation with customers and creditors over the appropriateness or

36

comparability to LIBOR of the substitute indices, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. As of December 31, 2019, we had $112.1 million in loans that are tied to LIBOR, and $74.1 million of those are SWAPs. We have $3.6 million in floating rate junior subordinated debentures to Coastal (WA) Statutory Trust I, which was formed for the issuance of trust preferred securities. These debentures are also tied to LIBOR.

We may be adversely affected by recent changes in U.S. tax laws and regulations.

From time to time, the U.S. government may introduce new tax laws and regulations, or interpretations of existing income tax laws could change, causing an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, changes in tax laws contained in the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act), which was enacted in December 2017, include a number of provisions that will have an impact on the banking industry, borrowers and the market for residential real estate. Included in this legislation was a reduction of the corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21%. In addition, other changes included: (i) a lower limit on the deductibility of mortgage interest on single-family residential mortgage loans, (ii) the elimination of interest deductions for home equity loans, (iii) a limitation on the deductibility of business interest expense and (iv) a limitation on the deductibility of property taxes and state and local income taxes.

Similarly, our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we report our financial condition and results of operations. Some of these policies require use of estimates and assumptions that may affect the value of our assets, liabilities, and financial results. Periodically, new accounting standards are issued or existing standards are revised, changing the methods for preparing our financial statements. These changes are not within our control and may significantly impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.  

We expect that the implementation of a new accounting standard could require us to increase our allowance for loan losses and may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The FASB, has adopted a new accounting standard that is effective for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2019 and interim period within those annual periods. As a smaller reporting company our implementation will be effective January 1, 2023. This standard, referred to as Current Expected Credit Loss (CECL), will require financial institutions to determine periodic estimates of lifetime expected credit losses on loans, and provide for the expected credit losses as allowances for loan losses. This will change the current method of providing allowances for loan losses that are probable, which we expect could require us to increase our allowance for loan losses, and will likely greatly increase the data we would need to collect and review to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses. Any increase in our allowance for loan losses, or expenses incurred to determine the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses, may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to laws regarding the privacy, information security and protection of personal information and any violation of these laws or another incident involving personal, confidential or proprietary information of individuals could damage our reputation and otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and earnings.

Our business requires the collection and retention of large volumes of customer data, including personally identifiable information in various information systems that we maintain and in those maintained by third parties with whom we contract to provide data services. We also maintain important internal company data such as personally identifiable information about our employees and information relating to our operations. We are subject to complex and increasingly demanding laws and regulations governing the privacy and protection of personal information of individuals (including customers, employees, suppliers and other third parties). For example, our business is subject to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act which, among other things: (i) imposes certain limitations on our ability to share nonpublic personal information about our customers with nonaffiliated third parties; (ii) requires that we provide certain disclosures to customers about our information collection, sharing and security practices and afford customers the right to “opt out” of any information sharing by us with nonaffiliated third parties (with certain exceptions); and (iii) requires that we develop, implement and maintain a written comprehensive information security program containing appropriate safeguards based on our size and complexity, the nature and scope of our activities, and the sensitivity of customer information we process, as well as plans for responding to data security breaches. Various state and federal laws and regulations impose data security breach notification requirements with varying levels of individual, consumer, regulatory or law enforcement notification in certain circumstances in the

37

event of a security breach. Ensuring that our collection, use, transfer and storage of personal information complies with all applicable laws and regulations can increase our costs.

Furthermore, we may not be able to ensure that all of our clients, suppliers, counterparties, broker dealers and financial providers in CCBX, and other third parties have appropriate controls in place to protect the confidentiality of the information that they exchange with us, particularly where such information is transmitted by electronic means. If personal, confidential or proprietary information of customers or others were to be mishandled or misused (in situations where, for example, such information was erroneously provided to parties who are not permitted to have the information, or where such information was intercepted or otherwise compromised by third parties), we could be exposed to litigation or regulatory sanctions under personal information laws and regulations. Concerns regarding the effectiveness of our measures to safeguard personal information, or even the perception that such measures are inadequate, could cause us to lose customers or potential customers for our products and services and thereby reduce our revenues. Accordingly, any failure or perceived failure to comply with applicable privacy or data protection laws and regulations may subject us to inquiries, examinations and investigations that could result in requirements to modify or cease certain operations or practices or in significant liabilities, fines or penalties, and could damage our reputation and otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and earnings.

We are dependent on our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party service providers; systems failures, interruptions and cybersecurity breaches could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is dependent on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party service providers. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. If significant, sustained or repeated, a system failure or service denial could compromise our ability to operate effectively, damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, and/or subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our third-party service providers may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes and other security breaches. We likely will expend additional resources to protect against the threat of such security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by such security breaches or viruses. To the extent that the activities of our third-party service providers or the activities of our customers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches and viruses could expose us to claims, regulatory scrutiny, litigation costs and other possible liabilities.

