CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. - Quarter Report: 2017 March (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-Q

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2017

Commission file number: 1-11416

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including Area Code: (949) 753-6800

Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report: N/A

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) 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 and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒    No ☐

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

Large Accelerated Filer ☐      Accelerated Filer ☒

Non-Accelerated Filer ☐      Smaller Reporting Company ☐

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

As of April 28, 2017 the registrant had 23,141,416 common shares outstanding.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

INDEX TO FORM 10-Q

For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2017

Item 1. Financial Statements

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS

(In thousands, except share and per share data)

See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS

(In thousands, except per share data)

See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME

(In thousands)

See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS

(In thousands)

See accompanying Notes to Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Description of Business

We were formed in California on March 8, 1991. We specialize in purchasing and servicing retail automobile installment sale contracts (“automobile contracts” or “finance receivables”) originated by licensed motor vehicle dealers located throughout the United States (“dealers”) in the sale of new and used automobiles, light trucks and passenger vans. Through our purchases, we provide indirect financing to dealer customers for borrowers with limited credit histories or past credit problems (“sub-prime customers”). We serve as an alternative source of financing for dealers, allowing sales to customers who otherwise might not be able to obtain financing. In addition to purchasing installment purchase contracts directly from dealers, we have also (i) acquired installment purchase contracts in four merger and acquisition transactions, (ii) purchased immaterial amounts of vehicle purchase money loans from non-affiliated lenders, and (iii) lent money directly to consumers for an immaterial amount of loans secured by vehicles. In this report, we refer to all of such contracts and loans as "automobile contracts."

Basis of Presentation

Our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, with the instructions to Form 10-Q and with Article 10 of Regulation S-X of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and include all adjustments that are, in management’s opinion, necessary for a fair presentation of the results for the interim periods presented. All such adjustments are, in the opinion of management, of a normal recurring nature. Results for the three month period ended March 31, 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the operating results to be expected for the full year.

Certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America have been condensed or omitted from these Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements. These Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Financial Statements should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016.

Use of Estimates

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires us to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of income and expenses during the reported periods.

Other Income

The following table presents the primary components of Other Income for the three-month periods ending March 31, 2017 and 2016:

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Warrants

In connection with the amendment to and partial repayment of our residual interest financing in July 2008, we issued warrants exercisable for 2,500,000 common shares for $4,071,429. The warrants represent the right to purchase 2,500,000 CPS common shares at a nominal exercise price, at any time prior to July 10, 2018. In March 2010 we repurchased warrants for 500,000 of these shares for $1.0 million. Warrants to purchase 2,000,000 shares remain outstanding as of March 31, 2017.

Stock-based Compensation

We recognize compensation costs in the financial statements for all share-based payments based on the grant date fair value estimated in accordance with the provisions of ASC 718 “Stock Compensation”.

For the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016, we recorded stock-based compensation costs in the amount of $1.4 million and $1.2 million, respectively. As of March 31, 2017, unrecognized stock-based compensation costs to be recognized over future periods equaled $8.6 million. This amount will be recognized as expense over a weighted-average period of 1.9 years.

The following represents stock option activity for the three months ended March 31, 2017:

At March 31, 2017, the aggregate intrinsic value of options outstanding and exercisable was $14.5 million and $11.7 million, respectively. There were 279,000 options exercised for the three months ended March 31, 2017 compared to 14,000 for the comparable period in 2016. The total intrinsic value of options exercised was $913,000 and $51,000 for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016. There were 3.7 million shares available for future stock option grants under existing plans as of March 31, 2017.

Purchases of Company Stock

During the three-month period ended March 31, 2017, we purchased 586,810 shares of our common stock, at an average price of $4.94. We purchased 561,617 shares of our stock in the open market at an average price of $4.94. The remaining purchases of 25,193 shares were related to net exercises of outstanding options and warrants. In transactions during the three-month period ended March 31, 2017, the holders of options and warrants to purchase 45,000 shares of our common stock paid the aggregate $127,000 exercise price by surrender to us of 25,193 of such 45,000 shares.

During the three-month period ended March 31, 2016, we purchased 703,745 shares of our stock in the open market at an average price of $4.19.

Reclassifications

Some items in the prior year financial statements were reclassified to conform to the current presentation. Reclassifications had no effect on prior year net income or total shareholders’ equity.

Financial Covenants

Certain of our securitization transactions, our warehouse credit facilities and our residual interest financing contain various financial covenants requiring minimum financial ratios and results. Such covenants include maintaining minimum levels of liquidity and net worth and not exceeding maximum leverage levels. As of March 31, 2017, we were in compliance with all such covenants. In addition, certain of our debt agreements other than our term securitizations contain cross-default provisions. Such cross-default provisions would allow the respective creditors to declare a default if an event of default occurred with respect to other indebtedness of ours, but only if such other event of default were to be accompanied by acceleration of such other indebtedness.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Provision for Contingent Liabilities

We are routinely involved in various legal proceedings resulting from our consumer finance activities and practices, both continuing and discontinued. Our legal counsel has advised us on such matters where, based on information available at the time of this report, there is an indication that it is both probable that a liability has been incurred and the amount of the loss can be reasonably determined.

