FNCB Bancorp, Inc. - Annual Report: 2015 (Form 10-K)

5  

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2015

OR

For the transition period from                to               

Commission File No. 000-53869

FIRST NATIONAL COMMUNITY BANCORP, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code (570) 346-7667

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: NONE

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

Common Stock, $1.25 par value

(Title of Class)

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 section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ 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 if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☐

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

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 stock of the registrant, held by non-affiliates was $86,331,852 at June 30, 2015.

APPLICABLE ONLY TO CORPORATE REGISTRANTS

State the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date: 16,530,432 shares of common stock as of March 11, 2016.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Certain information required by Items 10, 11, 12, 13 and 14 is incorporated by reference into Part III hereof from portions of the Proxy Statement for the registrant’s 2016 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Contents

PART I

Item 1. Business

Overview

The Company

First National Community Bancorp, Inc., incorporated in 1997, is a Pennsylvania business corporation and a registered bank holding company headquartered in Dunmore, Pennsylvania. In this report the terms “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to First National Community Bancorp, Inc. and its subsidiaries, unless the context requires otherwise. In certain circumstances, however, First National Community Bancorp, Inc. uses the term “Company” to refer to itself.

The Company became an active bank holding company on July 1, 1998 when it acquired ownership of First National Community Bank (the “Bank”). The Bank is a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. The Company’s primary activity consists of owning and operating the Bank, which provides practically all of the Company’s earnings as a result of its banking services.

The Company had net income of $35.8 million, $13.4 million and $6.4 million in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Total assets were $1.1 billion at December 31, 2015 and $1.0 billion at both December 31, 2014 and 2013.

The Bank

Established as a national banking association in 1910, as of December 31, 2015 the Bank operated 19 full-service branch offices within three contiguous counties, Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wayne, its primary market area located in the Northeast section of the state.

Products and Services

Retail Banking

The Bank provides a wide variety of traditional banking products and services to individuals and businesses, including Debit Cards, Online Banking, Mobile Banking, Image Checking and E-Statements. Deposit products include various checking, savings and certificate of deposit products, as well as a line of preferred products for higher-balance customers.  The Bank is a member of the Promontory Interfinancial Network and participates in their Certificate of Deposit Account Registry (“CDARs”) and Insured Cash Sweep (“ICS”) programs, which allow customers to secure Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance on balances in excess of the standard limitations.

The Bank also offers customers the convenience of 24-hour banking, seven days a week, through FNCB Online Banking (“FNCB Online”) via a secure website, https://www.fncb.com. FNCB Online’s product suite includes Bill Payment, Finance Works, Funds Transfer and POP Money (person to person transfers), and Purchase Rewards. FNCB Online can also be accessed through the Bank’s mobile application. Customers can also access money from their deposit accounts by using their debit card to make purchases or cash withdrawals from any automated teller machines (“ATMs”) including ATMs located in each of the Bank’s branch offices as well as additional locations. FNCB’s mobile deposit, available to personal banking customers with access to FNCB Online Banking and an eligible deposit account, allows customers to deposit checks, electronically from start to finish, from anywhere at any time.

Through FNCB Online, customers can directly access their accounts, open new accounts and apply for a mortgage or obtain a pre-qualification approval through the Bank’s mortgage center. Telephone banking (Account Link), a service that provides customers with the ability to access account information and perform related account transfers through the use of a touch tone telephone, is also available. The Bank offers Bounce Protection, Savings Overdraft Protection and Instant Money loans which provide customers with an added level of protection against unanticipated overdrafts due to cash flow emergencies and account reconciliation errors. The Bank offers its customers an identity theft protection plan through a strategic partnership with an independent vendor. Subscribers select which coverage package they desire by visiting the Bank’s secure website and choosing “Identity Protection” from the Resources menu.

FNCB Business Online Banking is a menu driven product that provides the Bank’s business customers direct access to their account information and the ability to perform internal and external transfers, wire transfers and payments through ACH transactions, and process Direct Deposit payroll transactions for employees, 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, from their place of business. Remote Deposit Capture allows business customers the ability to process daily check deposits to their accounts through an online image capture environment. Business customers can access money from their deposit account by using their “business” debit card, providing a faster, more convenient way to make purchases, track business expenses and manage finances.

Lending Activities

The Bank offers a variety of loans, including residential real estate loans, construction, land acquisition and development loans, commercial real estate loans, commercial and industrial loans, loans to state and political subdivisions, and consumer loans, generally to individuals and businesses in its primary market area. These lending activities are described in further detail below.