Security breaches and cybersecurity threats could compromise our information and expose us to liability, which would cause our business and reputation to suffer.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including our proprietary business information and that of our customers, suppliers and business partners, as well as personally identifiable information about our customers and employees. The processing that takes place with our strategic partners could potentially have an adverse impact on us in the event of a security breach of their systems. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy. We, our customers, and other financial institutions with which we interact, are subject to increasingly frequent, continuous attempts, including ransomware and malware attacks, to penetrate key systems by individual hackers, organized criminals, and in some cases, state-sponsored organizations. We have a cybersecurity program that includes internal/external penetration testing, regular vulnerability assessments, detailed vulnerability management, data loss prevention controls, file access and integrity monitoring and reporting and threat intelligence.  While we have established policies and procedures to prevent or limit the impact of cyber-attacks, there can be no assurance that such events will not occur or will be adequately addressed if they do. In addition, we also outsource certain cybersecurity functions, such as penetration testing, to third-party service providers, and the failure of these service providers to adequately perform such functions could increase our exposure to security breaches and cybersecurity threats. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other malicious code and cyber-attacks that could

38

have an impact on information security. Any such breach or attacks could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such unauthorized access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, and regulatory penalties; disrupt our operations and the services we provide to customers; damage our reputation; and cause a loss of confidence in our products and services, all of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We have not experienced any known cyber-attacks on our information technology and infrastructure that have resulted in any material system failure, incident or security breach to date.

We must keep pace with technological change to remain competitive.

Financial products and services have become increasingly technology-driven. Our ability to meet the needs of our customers competitively, and in a cost-efficient manner, is dependent on the ability to keep pace with technological advances and to invest in new technology as it becomes available, as well as related essential personnel. In addition, technology has lowered barriers to entry into the financial services market and made it possible for financial technology companies and other non-bank entities to offer financial products and services traditionally provided by banks. The ability to keep pace with technological change is important, and the failure to do so, due to cost, proficiency or otherwise, could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Because the nature of the financial services business involves a high volume of transactions, we face significant operational risks.

We rely on the ability of our employees and systems to process a high number of transactions. Operational risk is the risk of loss resulting from our operations, including but not limited to, the risk of fraud by employees or outside persons, the execution of unauthorized transactions by employees, errors relating to transaction processing and technology, breaches of our internal control system and compliance requirements, high volume of transactions processed for our strategic partners, and business continuation and disaster recovery. Insurance coverage may not be available for such losses, or where available, such losses may exceed insurance limits. This risk of loss also includes the potential legal actions that could arise as a result of an operational deficiency or as a result of noncompliance with applicable regulations, adverse business decisions or their implementation, and customer attrition due to potential negative publicity. Although our control testing has not identified any significant deficiencies in our internal control system, a breakdown in our internal control system, improper operation of our systems or improper employee actions could result in material financial loss to us, the imposition of regulatory action, and damage to our reputation.

We are dependent on the use of data and modeling in our management’s decision-making, and faulty data or modeling approaches could negatively impact our decision-making ability or possibly subject us to regulatory scrutiny in the future.

The use of statistical and quantitative models and other quantitative analyses is widespread in bank decision-making, and the employment of such analyses is becoming increasingly widespread in our operations. Liquidity stress testing, interest rate sensitivity analysis, and the identification of possible violations of anti-money laundering regulations are all examples of areas in which we are dependent on models and the data that underlies them. The use of statistical and quantitative models is also becoming more prevalent in regulatory compliance. While we are not currently subject to annual stress testing under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, (the Dodd-Frank Act), we anticipate that model-derived testing may become more extensively implemented by regulators in the future.

We anticipate data-based modeling will penetrate further into bank decision-making, particularly risk management efforts, as the capacities developed to meet rigorous stress testing requirements are able to be employed more widely and in differing applications. While we believe these quantitative techniques and approaches improve our decision-making, they also create the possibility that faulty data or flawed quantitative approaches could negatively impact our decision-making ability or, if we become subject to regulatory stress testing in the future, adverse regulatory scrutiny. Further, because of the complexity inherent in these approaches, misunderstanding or misuse of their outputs could similarly result in suboptimal decision-making.

39

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information provided to us by our borrowers and counterparties and any misrepresented information could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In deciding whether to approve loans or to enter into other transactions with borrowers and counterparties, we rely on information furnished to us by, or on behalf of, borrowers and counterparties, including financial statements, credit reports and other financial information. We also rely on representations of borrowers and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. If any of this information is intentionally or negligently misrepresented and such misrepresentation is not detected prior to loan funding, the value of the loan may be significantly lower than expected and we may be subject to regulatory action. Whether a misrepresentation is made by the loan applicant, another third party, or one of our employees, we generally bear the risk of loss associated with the misrepresentation. Our controls and processes may not have detected, or may not detect all, misrepresented information in our loan originations or from our business clients. Any such misrepresented information could adversely affect our business, financial condition and earnings.

We are subject to certain operational risks, including, but not limited to, customer, employee or third-party fraud and data processing system failures and errors.

Because we are a financial institution, employee errors and employee or customer misconduct could subject us in particular to financial losses or regulatory sanctions and seriously harm our reputation. Misconduct by our employees could include hiding unauthorized activities from us, improper or unauthorized activities on behalf of our customers or improper use of confidential information, each of which can be particularly damaging for financial institutions. It is not always possible to prevent employee errors and misconduct, and the precautions we take to prevent and detect this activity may not be effective in all cases. Employee errors could also subject us to financial claims for negligence.