We have recorded a liability as of March 31, 2017, which represents our best estimate of probable incurred losses for legal contingencies. The amount of losses that may ultimately be incurred cannot be estimated with certainty.

(2) Finance Receivables

Our portfolio of finance receivables consists of small-balance homogeneous contracts comprising a single segment and class that is collectively evaluated for impairment on a portfolio basis according to delinquency status. Our contract purchase guidelines are designed to produce a homogenous portfolio. For key terms such as interest rate, length of contract, monthly payment and amount financed, there is relatively little variation from the average for the portfolio. We report delinquency on a contractual basis. Once a contract becomes greater than 90 days delinquent, we do not recognize additional interest income until the obligor under the contract makes sufficient payments to be less than 90 days delinquent. Any payments received on a contract that is greater than 90 days delinquent are first applied to accrued interest and then to principal reduction.

The following table presents the components of Finance Receivables, net of unearned interest:

We consider an automobile contract delinquent when an obligor fails to make at least 90% of a contractually due payment by the following due date, which date may have been extended within limits specified in the servicing agreements. The period of delinquency is based on the number of days payments are contractually past due, as extended where applicable. Automobile contracts less than 31 days delinquent are not included. In certain circumstances we will grant obligors one-month payment extensions to assist them with temporary cash flow problems. The only modification of terms is to advance the obligor’s next due date by one month and extend the maturity date of the receivable by one month. In certain limited cases, a two-month extension may be granted. There are no other concessions such as a reduction in interest rate, forgiveness of principal or of accrued interest. Accordingly, we consider such extensions to be insignificant delays in payments rather than troubled debt restructurings. The following table summarizes the delinquency status of finance receivables as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016:

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Finance receivables totaling $33.5 million and $44.4 million at March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, including all receivables greater than 90 days delinquent, have been placed on non-accrual status as a result of their delinquency status.

We use a loss allowance methodology commonly referred to as "static pooling," which stratifies our finance receivable portfolio into separately identified pools based on the period of origination. Using analytical and formula driven techniques, we estimate an allowance for finance credit losses, which we believe is adequate for probable incurred credit losses that can be reasonably estimated in our portfolio of automobile contracts. The estimate for probable incurred credit losses is reduced by our estimate for future recoveries on previously incurred losses. Provision for credit losses is charged to our consolidated statement of operations. Net losses incurred on finance receivables are charged to the allowance. We establish the allowance for new receivables over the 12-month period following their acquisition.

The following table presents a summary of the activity for the allowance for finance credit losses for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016:

Excluded from finance receivables are contracts that were previously classified as finance receivables but were reclassified as other assets because we have repossessed the vehicle securing the Contract. The following table presents a summary of such repossessed inventory together with the allowance for losses in repossessed inventory that is not included in the allowance for finance credit losses:

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(3) Securitization Trust Debt

We have completed many securitization transactions that are structured as secured borrowings for financial accounting purposes. The debt issued in these transactions is shown on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets as “Securitization trust debt,” and the components of such debt are summarized in the following table:

_________________

Debt issuance costs of $13.2 million and $13.4 million as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, have been excluded from the table above. These debt issuance costs are presented as a direct deduction to the carrying amount of the securitization trust debt on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

All of the securitization trust debt was sold in private placement transactions to qualified institutional buyers. The debt was issued through our wholly-owned bankruptcy remote subsidiaries and is secured by the assets of such subsidiaries, but not by our other assets.

The terms of the securitization agreements related to the issuance of the securitization trust debt and the warehouse credit facilities require that we meet certain delinquency and credit loss criteria with respect to the pool of receivables, and certain of the agreements require that we maintain minimum levels of liquidity and not exceed maximum leverage levels. As of March 31, 2017, we were in compliance with all such covenants.

We are responsible for the administration and collection of the automobile contracts. The securitization agreements also require certain funds be held in restricted cash accounts to provide additional collateral for the borrowings, to be applied to make payments on the securitization trust debt or as pre-funding proceeds from a term securitization prior to the purchase of additional collateral. As of March 31, 2017, restricted cash under the various agreements totaled approximately $129.2 million. Interest expense on the securitization trust debt consists of the stated rate of interest plus amortization of additional costs of borrowing. Additional costs of borrowing include facility fees, amortization of deferred financing costs and discounts on notes sold. Deferred financing costs and discounts on notes sold related to the securitization trust debt are amortized using a level yield method. Accordingly, the effective cost of the securitization trust debt is greater than the contractual rate of interest disclosed above.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Our wholly-owned bankruptcy remote subsidiaries were formed to facilitate the above asset-backed financing transactions. Similar bankruptcy remote subsidiaries issue the debt outstanding under our credit facilities. Bankruptcy remote refers to a legal structure in which it is expected that the applicable entity would not be included in any bankruptcy filing by its parent or affiliates. All of the assets of these subsidiaries have been pledged as collateral for the related debt. All such transactions, treated as secured financings for accounting and tax purposes, are treated as sales for all other purposes, including legal and bankruptcy purposes. None of the assets of these subsidiaries are available to pay other creditors.