Residential Mortgage Loans

The Bank offers a variety of fixed-rate one- to four-family residential loans including First Time Homebuyer mortgages and Home Possible® mortgages to meet the home financing needs of customers with low downpayments. The Bank also offers a “WOW” mortgage, a first-lien, fixed-rate mortgage product with maturity terms of 7.5, 10 and 14.5 years. At December 31, 2015, one- to four-family residential mortgage loans totaled $130.7 million, or 17.9%, of the total loan portfolio. Except for the WOW mortgage, one- to four-family mortgage loans are originated generally for sale in the secondary market. However, management may portfolio one- to four-family residential mortgage loans as deemed necessary according to current asset/liability management strategies. During the year ended December 31, 2015, the Bank sold $7.9 million of one- to four-family mortgages. The Bank retains servicing rights on these mortgages.

Construction, Land Acquisition and Development Loans

The Bank offers interim construction financing secured by residential property for the purpose of constructing one- to four-family homes. The Bank also offers interim construction financing for the purpose of constructing residential developments and various commercial properties including shopping centers, office complexes and single purpose owner-occupied structures and for land acquisition. At December 31, 2015, construction, land acquisition and development loans amounted to $30.8 million and represented 4.2% of the total loan portfolio.

Commercial Real Estate Loans

At December 31, 2015, commercial real estate loans totaled $245.2 million, or 33.5%, of the total loan portfolio. Commercial real estate mortgage loans represent the largest portion of the Bank’s total loan portfolio and loans in this portfolio generally have larger loan balances. The commercial real estate loan portfolio is secured by a broad range of real estate, including but not limited to, office complexes, shopping centers, hotels, warehouses, gas stations, convenience markets, residential care facilities, nursing care facilities, restaurants, multifamily housing, farms and land subdivisions.

Commercial and Industrial Loans

The Bank generally offers commercial loans to individuals and businesses located in its primary market area. The commercial loan portfolio includes, but is not limited to, lines of credit, dealer floor plan lines, equipment loans, vehicle loans and term loans. These loans are primarily secured by vehicles, machinery and equipment, inventory, accounts receivable, marketable securities, deposit accounts and real estate. At December 31, 2015, commercial and industrial loans totaled $149.8 million, or 20.5%, of the total loan portfolio.

Consumer Loans

Consumer loans include both secured and unsecured installment loans, lines of credit and overdraft protection loans. The Bank is also in the business of underwriting indirect auto loans which are originated through various auto dealers in northeastern Pennsylvania and dealer floor plan loans. Generally, the Bank also offers home equity loans and lines of credit with a maximum combined loan-to-value ratio of 90%, based on the appraised value of the property. Home equity loans have fixed rates of interest and are for terms up to 15 years. Home equity lines of credit have adjustable interest rates and are based off of the prime interest rate. At December 31, 2015, consumer loans totaled $128.6 million, or 17.6%, of the total loan portfolio.

State and Political Subdivision Loans

The Bank originates state and political subdivision loans, including general obligation and tax anticipation notes, primarily to municipalities in the Bank’s market area. At December 31, 2015, state and political subdivision loans totaled $46.1 million, or 6.3%, of the total loan portfolio.

For more information regarding the loan portfolio and lending policies, please refer to Note 2 “Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Wealth Management

The Company offers customers wealth management services through a third party provider. Customers are able to access alternative deposit products such as mutual funds, annuities, stocks, and bonds directly for purchase from an outside provider.

Deposit Activities

In general, deposits, borrowings and loan repayments are the major sources of the Bank’s funds for lending and other investment purposes. The Bank grows its deposits within its market area primarily by offering a wide selection of deposit accounts. Deposit account terms vary according to the minimum balance required, the time periods the funds must remain on deposit and the interest rate, among other factors. In determining the terms of the Bank’s deposit accounts, the Bank considers the interest rates offered by its competitors, the interest rates available on borrowings, its liquidity needs and customer preferences. The Bank regularly reviews its deposit mix and deposit pricing as part of its asset/liability management, taking into consideration rates offered by competitors in its market area.

Competition

The Company faces substantial competition in originating loans and in attracting deposits from a significant number of financial institutions operating in its market area, many with a statewide or regional presence, and in some cases, a national presence, as well as other financial institutions outside of its market area through online loan and deposit product offerings. The competition comes principally from other banks, savings institutions, credit unions, mortgage banking companies and, with respect to deposits, institutions offering investment alternatives, including money market funds and online savings accounts. The increased competition has resulted from changes in the legal and regulatory guidelines, as well as from economic conditions. The cost of regulatory compliance remains high for community banks as compared to their larger competitors that are able to achieve economies of scale.