We maintain a system of internal controls to mitigate operational risks, including data processing system failures and errors and customer or employee fraud, as well as insurance coverage designed to protect us from material losses associated with these risks, including losses resulting from any associated business interruption. If our internal controls fail to prevent or detect an occurrence, or if any resulting loss is not insured or exceeds applicable insurance limits, it could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Negative public opinion regarding our company or failure to maintain our reputation in the communities we serve could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations and prevent us from growing our business.

As a community bank, our reputation within the communities we serve is critical to our success. We believe we have set ourselves apart from our competitors by building strong personal and professional relationships with our customers and being active members of the communities we serve. As such, we strive to enhance our reputation by recruiting, hiring and retaining employees who share our core values of being an integral part of the communities we serve and delivering superior service to our customers. If our reputation is negatively affected by the actions of our employees or otherwise, we may be less successful in attracting new talent and customers or may lose existing customers, and our business, financial condition and earnings could be adversely affected. Further, negative public opinion can expose us to litigation and regulatory action and delay and impede our efforts to implement our expansion strategy, which could further adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We could recognize losses on investment securities held in our securities portfolio, particularly if interest rates increase or economic and market conditions deteriorate.

While we attempt to invest a significant majority of our total assets in loans (our loan-to-asset ratio was 83.2% as of December 31, 2019), we invest a percentage of our total assets (2.9% as of December 31, 2019) in investment securities with the primary objectives of providing a source of liquidity and meeting pledging requirements. As of December 31, 2019, the fair value of our available for sale investment securities portfolio was $28.4 million, which included a net unrealized loss of $41,000, and the fair value of our held to maturity investment securities was $4.3 million, which included a net unrealized loss of $21,000. Factors beyond our control can

40

significantly and adversely influence the fair value of securities in our portfolio. For example, fixed-rate securities are generally subject to decreases in market value when interest rates rise. Additional factors include, but are not limited to, rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults by the issuer or individual borrowers with respect to the underlying securities, and instability in the credit markets. Any of the foregoing factors could cause other-than-temporary impairment in future periods and result in realized losses. The process for determining whether impairment is other-than-temporary usually requires difficult, subjective judgments about the future financial performance of the issuer and any collateral underlying the security in order to assess the probability of receiving all contractual principal and interest payments on the security. Although we have not recognized other-than-temporary impairment related to our investment portfolio as of December 31, 2019, changing economic and market conditions affecting interest rates, the financial condition of issuers of the securities and the performance of the underlying collateral, among other factors, may cause us to recognize losses in future periods, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

The accuracy of our financial statements and related disclosures could be affected if the judgments, assumptions or estimates used in our critical accounting policies are inaccurate.

The preparation of financial statements and related disclosures in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) requires us to make judgments, assumptions and estimates that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and related notes to those financial statements. Our critical accounting policies, which are included in the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” in this report, describe those significant accounting policies and methods used in the preparation of our consolidated financial statements that we consider “critical” because they require judgments, assumptions and estimates that materially affect our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures. As a result, if future events or regulatory views concerning such analysis differ significantly from the judgments, assumptions and estimates in our critical accounting policies, those events or assumptions could have a material impact on our consolidated financial statements and related disclosures, in each case resulting in our needing to revise or restate prior period financial statements, cause damage to our reputation and the price of our common stock, and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Industry

Regulation of the financial services industry is intense, and we may be adversely affected by changes in laws and regulations.

We are subject to extensive government regulation, supervision and examination. Such regulation, supervision and examination govern the activities in which we may engage, and are intended primarily for the protection of the deposit insurance fund and the Bank’s depositors, rather than for shareholders.

In 2010 and 2011, in response to the financial crisis and recession that began in 2008, significant regulatory and legislative changes resulted in broad reform and increased regulation affecting financial institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act has created a significant shift in the way financial institutions operate. The Dodd-Frank Act also created the CFPB, to implement consumer protection and fair lending laws, a function that was formerly performed by the depository institution regulators. The Dodd-Frank Act contains various provisions designed to enhance the regulation of depository institutions and prevent the recurrence of a financial crisis such as that which occurred in 2008 and 2009. The Dodd-Frank Act has had and may continue to have a material impact on our operations, particularly through increased regulatory burden and compliance costs. On May 24, 2018, the EGRRCPA, became law. Among other things, the EGRRCPA changes certain of the regulatory requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act and includes provisions intended to relieve the regulatory burden on community banks. We cannot currently predict the impact of this legislation on us. Any future legislative changes could have a material impact on our profitability, the value of assets held for investment or the value of collateral for loans. Future legislative changes could also require changes to business practices and potentially expose us to additional costs, liabilities, enforcement action and reputational risk.

Federal regulatory agencies have the ability to take strong supervisory actions against financial institutions that have experienced increased loan production and losses and other underwriting weaknesses or have compliance weaknesses. These actions include entering into formal or informal written agreements and cease and desist orders that place certain limitations on their operations. If we were to become subject to a regulatory action, such action

41

could negatively impact our ability to execute our business plan, and result in operational restrictions, as well as our ability to grow, pay dividends, repurchase stock or engage in mergers and acquisitions. See “Item 1.  Business—Regulation and Supervision—Bank Regulation and Supervision—Capital Adequacy” for a discussion of regulatory capital requirements.