(4) Debt

The terms and amounts of our other debt outstanding at March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016 are summarized below:

Debt issuance costs of $1.2 million and $1.6 million as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, respectively, have been excluded from the table above. These debt issuance costs are presented as a direct deduction to the carrying amount of the Warehouse lines of credit on our Unaudited Condensed Consolidated Balance Sheets.

In April 2017, we renewed our $100 million warehouse credit line that was first established in May 2012. There was $76.5 million outstanding under this facility at March 31, 2017. The revolving period for this facility was extended to April 2019 followed by an amortization period through April 2021 for any receivables pledged at the end of the revolving period.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(5) Interest Income and Interest Expense

The following table presents the components of interest income:

The following table presents the components of interest expense:

(6) Earnings Per Share

Earnings per share for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 were calculated using the weighted average number of shares outstanding for the related period. The following table reconciles the number of shares used in the computations of basic and diluted earnings per share for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016:

If the anti-dilutive effects of common stock equivalents were considered, shares included in the diluted earnings per share calculation for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016 would have included an additional 6.6 million and 6.8 million shares, respectively, attributable to the exercise of outstanding options and warrants.

(7) Income Taxes

We file numerous consolidated and separate income tax returns with the United States and with many states. With few exceptions, we are no longer subject to U.S. federal, state, or local examinations by tax authorities for years before 2013.

As of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, we had no unrecognized tax benefits for uncertain tax positions. We do not anticipate that total unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change due to any settlements of audits or expirations of statutes of limitations over the next 12 months.

The Company and its subsidiaries file a consolidated federal income tax return and combined or stand-alone state franchise tax returns for certain states. We utilize the asset and liability method of accounting for income taxes, under which deferred income taxes are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to the differences between the financial statement values of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred taxes of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

Deferred tax assets are recognized subject to management’s judgment that realization is more likely than not. A valuation allowance is recognized for a deferred tax asset if, based on the weight of the available evidence, it is more likely than not that some portion of the deferred tax asset will not be realized. In making such judgments, significant weight is given to evidence that can be objectively verified. Although realization is not assured, we believe that the realization of the recognized net deferred tax asset of $43.0 million as of March 31, 2017 is more likely than not based on forecasted future net earnings. Our net deferred tax asset of $43.0 million consists of approximately $34.8 million of net U.S. federal deferred tax assets and $8.4 million of net state deferred tax assets.

Income tax expense was $3.3 million and $5.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016, which represents an effective income tax rate of 43% and 41%, respectively.

(8) Legal Proceedings

Consumer Litigation. We are routinely involved in various legal proceedings resulting from our consumer finance activities and practices, both continuing and discontinued. Consumers can and do initiate lawsuits against us alleging violations of law applicable to collection of receivables, and such lawsuits sometimes allege that resolution as a class action is appropriate.

For the most part, we have legal and factual defenses to consumer claims, which we routinely contest or settle (for immaterial amounts) depending on the particular circumstances of each case.

Department of Justice Subpoena. In January 2015, we were served with a subpoena by the U.S. Department of Justice directing us to produce certain documents relating to our and our subsidiaries’ and affiliates’ origination and securitization of sub-prime automobile contracts since 2005, in connection with an investigation by the U.S. Department of Justice in contemplation of a civil proceeding for potential violations of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989. We are among several other securitizers of sub-prime automobile receivables who received such subpoenas in 2014 and 2015. Among other matters, the subpoena requested information relating to the underwriting criteria used to originate these automobile contracts and the representations and warranties relating to those underwriting criteria that were made in connection with the securitization of the automobile contracts. We have produced required documents, and are unaware of any subsequent material developments in the government’s investigation. The investigation could in the future result in the imposition of damages, fines or civil or criminal claims and/or penalties. No assurance can be given as to the ultimate outcome of the investigation or any resulting proceeding(s), which might materially and adversely affect us.

In General. There can be no assurance as to the outcomes of the matters referenced above. We have recorded a liability as of March 31, 2017, which represents our best estimate of probable incurred losses for legal contingencies, including each of the matters described or referenced above. The amount of losses that may ultimately be incurred cannot be estimated with certainty. However, based on such information as is available to us, we believe that the range of reasonably possible losses for the legal proceedings and contingencies we face, including those described or referenced above, as of March 31, 2017 does not exceed $1 million.

Accordingly, we believe that the ultimate resolution of such legal proceedings and contingencies, after taking into account our current litigation reserves, should not have a material adverse effect on our consolidated financial condition. We note, however, that in light of the uncertainties inherent in contested proceedings, the wide discretion vested in the U.S. Department of Justice and other government agencies, and the deference that courts may give to assertions made by government litigants, there can be no assurance that the ultimate resolution of these matters will not be material to our operating results for a particular period, depending on, among other factors, the size of the loss or liability imposed and the level of our income for that period.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

(9) Employee Benefits

On March 8, 2002 we acquired MFN Financial Corporation and its subsidiaries in a merger. We sponsor the MFN Financial Corporation Benefit Plan (the “Plan”). Plan benefits were frozen June 30, 2001. The table below sets forth the Plan’s net periodic benefit cost for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016.