As a result of consolidation in the banking industry, some of the Bank’s competitors and their respective affiliates are larger and may enjoy advantages such as greater financial resources, a wider geographic presence, a wider array of services, or more favorable pricing alternatives and lower origination and operating costs. The Company considers its major competition to be local commercial banks as well as other commercial banks with branches in the Company’s market area. Competitors may offer deposits at higher rates and loans with lower fixed rates, more attractive terms and less stringent credit structures than the Company has been able to offer. The growth and profitability of the Company depend on its continued ability to successfully compete.

Supervision and Regulation

The Company participates in a highly regulated industry and is subject to a variety of statutes, regulations and policies, as well as ongoing regulatory supervision and review. These laws, regulations and policies are subject to frequent change and the Company takes measures to comply with applicable requirements.

Supervisory Actions

The Bank was under a Consent Order (the “Order”) from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) dated September 1, 2010. On March 25, 2015, after meeting all of the requirements of the Order, the Bank was fully and completely released from the Order. The Company was also subject to a Written Agreement (the “Agreement”) with the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (the “Reserve Bank”) dated November 24, 2010. On September 8, 2015, the Company was notified by the Reserve Bank that, effective September 2, 2015, it had been fully and completely released from the Written Agreement.

The Company

The Company is a bank holding company registered with, and subject to regulation by, the Reserve Bank and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”). The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHCA”), and other federal laws subject bank holding companies to restrictions on the types of activities in which they may engage, and to a range of supervisory requirements and activities, including regulatory enforcement actions for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe and unsound banking practices.

The BHCA requires approval of the FRB for, among other things, the acquisition by a proposed bank holding company of control of more than five percent (5%) of the voting shares, or substantially all the assets, of any bank or the merger or consolidation by a bank holding company with another bank holding company.  The BHCA also generally permits the acquisition by a bank holding company of control or substantially all the assets of any bank located in a state other than the home state of the bank holding company, except where the bank has not been in existence for the minimum period of time required by state law; but if the bank is at least 5 years old, the FRB may approve the acquisition.

With certain limited exceptions, a bank holding company is prohibited from acquiring control of any voting shares of any company which is not a bank or bank holding company and from engaging directly or indirectly in any activity other than banking or managing or controlling banks or furnishing services to or performing services for its authorized subsidiaries.  A bank holding company may, however, engage in, or acquire an interest in a company that engages in, activities that the FRB has determined by order or regulation to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be properly incident thereto.  In making such a determination, the FRB is required to consider whether the performance of such activities can reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as convenience, increased competition or gains in efficiency, which outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices. The FRB is also empowered to differentiate between activities commenced de novo and activities commenced by the acquisition, in whole or in part, of a going concern.  Some of the activities that the FRB has determined by regulation to be closely related to banking include making or servicing loans, performing certain data processing services, acting as a fiduciary or investment or financial advisor, and making investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare.

Subsidiary banks of a bank holding company are subject to certain restrictions imposed by the Federal Reserve Act on any extensions of credit to the bank holding company or any of its subsidiaries, or investments in the stock or other securities thereof, and on the taking of such stock or securities as collateral for loans to any borrower.  Further, a holding company and any subsidiary bank are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with the extension of credit.  A subsidiary bank may not extend credit, lease or sell property, or furnish any services, or fix or vary the consideration for any of the foregoing on the condition that: (i) the customer obtain or provide some additional credit, property or services from or to such bank other than a loan, discount, deposit or trust service; (ii) the customer obtain or provide some additional credit, property or service from or to the bank holding company or any other subsidiary of the bank holding company; or (iii) the customer not obtain some other credit, property or service from competitors, except for reasonable requirements to assure the soundness of credit extended.

The Gramm Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the “GLB Act”) allows a bank holding company or other company to certify status as a financial holding company, which allows such company to engage in activities that are financial in nature, that are incidental to such activities, or are complementary to such activities without further approval. The Company is not a financial holding company. The GLB Act enumerates certain activities that are deemed financial in nature, such as underwriting insurance or acting as an insurance principal, agent or broker, underwriting, dealing in or making markets in securities, and engaging in merchant banking under certain restrictions. It also authorizes the FRB to determine by regulation what other activities are financial in nature, or incidental or complementary thereto.