Increases in Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance premiums could adversely affect our earnings and results of operations.

The deposits of the Bank are insured by the FDIC up to legal limits and, accordingly, subject it to the payment of FDIC deposit insurance assessments. The Bank's regular assessments are determined by the level of its assessment base and its risk classification, which is based on its regulatory capital levels and the level of supervisory concern that it poses. Moreover, the FDIC has the unilateral power to change deposit insurance assessment rates and the manner in which deposit insurance is calculated and also to charge special assessments to FDIC-insured institutions. The FDIC utilized all of these powers during the financial crisis for the purpose of restoring the reserve ratios of the Deposit Insurance Fund. Any future special assessments, increases in assessment rates or premiums, or required prepayments in FDIC insurance premiums could reduce our profitability or limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Federal banking agencies periodically conduct examinations of our business, including compliance with laws and regulations, and our failure to comply with any supervisory actions to which we are or become subject as a result of such examinations could adversely affect us.

As part of the bank regulatory process, the Federal Reserve and the Washington DFI periodically conduct comprehensive examinations of our business, including compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, either of these banking agencies were to determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, asset sensitivity, risk management or other aspects of any of our operations had become unsatisfactory, or that our Company, the Bank or their respective management were in violation of any law or regulation, it may take a number of different remedial actions as it deems appropriate. The Federal Reserve may enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices or violations of law, require affirmative actions to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, direct an increase in our capital levels, restrict our growth, assess civil monetary penalties against us, the Bank or their respective officers or directors, and remove officers and directors. The FDIC also has authority to review our financial condition, and, if the FDIC were to conclude that the Bank or its directors were engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, that the Bank was in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or the Bank or the directors violated applicable law, the FDIC could move to terminate the Bank’s deposit insurance. If we become subject to such regulatory actions, our business, financial condition, earnings and reputation could be adversely affected.

Many of our new activities and expansion plans require regulatory approvals, and failure to obtain these approvals may restrict our growth.

We intend to complement and expand our business by growing our BaaS division, expanding the Bank’s banking location network, or de novo branching, and pursuing strategic acquisitions of financial institutions and other complementary businesses. Generally, we must receive federal and state regulatory approval before we can acquire a depository institution or related business insured by the FDIC or before we open a de novo branch. In determining whether to approve a proposed acquisition, federal banking regulators will consider, among other factors, the effect of the acquisition on competition, our financial condition, our future prospects, and the impact of the proposal on U.S. financial stability. The regulators also review current and projected capital ratios and levels, the competence, experience and integrity of management and its record of compliance with laws and regulations, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served (including the acquiring institution’s record of compliance under the CRA) and the effectiveness of the acquiring institution in combating money laundering activities. Such regulatory approvals may not be granted on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all.

42

Financial institutions, such as the Bank, face a risk of noncompliance with and enforcement action under the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.

The Bank Secrecy Act, the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act), and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the Treasury Department), to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, has authority to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of these requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration and the Internal Revenue Service. There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the sanctions programs and rules administered and enforced by the Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.

In order to comply with regulations, guidelines and examination procedures in this area, we have dedicated significant resources to our anti-money laundering program. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we could be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the inability to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plans, including acquisitions and de novo branching.

We are subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including the CRA and fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions.

The CRA requires the Federal Reserve to assess the Bank’s performance in meeting the credit needs of the communities it serves, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods, and if the Federal Reserve determines that the Bank needs to improve its performance or is in substantial non-compliance with CRA requirements, various adverse regulatory consequences may ensue. In addition, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The CFPB, the U.S. Department of Justice and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. The CFPB was created under the Dodd-Frank Act to centralize responsibility for consumer financial protection with broad rulemaking authority to administer and carry out the purposes and objectives of federal consumer financial laws with respect to all financial institutions that offer financial products and services to consumers. The CFPB is also authorized to prescribe rules applicable to any covered person or service provider, identifying and prohibiting acts or practices that are “unfair, deceptive, or abusive” in connection with any transaction with a consumer for a consumer financial product or service, or the offering of a consumer financial product or service. The ongoing broad rulemaking powers of the CFPB have potential to have a significant impact on the operations of financial institutions offering consumer financial products or services.

A successful regulatory challenge to an institution’s performance under the CRA, fair lending laws or regulations, or consumer lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisitions activity, restrictions on expansion, and restrictions on entering new business lines. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Federal, state and local consumer lending laws may restrict our ability to originate certain mortgage loans or increase our risk of liability with respect to such loans and could increase our cost of doing business.

Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered “predatory.” These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. It is our policy not to make predatory loans, but these laws create the potential for liability with respect to our lending activities. They increase our cost of doing business and, ultimately, may prevent us from making certain loans and cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that we do make.

43

The expanding body of federal, state and local regulations and/or the licensing of loan servicing, collections or other aspects of our business and our sales of loans to third parties may increase the cost of compliance and the risks of noncompliance and subject us to litigation.

We service most of our own loans, and loan servicing is subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities, as well as various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions on those activities. The volume of new or modified laws and regulations has increased in recent years and, in addition, some individual municipalities have begun to enact laws that restrict loan servicing activities, including delaying or temporarily preventing foreclosures or forcing the modification of certain mortgages. If regulators impose new or more restrictive requirements, we may incur additional significant costs to comply with such requirements, which may further adversely affect us. In addition, were we to be subject to regulatory investigation or regulatory action regarding our loan modification and foreclosure practices, our business, financial condition and earnings could be adversely affected.