We did not make any contributions to the Plan during the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016. We do not anticipate making any contributions for the remainder of 2017.

(10) Fair Value Measurements

ASC 820, "Fair Value Measurements" clarifies the principle that fair value should be based on the assumptions market participants would use when pricing an asset or liability and establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the information used to develop those assumptions. Under the standard, fair value measurements would be separately disclosed by level within the fair value hierarchy.

ASC 820 defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value, establishes a three-level valuation hierarchy for disclosure of fair value measurement and enhances disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. The three levels are defined as follows: level 1 - inputs to the valuation methodology are quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets; level 2 – inputs to the valuation methodology include quoted prices for similar assets and liabilities in active markets, and inputs that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the financial instrument; and level 3 – inputs to the valuation methodology are unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement.

Repossessed vehicle inventory, which is included in Other assets on our unaudited condensed consolidated balance sheet, is measured at fair value using level 2 assumptions based on our actual loss experience on sale of repossessed vehicles. At March 31, 2017 the finance receivables related to the repossessed vehicles in inventory totaled $37.7 million. We have applied a valuation adjustment, or loss allowance, of $26.9 million, which is based on a recovery rate of approximately 28%, resulting in an estimated fair value and carrying amount of $10.8 million. The fair value and carrying amount of the repossessed inventory at December 31, 2016 was $11.1 million after applying a valuation adjustment of $28.9 million.

There were no transfers in or out of level 1 or level 2 assets and liabilities for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016. We have no material level 3 assets that are measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis.

CONSUMER PORTFOLIO SERVICES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

NOTES TO UNAUDITED CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS

The estimated fair values of financial assets and liabilities at March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, were as follows:

The following summary presents a description of the methodologies and assumptions used to estimate the fair value of our financial instruments. Much of the information used to determine fair value is highly subjective. When applicable, readily available market information has been utilized. However, for a significant portion of our financial instruments, active markets do not exist. Therefore, significant elements of judgment were required in estimating fair value for certain items. The subjective factors include, among other things, the estimated timing and amount of cash flows, risk characteristics, credit quality and interest rates, all of which are subject to change. Since the fair value is estimated as of March 31, 2017 and December 31, 2016, the amounts that will actually be realized or paid at settlement or maturity of the instruments could be significantly different.

Cash, Cash Equivalents and Restricted Cash and Equivalents

The carrying value equals fair value.

Finance Receivables, net

The fair value of finance receivables is estimated by discounting future cash flows expected to be collected using current rates at which similar receivables could be originated.

Accrued Interest Receivable and Payable

The carrying value approximates fair value.

Warehouse Lines of Credit and Subordinated Renewable Notes

The carrying value approximates fair value because the related interest rates are estimated to reflect current market conditions for similar types of secured instruments.

Securitization Trust Debt

The fair value is estimated by discounting future cash flows using interest rates that we believe reflect the current market rates.

Item 2. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Overview

We are a specialty finance company. Our business is to purchase and service retail automobile contracts originated primarily by franchised automobile dealers and, to a lesser extent, by select independent dealers in the United States in the sale of new and used automobiles, light trucks and passenger vans. Through our automobile contract purchases, we provide indirect financing to the customers of dealers who have limited credit histories, low incomes or past credit problems, who we refer to as sub-prime customers. We serve as an alternative source of financing for dealers, facilitating sales to customers who otherwise might not be able to obtain financing from traditional sources, such as commercial banks, credit unions and the captive finance companies affiliated with major automobile manufacturers. In addition to purchasing installment purchase contracts directly from dealers, we have also (i) acquired installment purchase contracts in four merger and acquisition transactions, (ii) purchased immaterial amounts of vehicle purchase money loans from non-affiliated lenders, and (iii) directly originated an immaterial amount of vehicle purchase money loans by lending money directly to consumers. In this report, we refer to all of such contracts and loans as "automobile contracts."

We were incorporated and began our operations in March 1991. From inception through March 31, 2017, we have originated a total of approximately $13.7 billion of automobile contracts, primarily by purchasing retail installment sales contracts from dealers, and to a lesser degree, by originating loans secured by automobiles directly with consumers. In addition, we acquired a total of approximately $822.3 million of automobile contracts in mergers and acquisitions in 2002, 2003, 2004 and, most recently, in September 2011. The September 2011 acquisition consisted of approximately $217.8 million of automobile contracts that we purchased from Fireside Bank of Pleasanton, California. In 2004 and 2009, we were appointed as a third-party servicer for certain portfolios of automobile contracts originated and owned by non-affiliated entities. Recent contract purchase volumes and managed portfolio levels are shown in the table below:

Our principal executive offices are in Las Vegas, Nevada. Most of our operational and administrative functions take place in Irvine, California. Credit and underwriting functions are performed primarily in that California branch with certain of these functions also performed in our Florida and Nevada branches. We service our automobile contracts from our California, Nevada, Virginia, Florida and Illinois branches.