The Bank

The Bank, as a national bank, is a member of the Federal Reserve System and its accounts are insured up to the maximum legal limit by the Deposit Insurance Fund of the FDIC. The Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the OCC. The regulations of these agencies and the FDIC govern most aspects of the Bank’s business, including required reserves against deposits, loans, investments, mergers and acquisitions, borrowings, dividends and location and number of branch offices. State laws may also apply to the Bank to the extent that federal law does not preempt the state law. The laws and regulations governing the Bank generally have been promulgated to protect depositors and the Deposit Insurance Fund, and not for the purpose of protecting shareholders.

On February 26, 2016, the Bank filed an application with the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities to convert from an OCC-chartered banking institution to a Pennsylvania state-chartered banking institution and has notified the OCC and the FDIC of the same.  If and when the conversion application is approved, the primary banking regulators of the Bank would become the Pennsylvania Department of Banking and Securities and the FDIC. The Company would continue to be regulated by the Federal Reserve.  There can be no assurance as to the ability and timing to obtain the requisite approvals of the foregoing conversion application.

Branching and Interstate Banking. The federal banking agencies are authorized to approve interstate bank merger transactions without regard to whether such transactions are prohibited by the law of any state, unless the home state of one of the banks has opted out of the interstate bank merger provisions of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (the “Riegle-Neal Act”) by adopting a law after the date of enactment of the Riegle-Neal Act and before June 1, 1997 that applies equally to all out-of-state banks and expressly prohibits merger transactions involving out-of-state banks. Interstate bank mergers are also subject to the nationwide and statewide insured deposit concentration limitations described in the Riegle-Neal Act.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) permits national and state banks to establish de novo branches in other states to the same extent as a bank chartered by that state would be so permitted. Previously, banks could only establish branches in other states if the host state expressly permitted out-of-state banks to establish branches in that state. Pennsylvania law had previously permitted banks chartered in Pennsylvania to branch in other states without limitation, thereby permitting national banks in Pennsylvania to establish branches anywhere in the state, but only permitted out of state banks to branch in Pennsylvania if the home state of the out of state bank permits Pennsylvania banks to establish de novo branches. The branching provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act could result in more banks from other states establishing de novo branches in the Bank’s market area.

USA Patriot Act and BSA. Under the BSA, a financial institution is required to have systems in place to detect certain transactions, based on the size and nature of the transaction. Financial institutions are generally required to report cash transactions involving more than $10,000 to the United States Treasury. In addition, financial institutions are required to file suspicious activity reports for transactions that involve more than $5,000 and that the financial institution knows, suspects or has reason to suspect, involves illegal funds, is designed to evade the requirements of the BSA or has no lawful purpose. Under the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act, commonly referred to as the “USA Patriot Act” or the “Patriot Act,” financial institutions are subject to prohibitions against specified financial transactions and account relationships, as well as enhanced due diligence standards intended to detect, and prevent, the use of the United States financial system for money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The Patriot Act requires financial institutions, including banks, to establish anti-money laundering programs, including employee training and independent audit requirements, meet minimum standards specified by the act, follow minimum standards for customer identification and maintenance of customer identification records, and regularly compare customer lists against lists of suspected terrorists, terrorist organizations and money launderers.

Capital Adequacy Requirements. The FRB and OCC have adopted risk based capital adequacy and leverage capital adequacy requirements pursuant to which they assess the adequacy of capital in examining and supervising banks and bank holding companies and in analyzing bank regulatory applications. Risk-based capital requirements determine the adequacy of capital based on the risk inherent in various classes of assets and off-balance sheet items.

In December 2010, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision released its final framework for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulation (“Basel III”). The regulations adopted by the U.S. federal bank regulatory agencies, when fully phased-in, will require bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain more capital, with a greater emphasis on common equity. The Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduces as a new capital measure “Common Equity Tier I” (“CET I”), (ii) specifies that Tier I capital consists of CET I and “Additional Tier I capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET I narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET I and not to the other components of capital and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations.

When fully phased-in, Basel III requires banks to maintain (i) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum ratio of CET I to risk-weighted assets of at least 4.50%, plus a “capital conservation buffer” of 2.50 %; (ii) a minimum ratio of Tier I capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 6.00%, plus the capital conservation buffer, or 8.50%; (iii) a minimum ratio of total (Tier I plus Tier 2) capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.00% plus the capital conservation buffer, or 10.50%; and (iv) as a newly adopted international standard, a minimum leverage ratio of 3.00%, calculated as the ratio of Tier I capital to balance sheet exposures plus certain off-balance sheet exposures (computed as the average for each quarter of the month-end ratios for the quarter).