Our failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could possibly lead to: civil and criminal liability; loss of licensure; damage to our reputation in the industry; fines and penalties and litigation, including class action lawsuits; and administrative enforcement actions. Any of these outcomes could materially and adversely affect us.

The Federal Reserve may require us to commit capital resources to support the Bank.

The Federal Reserve requires a bank holding company to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary banks and to commit resources to support its subsidiary banks. Under the “source of strength” doctrine that was codified by the Dodd-Frank Act, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank at times when the bank holding company may not otherwise be inclined to do so and may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for failure to commit resources to such a subsidiary bank. Under the prompt corrective action regime, if the Bank were to become undercapitalized, we would be required to guarantee the Bank’s plan to restore its capital subject to certain limits. See “Item 1. Business—Regulation and Supervision—Bank Regulation and Supervision—Prompt Corrective Action.” Accordingly, we could be required to provide financial assistance to the Bank if it experiences financial distress.

A capital injection may be required at a time when our resources are limited, and we may be required to borrow the funds or raise capital to make the required capital injection. Any loan by a bank holding company to its subsidiary bank is subordinate in right of payment to deposits and certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary bank. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, the bankruptcy trustee will assume any commitment by the holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank. Moreover, bankruptcy law provides that claims based on any such commitment will be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of the holding company’s general unsecured creditors, including the holders of any note obligations. Thus, any borrowing by a bank holding company for the purpose of making a capital injection to a subsidiary bank often becomes more difficult and expensive relative to other corporate borrowings.

We could be adversely affected by the soundness of other financial institutions.

Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties, and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of a default by a counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when our collateral cannot be foreclosed upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the credit or derivative exposure due. Any such losses could adversely affect our business, financial condition and earnings.

We could be adversely affected by the upcoming election.

There is uncertainty surrounding the upcoming elections, and how the outcome may impact the economy, interest rates, trade, taxes, consumer spending and regulations.   The uncertainty surrounding the election, and the outcome of the election could significantly affect the markets in which we do business.  The impact to costs, profitability, loan delinquencies and value of our investments could all be impacted.  

44

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2. Properties

Our corporate headquarters is located at 5415 Evergreen Way, Everett, WA 98203. In addition to our corporate headquarters, which includes our Evergreen branch, we operated 13 other branch offices as of December 31, 2019. We own our corporate headquarters and three of our other branch offices and lease the remainder of our branch offices. The leases, excluding renewal periods, on our branch offices expire in 2021 through 2029. We believe that these facilities and additional or alternative space available to us are adequate to meet our needs for the foreseeable future.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

From time to time we are a party to various litigation matters incidental to the conduct of our business. We do not believe that any currently pending legal proceedings will have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or earnings.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

45

PART II

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

The Company’s common stock, no par value per share, is traded on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “CCB.” On December 31, 2019, there were 378 holders of record of the Company’s common stock.

Holders of our common stock are only entitled to receive dividends when, as and if declared by our board of directors out of funds legally available for dividends. We have not historically declared or paid dividends on our common stock and we do not intend to declare or pay dividends on our common stock in the near-term. Instead, we anticipate that all of our future earnings will be retained to support our operations and to finance the growth and development of our business. Any future determination to pay dividends will be made by our board of directors and will depend on a number of factors, including:

We are not obligated to pay dividends on our common stock and are subject to certain restrictions on paying dividends on our common stock.

As a Washington corporation, we are subject to certain restrictions on distributions to shareholders under the Washington Business Corporation Act. Generally, a Washington corporation is prohibited from making a distribution to shareholders if, after giving effect to the distribution, the corporation would not be able to pay its liabilities as they become due in the usual course of business or the corporation’s total assets would be less than the sum of its total liabilities plus, unless its articles of incorporation provide otherwise, the amount that would be needed, if the corporation were to be dissolved at the time of the distribution, to satisfy the preferential rights upon dissolution of shareholders whose preferential rights are superior to those receiving the distribution. In addition, if required payments on our outstanding junior subordinated debentures are not made or suspended, we may be prohibited from paying dividends on our common stock. We are also subject to certain restrictions on our right to pay dividends on our capital stock in the event we have failed to make any required payment of interest or principal under the terms of our subordinated note.

We are subject to certain restrictions on the payment of cash dividends as a result of banking laws, regulations and policies. Because we are a bank holding company and do not engage directly in business activities of a material nature, our ability to pay dividends on our common stock depends, in large part, upon our receipt of dividends from the Bank, which is also subject to numerous limitations on the payment of dividends under federal and state banking laws, regulations and policies. See “Item 1. Business—Regulation and Supervision—Bank Holding Company Regulation—Payment of Dividends.” The present and future dividend policy of the Bank is subject to the discretion of its board of directors. The Bank is not obligated to pay us dividends.

46

Purchases of Equity Securities

The Company did not purchase any shares of its common stock during the year ended December 31, 2019.