The programs we offer to dealers and consumers are intended to serve a wide range of sub-prime customers, primarily through franchised new car dealers. We originate automobile contracts with the intention of financing them on a long-term basis through securitizations. Securitizations are transactions in which we sell a specified pool of contracts to a special purpose subsidiary of ours, which in turn issues asset-backed securities to fund the purchase of the pool of contracts from us.

Securitization and Warehouse Credit Facilities

Throughout the period for which information is presented in this report, we have purchased automobile contracts with the intention of financing them on a long-term basis through securitizations, and on an interim basis through warehouse credit facilities. All such financings have involved identification of specific automobile contracts, sale of those automobile contracts (and associated rights) to one of our special-purpose subsidiaries, and issuance of asset-backed securities to be purchased by institutional investors. Depending on the structure, these transactions may be accounted for under generally accepted accounting principles as sales of the automobile contracts or as secured financings.

When structured to be treated as a secured financing for accounting purposes, the subsidiary is consolidated with us. Accordingly, the sold automobile contracts and the related debt appear as assets and liabilities, respectively, on our consolidated balance sheet. We then periodically (i) recognize interest and fee income on the contracts, (ii) recognize interest expense on the securities issued in the transaction and (iii) record as expense a provision for credit losses on the contracts.

Since 1994 we have conducted 73 term securitizations of automobile contracts that we originated. As of March 31, 2017, 18 of those securitizations are active and all but one are structured as secured financings. The exception is our September 2010 transaction, which is structured as a sale of the related contracts. From 1994 through April 2008 we generally utilized financial guarantees for the senior asset-backed notes issued in the securitization. Since September 2010 we have utilized senior subordinated structures without any financial guarantees. We have generally conducted our securitizations on a quarterly basis, near the end of each calendar quarter, resulting in four securitizations per calendar year. However, in 2015, we elected to defer what would have been our December securitization in favor of a securitization in January 2016, and since that time have generally conducted our securitizations near the beginning of each calendar quarter.

Our history of term securitizations, over the most recent ten years, is summarized in the table below:

From time to time we have also completed financings of our residual interests in other securitizations that we and our affiliates previously sponsored. As of March 31, 2016, we had one such residual interest financing outstanding, which was repaid in full in November 2016.

Generally, prior to a securitization transaction we fund our automobile contract purchases primarily with proceeds from warehouse credit facilities. Our current short-term funding capacity is $300 million, comprising three credit facilities. The first $100 million credit facility was established in May 2012. This facility was renewed in August 2016, extending the revolving period to August 2018, and adding an amortization period through August 2019. In April 2015, we entered into a $100 million facility, with a revolving period extending to April 2017, followed by an amortization period to April 2019. That facility was renewed in April 2017, extending the revolving period to April 2019, followed by an amortization period to April 2021. In November 2015, we entered into a third $100 million facility, with a revolving period extending to November 2017, followed by an amortization period to November 2019.

In a securitization and in our warehouse credit facilities, we are required to make certain representations and warranties, which are generally similar to the representations and warranties made by dealers in connection with our purchase of the automobile contracts. If we breach any of our representations or warranties, we will be obligated to repurchase the automobile contract at a price equal to the principal balance plus accrued and unpaid interest. We may then be entitled under the terms of our dealer agreement to require the selling dealer to repurchase the contract at a price equal to our purchase price, less any principal payments made by the customer. Subject to any recourse against dealers, we will bear the risk of loss on repossession and resale of vehicles under automobile contracts that we repurchase.

In a securitization, the related special purpose subsidiary may be unable to release excess cash to us if the credit performance of the securitized automobile contracts falls short of pre-determined standards. Such releases represent a material portion of the cash that we use to fund our operations. An unexpected deterioration in the performance of securitized automobile contracts could therefore have a material adverse effect on both our liquidity and results of operations.

Financial Covenants

Certain of our securitization transactions and our warehouse credit facilities contain various financial covenants requiring certain minimum financial ratios and results. Such covenants include maintaining minimum levels of liquidity and net worth and not exceeding maximum leverage levels. In addition, certain of our debt agreements other than our term securitizations contain cross-default provisions. Such cross-default provisions would allow the respective creditors to declare a default if an event of default occurred with respect to other indebtedness of ours, but only if such other event of default were to be accompanied by acceleration of such other indebtedness. As of March 31, 2017 we were in compliance with all such covenants.

Results of Operations

Comparison of Operating Results for the three months ended March 31, 2017 with the three months ended March 31, 2016

Revenues.