Basel III also provides for a “countercyclical capital buffer,” generally to be imposed when national regulators determine that excess aggregate credit growth becomes associated with a buildup of systemic risk that would be a CET I add-on to the capital conservation buffer in the range of 0.00% to 2.50% when fully implemented. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress.

Banking institutions with a ratio of CET I to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer (or below the combined capital conservation buffer and countercyclical capital buffer, when the latter is applied) may face constraints on their ability to pay dividends, to effect equity repurchases and pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers, which constraints vary based on the amount of the shortfall.

The Basel III final framework provides for a number of new deductions from and adjustments to CET I. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets dependent upon future taxable income and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET I to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10.00% of CET I or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15.00% of CET I.

The federal banking regulators issued a final rulemaking in July 2013 (the “Basel III Rule”) to implement Basel III under regulations substantially consistent with the above. The Basel III Rule also includes, as part of the definition of CET I capital, a requirement that banking institutions include the amount of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI,” which primarily consists of unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, that are not required to be treated as OTTI, net of tax) in calculating regulatory capital, unless the institution makes a one-time opt-out election from this provision in connection with the filing of its first regulatory reports after applicability of the Basel III Rule to that institution. The Basel III Rule also imposes a 4.00% minimum Tier I leverage ratio.

The Basel III Rule also makes changes to the manner of calculating risk-weighted assets. It imposes methodologies for determining risk weighted assets, including revisions to recognition of credit risk mitigation, such as a greater recognition of financial collateral and a wider range of eligible guarantors. They also include risk weighting of equity exposures and past due loans; and higher (greater than 100%) risk weighting for certain commercial real estate exposures that have higher credit risk profiles, including higher loan to value and equity components.

As discussed below, the Basel III Rule also integrates the new capital requirements into the prompt corrective action provisions under Section 38 of the FDIA.

In general, the Basel III Rule became applicable to the Company and Bank on January 1, 2015. The Company and Bank elected to exclude AOCI in calculating regulatory capital with the filing of their respective first regulatory reports after applicability of the Basel III Rule to them. Additionally, the Company’s outstanding subordinated notes are subject to phase out and will cease to qualify as capital for regulatory purposes. Overall, the Company believes that implementation of the Basel III Rule did not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s or Bank’s capital ratios, earnings, shareholder’s equity, or its ability to pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers.

Prompt Corrective Action. Under Section 38 of the FDIA, each federal banking agency is required to implement a system of prompt corrective action for institutions which it regulates. The federal banking agencies have promulgated substantially similar regulations to implement the system of prompt corrective action established by Section 38 of the FDIA.

The following are the capital requirements under the Basel III Rules integrated into the prompt corrective action category definitions. As of December 31, 2015, the following capital requirements were applicable to the Bank for purposes of Section 38 of the FDIA.

The Company’s total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio at December 31, 2015 and 2014 were 11.79% and 13.67%, respectively. The same ratio for the Bank was 13.83% and 15.42% at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The Tier I capital to risk-weighted assets ratio for the Company at December 31, 2015 and 2014 was 9.42% and 8.76%, respectively. The Bank’s Tier I Capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 12.69% at December 31, 2015 and 14.16% at December 31, 2014. The Tier I capital to average assets ratio for the Company was 7.27% and 6.05%, at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. This ratio for the Bank was 9.79% and 9.78% at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. At December 31, 2015, the Company’s and the Bank’s common equity Tier I capital to risk-weighted assets ratios were 9.42% and 12.69%, respectively.

Regulatory Enforcement Authority. Federal banking law grants substantial enforcement powers to federal banking regulators. This enforcement authority includes, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease-and-desist or removal orders and to initiate injunctive actions against banking organizations and institution-affiliated parties. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. Other actions or inactions may provide the basis for enforcement action, including misleading or untimely reports filed with regulatory authorities.