Item 6.Selected Financial Data 

The following table sets forth selected historical consolidated financial data as of and for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016 and 2015. The selected balance sheet data as of December 31, 2019 and 2018, and the selected statement of income data for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report. The selected balance sheet data as of December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 and the selected statement of income data for the years ended December 31, 2017, 2016 and 2015 have been derived from our audited consolidated financial statements that are not included in this report. Our historical results are not necessarily indicative of any future performance. The information presented in the following table has been adjusted to give effect to a one-for-five reverse stock split of our common shares completed effective May 4, 2018. The effect of the reverse stock split on outstanding shares and per share figures has been retroactively applied to all periods presented. This data should be read in conjunction with, and is qualified by reference to, "Item 7 - Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Operations" and our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

47

The selected historical consolidated financial data presented below contains financial measures that are not presented in accordance with GAAP and have not been audited. See Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Operations “GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.”

48

49

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

Overview

We are a bank holding company that operates through our wholly owned subsidiary, Coastal Community Bank, or the Bank. We are headquartered in Everett, Washington, which by population is the largest city in, and the county seat of, Snohomish County. We focus on providing a wide range of banking products and services to consumers and small to medium sized businesses in the broader Puget Sound region in the state of Washington. We currently operate 14 full-service banking locations, 11 of which are located in Snohomish County, where we are the largest community bank by deposit market share, and three of which are located in neighboring counties (one in King County and two in Island County). As of December 31, 2019, we had total assets of $1.129 billion, total gross loans of $939.1 million, total deposits of $968.0 million and total shareholders’ equity of $124.2 million.

The following discussion and analysis presents our financial condition and results of operations on a consolidated basis. However, because we conduct all of our material business operations through the Bank, the discussion and analysis relate to activities primarily conducted by the Bank.

As a bank holding company that operates through one segment, community banking, we generate most of our revenue from interest on loans and investments. Our primary source of funding for our loans is commercial and retail deposits. We place secondary reliance on wholesale funding, primarily borrowings from the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB). Our largest expenses are salaries and related employee benefits, occupancy, interest on deposits and borrowings, data processing, and provision for loan losses. Our principal lending products are commercial real estate loans, commercial and industrial loans, residential real estate loans, construction, land and land development loans, and to a lesser extent consumer loans.

Key Factors Affecting our Business

Average Balances and Interest Rates

Our operating results depend primarily on our net interest income, which is the largest contributor to our net income and is the difference between the interest and fees earned on interest-earning assets (such as loans and securities) and the interest expense incurred in connection with interest-bearing liabilities (such as deposits and borrowings). Net interest income is primarily a function of the average balances of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the yields and costs with respect to these assets and liabilities. Average balances are influenced by internal considerations such as the types of products we offer and the amount of risk that we are willing to assume as well as external influences such as economic conditions, competition for loans and deposits, and interest rates. The yields generated by our loans and securities are typically affected by short-term and long-term interest rates and, in the case of loans, competition for similar products in our market area. Interest rates are often impacted by the actions of the Federal Reserve. The cost of our deposits and short-term borrowings is primarily based on short-term interest rates, which are largely driven by competition and by the actions of the Federal Reserve. The level of net interest income is influenced by movements in interest rates and the pace at which such movements occur, as well as the relationship between short- and long-term interest rates.

Credit Quality

We have well established loan policies and underwriting practices that have resulted in low levels of charge-offs and nonperforming assets. Through our thorough underwriting process, we strive to originate quality loans that will maintain and enhance the overall credit quality of our loan portfolio, and through our careful monitoring of our loan portfolio and prompt attention to delinquencies, we seek to minimize the impact of problem loans. However, credit trends in the markets in which we operate are largely impacted by economic conditions beyond our control and can adversely impact our financial condition.

50

Operating Efficiency

The largest component of noninterest expense is salaries and employee benefits. Other significant operating expenses include occupancy expense, data processing expense, director and staff expense, marketing expense, and legal and professional fees. Our operating efficiency, as measured by our efficiency ratio, has gradually improved primarily because the growth of our deposits and loans has enabled our net interest income and noninterest income to outpace our expenses. When we open new branches or make substantial investments to increase our operating capacity, our operating efficiency decreases until we generate enough growth to offset the increased costs however, prior to making such investments, we focus on how best and most expediently we can achieve the growth necessary to offset the costs of these investments or new branches.

Economic Conditions

Our business and financial performance are affected by economic conditions generally in the United States and more directly in the markets in the Puget Sound region where we operate. The significant economic factors that are most relevant to our business and our financial performance include, but are not limited to, real estate values, interest rates and unemployment rates. In recent years, the Puget Sound region has experienced significant population gain, fueled in large part by the region’s technology industry, low unemployment and rising real estate values, all of which positively impacted our business.

Critical Accounting Policies

Our accounting policies are integral to understanding our results of operations. Our accounting policies are described in greater detail in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere is this report. We believe that of our accounting policies, the following accounting policies may involve a higher degree of judgment and complexity:

Securities

Securities are classified as available for sale when they might be sold before maturity. Securities available for sale are carried at fair value. Unrealized gains and losses are excluded from earnings and reported in other comprehensive income. Securities within the available for sale portfolio may be used as part of our asset/liability strategy and may be pledged or sold in response to changes in interest rate risk, prepayment risk or other similar economic factors. Securities held to maturity are carried at cost, adjusted for the amortization of premiums and the accretion of discounts and may be pledged.