During the three months ended March 31, 2017, our revenues were $107.6 million, an increase of $6.9 million, or 6.9%, from the prior year revenue of $100.7 million. The primary reason for the increase in revenues is an increase in interest income. Interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2017 increased $7.9 million, or 8.2%, to $104.6 million from $96.7 million in the prior year. The primary reason for the increase in interest income is the increase in finance receivables held by consolidated subsidiaries. The table below shows the outstanding and average balances of our portfolio held by consolidated subsidiaries for the three months ended March 31, 2017 and 2016:

In the three months ended March 31, 2017, other income of $3.0 million decreased by $963,000, or 24.2% compared to the prior year. The three-month period ended March 31, 2017 includes a decrease of $846,000 in revenue associated with direct mail and other related products and services that we offer to our dealers and a decrease of $75,000 in payments from third-party providers of convenience fees paid by our customers for web based and other electronic payments and a decrease of $57,000 on payments to us for our interest in certain sold charge offs and acquired third-party portfolios. The decreases were somewhat offset by an increase of $15,000 in the remaining categories of other income.

Expenses.  Our operating expenses consist largely of provision for credit losses, interest expense, employee costs, marketing and general and administrative expenses. Provision for credit losses and interest expense are significantly affected by the volume of automobile contracts we purchased during the trailing 12-month period and by the outstanding balance of finance receivables held by consolidated subsidiaries. Employee costs and general and administrative expenses are incurred as applications and automobile contracts are received, processed and serviced. Factors that affect margins and net income include changes in the automobile and automobile finance market environments, and macroeconomic factors such as interest rates and changes in the unemployment level.

Employee costs include base salaries, commissions and bonuses paid to employees, and certain expenses related to the accounting treatment of outstanding stock options, and are one of our most significant operating expenses. These costs (other than those relating to stock options) generally fluctuate with the level of applications and automobile contracts processed and serviced.

Other operating expenses consist largely of facilities expenses, telephone and other communication services, credit services, computer services, marketing and advertising expenses, and depreciation and amortization.

Total operating expenses were $99.8 million for the three months ended March 31, 2017, compared to $88.4 million for the prior period, an increase of $11.4 million, or 12.9%. The increase is primarily due to the increase in our consolidated portfolio and associated servicing costs, and the related increases in interest expense and in our provision for credit losses.

Employee costs increased by $2.6 million or 17.4%, to $17.8 million during the three months ended March 31, 2017, representing 17.8% of total operating expenses, from $15.1 million for the prior year, or 17.1% of total operating expenses. Since 2010, we have added employees in our Originations and Marketing departments in conjunction with the increase in contract purchases. Since 2013, we have also added Servicing staff to accommodate the increase in the number of accounts in our managed portfolio. The table below summarizes our employees by category as well as contract purchases and units in our managed portfolio as of, and for the three-month periods ended, March 31, 2017 and 2016:

General and administrative expenses include costs associated with purchasing and servicing our portfolio of finance receivables, including expenses for facilities, credit services, and telecommunications. General and administrative expenses were $6.9 million, an increase of $1.6 million, or 29.8% compared to the previous year and represented 6.9% of total operating expenses.

Interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2017 increased by $4.3 million to $22.1 million, or 23.9% and represented 22.1% of total operating expenses, compared to $17.8 million in the previous year, when it was 20.2% of total operating expenses.

Interest on securitization trust debt increased by $5.3 million, or 36.0%, for the three months ended March 31, 2017 compared to the prior period. The average balance of securitization trust debt increased 11.8% to $2,168.0 million for the three months ended March 31, 2017 compared to $1,938.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2016. In addition, the blended interest rates on new term securitizations have generally increased since June 2014. As a result, the cost of securitization debt during the three-month period ended March 31, 2017 was 3.7%, compared to 3.0% in the prior year period. For any particular quarterly securitization transaction, the blended cost of funds is ultimately the result of many factors including the market interest rates for benchmark swaps of various maturities against which our bonds are priced and the margin over those benchmarks that investors are willing accept, which in turn, is influenced by investor demand for our bonds at the time of the securitization. These and other factors have resulted in a general trend toward higher securitization trust debt interest costs since June 2014, although that trend has reversed somewhat since July 2016. The blended interest rates of our recent securitizations are summarized in the table below:

Interest expense on subordinated renewable notes decreased by $64,000, or 17.6%. The decrease is due to a decrease in the average yield on our subordinated renewable notes to 7.8% for the three-month period ended March 31, 2017 compared to the prior year when the average yield on our subordinated renewable notes was 9.5%. In addition, the average balance decreased to $15.3 million for the three-month period ended March 31, 2017 compared to $15.4 million in the prior year period.

Interest expense on warehouse debt decreased by $714,000, or 29.5%, for the three months ended March 31, 2017 compared to the prior period. When possible, we hold contracts with our own cash rather than pledging them to one of our warehouse facilities to minimize interest expense.

The following table presents the components of interest income and interest expense and a net interest yield analysis for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2017 and 2016:

(1)  Average balances are based on month end balances except for warehouse lines of credit, which are based on daily balances.

(2)  Net of deferred fees and direct costs.

(3)  Interest expense includes deferred financing costs and non-utilization fees.

(4)  Annualized net interest income divided by average interest earning assets.

The reduction in the annualized yield on our finance receivables for the three months ended March 31, 2017 compared to the prior year period is the result of our decision to offer dealers slightly lower acquisition fees and also to require slightly lower contract interest rates on a portion of the contracts we purchase.