The Bank and its “institution-affiliated parties,” including its management, employees, agents, independent contractors, consultants such as attorneys and accountants and others who participate in the conduct of the financial institution’s affairs, are subject to potential civil and criminal penalties for violations of law, regulations or written orders of a governmental agency. In addition, regulators are provided with greater flexibility to commence enforcement actions against institutions and institution-affiliated parties. Possible enforcement actions include the termination of deposit insurance and cease-and-desist orders. Such orders may, among other things, require affirmative action to correct any harm resulting from a violation or practice, including restitution, reimbursement, indemnifications or guarantees against loss. A financial institution may also be ordered to restrict its growth, dispose of certain assets, rescind agreements or contracts, or take other actions as determined by the ordering agency to be appropriate.

Under provisions of the federal securities laws, a determination by a court or regulatory agency that certain violations have occurred at a company or its affiliates can result in fines, restitution, a limitation of permitted activities, disqualification to continue to conduct certain activities and an inability to rely on certain favorable exemptions. Certain types of infractions and violations can also affect a public company in its timing and ability to expeditiously issue new securities into the capital markets.

The regulatory structure also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss allowances for regulatory purposes.

As a result of the previous volatility and instability in the financial system, Congress, the bank regulatory authorities and other government agencies have called for or proposed additional regulation and restrictions on the activities, practices and operations of banks and their holding companies. While many of these proposals relate to institutions that have accepted investments from, or sold troubled assets to, the Department of the Treasury or other government agencies, or otherwise participate in government programs intended to promote financial stabilization, Congress and the federal banking agencies have broad authority to require all banks and holding companies to adhere to more rigorous or costly operating procedures, corporate governance procedures, or to engage in activities or practices which they might not otherwise elect. Any such requirement could adversely affect the Company’s business and results of operations. The Company did not accept an investment by the Treasury Department in its preferred stock or warrants to purchase common stock, and except for the temporary increases in deposit insurance for customer accounts, has not participated in any of the programs adopted by the Treasury Department, FDIC or Federal Reserve.

The Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act made significant changes to the bank regulatory structure and affects the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act has required a number of federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations, and to prepare various studies and reports for Congress. The federal agencies have been given significant discretion in drafting these rules and regulations. To date, the following provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act are considered to be of greatest significance to the Company:

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Dodd-Frank Act created the CFPB, a new independent federal agency 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, which began operations on July 21, 2011, has examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to depository institutions with $10 billion or more 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 regulators 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.

A focus of the CFPB’s rulemaking efforts has been on reforms related to residential mortgage transactions. In 2013, the CFPB issued final 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. Several of the CFPB’s rulemakings became effective in January 2014. In November 2013, the CFPB issued final rules establishing integrated disclosure requirements for lenders and settlement agents in connection with most closed end, real estate secured consumer loans. These rules became effective in August 2015. During 2015, the CFPB issued additional rulemaking expanding the scope of information lenders must report in connection with mortgage and other housing-related loan applications under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.

The final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act requirement that lenders determine whether a consumer has the ability to repay a mortgage loan, which went into effect on January 10, 2014, establishes certain minimum requirements for creditors when making ability to pay determinations, and establishes certain protections from liability for mortgages meeting the definition of “qualified mortgages.” The rule affords greater legal protections for lenders making qualified mortgages that are not “higher priced.” Qualified mortgages must generally satisfy detailed requirements related to product features, underwriting standards, and a points and fees requirement whereby the total points and fees on a mortgage loan cannot exceed specified amounts or percentages of the total loan amount. Mandatory features of a qualified mortgage include: (1) a loan term not exceeding 30 years and (2) regular periodic payments that do not result in negative amortization, deferral of principal repayment, or a balloon payment. The rule creates special categories of qualified mortgages originated by certain smaller creditors. The Bank’s current business strategy, product offerings, and profitability may change as the rule is interpreted by the regulators and courts.

The final rules adopting new mortgage servicing standards, which took effect on January 10, 2014, impose new requirements regarding force-placed insurance, mandate certain notices prior to rate adjustments on adjustable-rate mortgages, and establish requirements for periodic disclosures to borrowers. These requirements will affect notices to be given to consumers as to delinquency, foreclosure alternatives, modification applications, interest rate adjustments and options for avoiding “force-placed” insurance. Servicers will be prohibited from processing foreclosures when a loan modification is pending, and must wait until a loan is more than 120 days delinquent before initiating a foreclosure action. Servicers must provide direct and ongoing access to its personnel, and provide prompt review of any loss mitigation application. Servicers must maintain accurate and accessible mortgage records for the life of a loan and until one year after the loan is paid off or transferred.