Interest earned on these assets is included in interest income. Interest income includes amortization of any purchase premium or discount. Premiums and discounts on securities are amortized using the level-yield method, except for mortgage backed securities where prepayments are anticipated. Gains and losses on sales are recorded on the trade date and determined using the specific identification method.

Management evaluates debt securities for other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI), on at least a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic or market conditions warrant such an evaluation. For securities in an unrealized loss position, management considers the extent and duration of the unrealized loss, and the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer. Management also assesses whether it intends to sell, or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell, a security in an unrealized loss position before recovery of its amortized cost basis. If either of the criteria regarding intent or requirement to sell is met, the entire difference between amortized cost and fair value is recognized as impairment through earnings. For debt securities that do not meet the aforementioned criteria, the amount of impairment is split into two components as follows: (1) OTTI related to credit loss, which must be recognized in the income statement, and (2) OTTI related to other factors, which is recognized in other comprehensive income, net of applicable taxes. The credit loss is defined as the difference between the present value of the cash flows expected to be collected and the amortized cost basis. The previous amortized cost basis less the OTTI recognized in earnings becomes the new amortized cost basis of the security.

51

Loans Held for Investment

Loans held for investment are those that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff at the principal and interest balance outstanding, net of deferred loan fees and costs. Loans are typically secured by specific items of collateral including business assets, consumer assets, and commercial and residential real estate. Commercial loans are expected to be repaid from cash flow from operations of businesses. Interest income is accrued on the unpaid principal balance. Loan origination fees and certain direct origination costs are deferred and recognized as adjustments to interest income using a level yield methodology or a method approximating the level yield methodology.

Allowance for Loan Losses

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of probable and reasonably estimable credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio. In determining the allowance, the Company estimates losses on individual impaired loans, or groups of loans which are not impaired, where the probable loss can be identified and reasonably estimated. On a quarterly basis, the Company assesses the risk inherent in the Company’s loan portfolio based on qualitative and quantitative trends in the portfolio, including the internal risk classification of loans, historical loss rates, changes in the nature and volume of the loan portfolio, industry or borrower concentrations, delinquency trends, detailed reviews of significant loans with identified weaknesses and the impacts of local, regional and national economic factors on the quality of the loan portfolio. Based on this analysis, the Company records a provision for loan losses to maintain the allowance at appropriate levels.

Determining the amount of the allowance is considered a critical accounting estimate, as it requires significant judgment and the use of subjective measurements, including management’s assessment of overall portfolio quality. The Company maintains the allowance at an amount the Company believes is sufficient to provide for estimated losses inherent in the Company’s loan portfolio at each balance sheet date, and fluctuations in the provision for loan losses may result from management’s assessment of the adequacy of the allowance. Changes in these estimates and assumptions are possible and may have a material impact on the Company’s allowance, and therefore the Company’s financial position, liquidity or results of operations.

Stock-based Compensation

We grant stock options and restricted stock to our employees and directors. We record the related compensation expense based on the grant date fair value calculated in accordance with the authoritative guidance issued by FASB. We recognize these compensation costs on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period of the award. We estimate the grant date fair value of stock options using the Black-Scholes valuation model. Stock-based compensation expense related to awards of restricted stock is based on the fair value at the grant date.

The determination of fair value using the Black-Scholes model is affected by the price of our common stock, as well as the input of other subjective assumptions. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, the expected term of stock options and our stock price volatility. As there has been no public market for our common stock prior to July 20, 2018, the estimated fair value of our common stock was determined by our board of directors as of the date of each option grant, with input from management, based on our board of directors’ assessment of objective and subjective factors that it believed were relevant. The factors considered by our board of directors included the prices of known transactions in our common stock, the book value per share of our common stock, and our board of directors’ understanding of pricing multiples for comparable financial institutions that were not publicly traded.

The assumptions underlying these valuations represented management’s best estimate, which involved inherent uncertainties and the application of management’s judgment. As a result, if we had used different assumptions or estimates, the fair value of our common stock and our stock-based compensation expense could have been materially different.

52

Emerging Growth Company

The JOBS Act permits an “emerging growth company” to take advantage of an extended transition period to comply with new or revised accounting standards applicable to public companies. However, we have decided not to take advantage of this provision. As a result, we will comply with new or revised accounting standards to the same extent that compliance is required for non-emerging growth companies. Our decision to opt out of the extended transition period under the JOBS Act is irrevocable.

Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements

For a discussion of the expected impact of accounting pronouncements recently issued but not adopted by us as of December 31, 2019, see Note 2 of our audited consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report.

Results of Operations

Net Income

Year Ended December 31, 2019, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2018. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2019, was $13.2 million, or $1.08 per diluted share, compared to $9.7 million, or $0.91 per diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2018. The increase in net income over the prior year was attributable to a $7.2 million increase in net interest income and a $2.8 million increase in noninterest income, which were partially offset by an $4.8 million increase in noninterest expense, $920,000 increase in provision for income taxes and $718,000 increase in provision for loan losses.