Provision for credit losses was $47.2 million for the three months ended March 31, 2017, an increase of $3.0 million, or 6.7% compared to the prior year and represented 47.3% of total operating expenses. The provision for credit losses maintains the allowance for finance credit losses at levels that we feel are adequate for probable incurred credit losses that can be reasonably estimated. Our approach for establishing the allowance requires greater amounts of provision for credit losses early in the terms of our finance receivables. In addition, we monitor the delinquency and net charge off rates in our portfolio to consider how such rates may affect the allowance for finance credit losses. Consequently, the increase in provision expense is the result of the increase in contract purchases, the larger portfolio owned by our consolidated subsidiaries, and somewhat higher delinquency and charge off rates compared to the prior year.

Marketing expenses consist primarily of commission-based compensation paid to our employee marketing representatives. Our marketing representatives earn a salary plus commissions based on volume of contract purchases and sales of ancillary products and services that we offer our dealers, such as training programs, internet lead sales, and direct mail products. Marketing expenses decreased by $710,000, or 15.2%, to $4.0 million during the three months ended March 31, 2017, compared to $4.7 million in the prior year period, and represented 4.0% of total operating expenses. For the three months ended March 31, 2017, we purchased 14,304 contracts representing $229.6 million in receivables compared to 19,222 contracts representing $312.3 million in receivables in the prior period.

Occupancy expenses increased by $578,000 or 53.4%, to $1.7 million compared to $1.1 million in the previous year and represented 1.7% of total operating expenses. In July 2015, we entered into a lease for additional office space in Irvine, California. We then occupied that space, and incurred incremental occupancy expense, in phases. The first phase was in July 2015 and the second and final phase was in April 2016.

Depreciation and amortization expenses increased by $53,000 or 30.0%, to $228,000 compared to $175,000 in the previous year and represented 0.2% of total operating expenses.

For the three months ended March 31, 2017, we recorded income tax expense of $3.3 million, representing a 42.5% effective income tax rate. In the prior year period, we recorded $5.0 million in income tax expense, representing a 41.0% effective income tax rate.

Credit Experience

Our financial results are dependent on the performance of the automobile contracts in which we retain an ownership interest. Broad economic factors such as recession and significant changes in unemployment levels influence the credit performance of our portfolio, as does the weighted average age of the receivables at any given time. In addition, in June 2014 we entered into a consent decree with the FTC that required us to make certain procedural changes in our servicing practices, which we believe have contributed to somewhat higher delinquencies and extensions compared to prior periods. The tables below document the delinquency, repossession and net credit loss experience of all such automobile contracts that we originated or own an interest in as of the respective dates shown. The tables do not include the experience of third party originated and owned portfolios.

Delinquency, Repossession and Extension Experience (1)

Total Owned Portfolio

____________________________________

(1) All amounts and percentages are based on the amount remaining to be repaid on each automobile contract, including, for pre-computed automobile contracts, any unearned interest. The information in the table represents the gross principal amount of all automobile contracts we have purchased, including automobile contracts subsequently sold in securitization transactions that we continue to service. The table does not include certain contracts we have serviced for third parties on which we earn servicing fees only and have no credit risk.

(2) We consider an automobile contract delinquent when an obligor fails to make at least 90% of a contractually due payment by the following due date, which date may have been extended within limits specified in the Servicing Agreements. The period of delinquency is based on the number of days payments are contractually past due. Automobile contracts less than 31 days delinquent are not included. The delinquency aging categories shown in the tables reflect the effect of extensions.

(3) Amount in repossession represents financed vehicles that have been repossessed but not yet liquidated.

(4) Accounts past due more than 90 days are on non-accrual.

Net Charge-Off Experience (1)

Total Owned Portfolio

_________________________

(1) All amounts and percentages are based on the principal amount scheduled to be paid on each automobile contract, net of unearned income on pre-computed automobile contracts.

(2) Net charge-offs include the remaining principal balance, after the application of the net proceeds from the liquidation of the vehicle (excluding accrued and unpaid interest) and amounts collected subsequent to the date of charge-off, including some recoveries which have been classified as other income in the accompanying interim consolidated financial statements. March 31, 2017 and March 31, 2016 percentages represent three months ended March 31, 2017 and March 31, 2016 annualized. December 31, 2016 represents 12 months ended December 31, 2016.

Extensions

In certain circumstances we will grant obligors one-month payment extensions to assist them with temporary cash flow problems. In general, an obligor would not be entitled to more than two such extensions in any 12-month period and no more than six over the life of the contract. The only modification of terms is to advance the obligor’s next due date by one month and extend the maturity date of the receivable by one month. In some cases, a two-month extension may be granted. There are no other concessions such as a reduction in interest rate, forgiveness of principal or of accrued interest. Accordingly, we consider such extensions to be insignificant delays in payments rather than troubled debt restructurings.