FDIC Insurance Premiums. The FDIC maintains a risk-based assessment system for determining deposit insurance premiums. Four risk categories (I-IV), each subject to different premium rates, are established based upon an institution’s status as well capitalized, adequately capitalized or undercapitalized, and the institution’s supervisory rating.

The Dodd-Frank Act permanently increased the maximum deposit insurance amount for banks, savings institutions and credit unions to $250,000 per depositor. The Dodd-Frank Act also broadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments. Assessments are now based on a financial institution’s average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the FDIC to increase the reserve ratio of the Deposit Insurance Fund from 1.15% to 1.35% of insured deposits by 2020 and eliminates the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to insured depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated the statutory prohibition against the payment of interest on business checking accounts.

An insured institution is required to pay deposit insurance premiums on its assessment base in accordance with its risk category. There are three adjustments that can be made to an institution’s initial base assessment rate: (1) a potential decrease for long-term unsecured debt, including senior and subordinated debt and, for small institutions, a portion of Tier I capital; (2) a potential increase for secured liabilities above a threshold amount; and (3) for non-Risk Category I institutions, a potential increase for brokered deposits above a threshold amount. The FDIC may also impose special assessments from time to time.

Effective February 2, 2015 and for the remainder of the year ended December 31, 2015, the Bank was considered risk category I for deposit insurance assessments and paid an annual assessment rate ranging from 0.0005 basis points to 0.0006 basis points on the assessment base of average consolidated total assets less the average tangible equity during the assessment period.

Dividend Restrictions

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. The Company’s revenues (on a parent company only basis) result almost entirely from dividends paid by its subsidiary, the Bank, to the Company. The right of the Company, and consequently the right of creditors and shareholders of the Company, to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of any subsidiary through the payment of such dividends or otherwise is necessarily subject to the prior claims of creditors of the subsidiary (including depositors) except to the extent that claims of the Company, in its capacity as a creditor, may be recognized. Additionally, the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Company is subject to various regulatory restrictions.

The declaration of cash dividends on the Company’s common stock is at the discretion of its board of directors, and any decision to declare a dividend is based on a number of factors, including, but not limited to, earnings, prospects, financial condition, regulatory capital levels, applicable covenants under any credit agreements, notes and other contractual restrictions, Pennsylvania law, federal bank regulatory law, and other factors deemed relevant.

Employees

As of December 31, 2015, the Company and the Bank employed 269 persons, including 39 part-time employees.

Available Information

The Company files reports, proxy and information statements and other information electronically with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). You may read and copy any materials that the Company files with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. Information may be obtained on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The SEC’s website site address is http://www.sec.gov. The Company’s website address is http://www.fncb.com. The Company makes its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q and Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments thereto available through its website at www.fncb.com. They may also be obtained free of charge as soon as practicable after filing or furnishing them to the SEC upon request by sending an email to corporatesecretary@fncb.com. Information may also be obtained via written request to First National Community Bancorp, Inc. Attention: Chief Financial Officer, 102 East Drinker Street, Dunmore, PA 18512.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

The risk factors discussed below, which could materially affect the Company’s business, operating results or financial condition, should be considered in addition to the other information about the Company presented in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. However, the risk factors described below are not meant to be all inclusive. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known or that the Company currently deems to be insignificant may also materially adversely affect the business, operating results or financial condition of the Company.

Risks Related to the Company and its Business

The Company may not be able to successfully compete with others for business.

The Company competes for loans, deposits and investment dollars with numerous regional and national banks and other community banking institutions, online divisions of banks located in other markets as well as other kinds of financial institutions and enterprises, such as securities firms, insurance companies, savings associations, credit unions, mortgage brokers, and private lenders. There is also competition for banking business from competitors outside of its market area. As noted above, the Company and the Bank are subject to extensive regulations and supervision, including, in many cases, regulations that limit the type and scope of activities. Many competitors have substantially greater resources than the Company, may offer certain services that the Bank does not provide, and operate under less stringent regulatory environments. The differences in available resources and applicable regulations may make it harder for the Company to compete profitably, reduce the rates that it can earn on loans and investments, increase the rates it must offer on deposits and other funds, and adversely affect its overall financial condition and earnings. For additional discussion of the Company’s competitive environment, see the section entitled “Business – Competition” included in Item 1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The economic environment continues to pose significant challenges for the Company and could adversely affect its financial condition and results of operations.