Year Ended December 31, 2018, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2017. Net income for the year ended December 31, 2018, was $9.7 million, or $0.91 per diluted share, compared to $5.4 million, or $0.59 per diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2017. The increase in net income over the prior year was attributable to a $5.6 million increase in net interest income, $1.3 million increase in noninterest income, and $2.2 million decrease in the provision for income taxes, as a result of the reduction in the corporate income tax rate under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which decreased tax expense in 2018, and as a result of the revaluation of deferred tax assets under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, increased tax expense in 2017.  See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Operations—GAAP Reconciliation and Management Explanation of Non-GAAP Financial Measures.” These increases in net income were offset by $3.8 million increase in noninterest expense and $956,000 increase in the provision for loan losses.

Net Interest Income

Year Ended December 31, 2019, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2018. Net interest income for the year ended December 31, 2019, was $42.0 million compared to $34.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, an increase of $7.2 million, or 20.7%. The increase in net interest income consisted of a $9.8 million, or 25.4%, increase in interest income offset by a $2.7 million, or 67.5%, increase in interest expense.

The growth in interest income was primarily attributable to a $138.2 million, or 19.6%, increase in average loans outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared to the prior year, combined with a 20 basis point increase in the yield on total loans. The increase in average loans outstanding was primarily due to our dual strategies of focusing on deepening relationships with existing borrowers and actively calling on new customers. Also contributing to the increase in 2019 was $8.1 million in purchased participation loans.  The hiring of new lending teams and lenders in 2018 contributed to loan growth in 2019 as those lenders were able to transition more customers and increase new customer relationships overall.  The increase in the yield on total loans reflects the total 1.25% interest rate increases by the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) between December 2017 and December 2018, resulting in higher rates on new and renewing loans during that period, the benefit of which was reflected throughout 2019.  

The increase in interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2019, was primarily related to a $87.5 million, or 18.3%, increase in average interest-bearing deposits over the prior year. The majority of this

53

increase is attributable to growth in core deposit accounts, which we define as deposits excluding all brokered and time deposits. Noninterest bearing deposits (such as demand or checking accounts) grew $77.7 million, or 26.5%, in 2019. NOW (which are interest bearing checking accounts) and money market accounts grew $88.0 million, or 25.1%, and savings accounts increased $793,000, or 1.5%, in 2019.  Non-core deposits decreased $2.1 million in 2019 with time deposits decreasing $15.2 million, or 15.7%, partially offset by an increase in BaaS brokered deposits of $13.1 million, or 124.2%, in 2019.  We do not regularly advertise time deposit rates or money market rates, although we occasionally advertise promotional rates in targeted portions of our market area. Market conditions for deposits are competitive and the aforementioned rate increase by the FOMC in 2018 resulted in a 23 basis point increase in cost of deposits as of December 31, 2019 as compared to December 31, 2018.  

For the year ended December 31, 2019, net interest margin and net interest spread were 4.23% and 3.76%, respectively, compared to 4.24% and 3.92% for the year ended December 31, 2018.

Year Ended December 31, 2018, Compared to Year Ended December 31, 2017. Net interest income for the year ended December 31, 2018, was $34.8 million compared to $29.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2017, an increase of $5.6 million, or 19.2%. The increase in net interest income consisted of a $6.6 million, or 20.6%, increase in interest income offset by a $1.0 million, or 36.6%, increase in interest expense.

The growth in interest income was primarily attributable to a $86.8 million, or 14.0%, increase in average loans outstanding for the year ended December 31, 2018, compared to the prior year, combined with a 20 basis point increase in the yield on total loans. The increase in average loans outstanding was due to organic growth initiatives with a continued focus on actively calling on new customers and deepening relationships with existing borrowers.  Also contributing to the increase in 2018 was $46.7 million in purchased loans during 2018, which included $14.1 million in purchased pools and $32.7 million in purchased participations.  The hiring of additional lending teams and lenders also contributed to loan growth, as new lenders were able to transition many of their existing customers and pending transactions to the Bank. The increase in the yield on loans was largely due to higher prepayment penalties and deferred fees recognized on loans paid off. Additionally, the composition of the loan portfolio changed slightly to loans that earn higher rates and higher fees at a quicker rate, and there were increases in average loan yields overall.  

The increase in interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2018, was primarily related to a $46.6 million, or 10.8%, increase in average interest-bearing deposits over the prior year. The majority of this increase is attributable to growth in core deposit accounts. Noninterest bearing deposits grew $51.2 million, or 21.1%, in 2018. Savings, interest bearing checking, and money market accounts grew $42.8 million, or 11.5%, in 2018, while customer time deposits grew $6.4 million, or 7.1%, in 2018. We do not regularly advertise time deposit rates or money market rates, although we occasionally advertise promotional rates in targeted portions of our market area. Our branch managers, business development officers, and lenders collaborate to provide consistent and coordinated customer service and to seek deposits from new and existing customers.

For the year ended December 31, 2018, net interest margin and net interest spread were 4.24% and 3.92%, respectively, compared to 4.08% and 3.83% for the year ended December 31, 2017.

The following table presents an analysis of the average balances of net interest income, net interest spread and net interest margin for the periods indicated. Loan fees included in interest income totaled $1.4 million and $1.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, respectively. For the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2018, the amount of interest income not recognized on nonaccrual loans was not material.

54