The basic question in deciding to grant an extension is whether or not we will (a) be delaying the inevitable repossession and liquidation or (b) risk losing the vehicle as a result of not being able to locate the obligor and vehicle. In both of those situations, the loss would likely be higher than if the vehicle had been repossessed without the extension. The benefits of granting an extension include minimizing current losses and delinquencies, minimizing lifetime losses, getting the obligor’s account current (or close to it) and building goodwill with the obligor so that he might prioritize us over other creditors on future payments. Our servicing staff are trained to identify when a past due obligor is facing a temporary problem that may be resolved with an extension. In most cases, the extension will be granted in conjunction with our receiving a past due payment (and where allowed by law, a nominal fee, applied to the loan as a partial payment) from the obligor, thereby indicating an additional monetary and psychological commitment to the contract on the obligor’s part.

The credit assessment for granting an extension is initially made by our collector, who bases the recommendation on the collector’s discussions with the obligor. In such assessments the collector will consider, among other things, the following factors: (1) the reason the obligor has fallen behind in payment; (2) whether or not the reason for the delinquency is temporary, and if it is, have conditions changed such that the obligor can begin making regular monthly payments again after the extension; (3) the obligor's past payment history, including past extensions if applicable; and (4) the obligor’s willingness to communicate and cooperate on resolving the delinquency. If the collector believes the obligor is a good candidate for an extension, he must obtain approval from his supervisor, who will review the same factors stated above prior to offering the extension to the obligor. After receiving an extension, an account remains subject to our normal policies and procedures for interest accrual, reporting delinquency and recognizing charge-offs.

We believe that a prudent extension program is an integral component to mitigating losses in our portfolio of sub-prime automobile receivables. The table below summarizes the status, as of March 31, 2017, for accounts that received extensions from 2008 through 2015 (2016 extension data are not included at this time due to insufficient passage of time for meaningful evaluation of results):

  ______________________

Note: Table excludes extensions on portfolios serviced for third parties

We view these results as a confirmation of the effectiveness of our extension program. For example, of the accounts granted extensions in 2012, 61.1% were either paid in full or active and performing at March 31, 2017. Each of these successful accounts represent continued payments of interest and principal (including payment in full in many cases), where without the extension we likely would have incurred a substantial loss and no interest revenue subsequent to the extension.

For the extension accounts that ultimately charge off, we consider any that charged off more than six months after the extension to be at least partially successful. For example, of the accounts granted extensions in 2012 that subsequently charged off, such charge offs occurred, on average, 17 months after the extension, indicating that even in the cases of an ultimate loss, the obligor serviced the account with additional payments of principal and interest.

Additional information about our extensions is provided in the tables below:

______________________

Note: Table excludes portfolios originated and owned by third parties

______________________

Note: Table excludes portfolios originated and owned by third parties

Non-Accrual Receivables

It is not uncommon for our obligors to fall behind in their payments. However, with the diligent efforts of our Servicing staff and systems for managing our collection efforts, we regularly work with our customers to resolve delinquencies. Our staff are trained to employ a counseling approach to assist our customers with their cash flow management skills and help them to prioritize their payment obligations in order to avoid losing their vehicle to repossession. Through our experience, we have learned that once a customer becomes greater than 90 days past due, it is not likely that the delinquency will be resolved and will ultimately result in a charge-off. As a result, we do not recognize any interest income for contracts that are greater than 90 days past due.

If a contract exceeds the 90 days past due threshold at the end of one period, and then makes the necessary payments such that it becomes less than or equal to 90 days delinquent at the end of a subsequent period, it would be restored to full accrual status for our financial reporting purposes. At the time a contract is restored to full accrual in this manner, there can be no assurance that full repayment of interest and principal will ultimately be made. However, we monitor each obligor’s payment performance and are aware of the severity of his delinquency at any time. The fact that the delinquency has been reduced below the 90-day threshold is a positive indicator. Should the contract again exceed the 90-day delinquency level at the end of any reporting period, it would again be reflected as a non-accrual account.

Our policy for placing a contract on non-accrual status is independent of our policy to grant an extension. In practice, it would be an uncommon circumstance where an extension was granted and the account remained in a non-accrual status, since the goal of the extension is to bring the contract current (or nearly current).

Liquidity and Capital Resources

Our business requires substantial cash to support our purchases of automobile contracts and other operating activities. Our primary sources of cash have been cash flows from the proceeds from term securitization transactions and other sales of automobile contracts, amounts borrowed under various revolving credit facilities (also sometimes known as warehouse credit facilities), customer payments of principal and interest on finance receivables, fees for origination of automobile contracts, and releases of cash from securitization transactions and their related spread accounts. Our primary uses of cash have been the purchases of automobile contracts, repayment of amounts borrowed under lines of credit, securitization transactions and otherwise, operating expenses such as employee, interest, occupancy expenses and other general and administrative expenses, the establishment of spread accounts and initial overcollateralization, if any, the increase of credit enhancement to required levels in securitization transactions, and income taxes. There can be no assurance that internally generated cash will be sufficient to meet our cash demands. The sufficiency of internally generated cash will depend on the performance of securitized pools (which determines the level of releases from those pools and their related spread accounts), the rate of expansion or contraction in our managed portfolio, and the terms upon which we are able to acquire and borrow against automobile contracts.