The Company is operating in a challenging economic environment, including uncertain national and local conditions. Additionally, concerns from some of the countries in the European Union, Asia and elsewhere have also strained the financial markets both abroad and domestically. Financial institutions continue to be affected by softness in the real estate market and constrained financial markets. While conditions appear to have improved since the depths of the financial crisis, generally and in the Company’s market area, should declines in real estate values, home sales volumes, and financial stress on borrowers as a result of the uncertain economic environment re-emerge, such events could have an adverse effect on our borrowers or their customers, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects on us and others in the financial institutions industry. Deterioration in economic conditions in our markets could drive loan losses beyond that which is provided for in the Company’s ALLL, which would necessitate further increases in the provision for loan and lease losses, and, in turn, reduce the Company’s earnings and capital. The Company may also face the following risks in connection with the economic environment:

If these conditions or similar ones continue to exist or worsen, the Company could experience adverse effects on its financial condition.

The Company is subject to lending risk.

As of December 31, 2015, approximately 37.8% of the Company’s loan portfolio consisted of commercial real estate loans and construction, land acquisition and development loans. These types of loans are generally viewed as having more risk of default than residential real estate loans or consumer loans. These types of loans are also typically larger than residential real estate loans and consumer loans. Because the Company’s loan portfolio contains a significant number of commercial real estate loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans could cause a significant increase in non-performing loans. All non-performing loans totaled $3.8 million, or 0.5% of total gross loans, as of December 31, 2015, and $5.5 million, or 0.8% of total gross loans, as of December 31, 2014. Although non-performing asset levels decreased from the prior year, an increase in non-performing loans could result in an increase in the provision for loan and lease losses and an increase in loan charge-offs, both of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. The lending activities in which the Bank engages carry the risk that the borrowers will be unable to perform on their obligations. As such, general economic conditions, nationally and in the Company’s primary market area, will have a significant impact on its results of operations. To the extent that economic conditions deteriorate, business and individual borrowers may be less able to meet their obligations to the Bank in full, in a timely manner, resulting in decreased earnings or losses to the Bank. To the extent that loans are secured by real estate, adverse conditions in the real estate market may reduce the ability of the borrower to generate the necessary cash flow for repayment of the loan, and reduce the ability to collect the full amount of the loan upon a default. To the extent that the Bank makes fixed-rate loans, general increases in interest rates will tend to reduce its spread as the interest rates the Company must pay for deposits would increase while interest income is flat. Economic conditions and interest rates may also adversely affect the value of property pledged as security for loans.

The Company’s concentrations of loans, including those to insiders and related parties, may create a greater risk of loan defaults and losses.

A substantial portion of the Company’s loans are secured by real estate in the Northeastern Pennsylvania market, and substantially all of its loans are to borrowers in that area. The Company also has a significant amount of commercial real estate, commercial and industrial, construction, land acquisition and development loans and land-related loans for residential and commercial developments. At December 31, 2015, $433.7 million, or 59.3%, of gross loans were secured by real estate, primarily commercial real estate. Management has taken steps to mitigate the Company’s commercial real estate concentration risk by diversification among the types and characteristics of real estate collateral properties, sound underwriting practices, and ongoing portfolio monitoring and market analysis. Of total gross loans, $30.8 million, or 4.2%, were construction, land acquisition and development loans. Construction, land acquisition and development loans have the highest risk of uncollectability. An additional $149.8 million, or 20.5%, of portfolio loans were commercial and industrial loans not secured by real estate. Historically, commercial and industrial loans generally have had a higher risk of default than other categories of loans, such as single family residential mortgage loans. The repayments of these loans often depend on the successful operation of a business and are more likely to be adversely affected by adverse economic conditions. While the Company believes that its loan portfolio is well diversified in terms of borrowers and industries, these concentrations expose the Company to the risk that adverse developments in the real estate market, or in the general economic conditions in the Company’s general market area, could increase the levels of non-performing loans and charge-offs, and reduce loan demand. In that event, the Company would likely experience lower earnings or losses. Additionally, if, for any reason, economic conditions in its market area deteriorate, or there is significant volatility or weakness in the economy or any significant sector of the area’s economy, the Company’s ability to develop business relationships may be diminished, the quality and collectability of its loans may be adversely affected, the value of collateral may decline and loan demand may be reduced.

Commercial real estate, commercial and industrial and construction, land acquisition and development loans tend to have larger balances than single family mortgage loans and other consumer loans. Because the loan portfolio contains a significant number of commercial and industrial loans, commercial real estate loans and construction, land acquisition and development loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans may cause a significant increase in non-performing assets. An increase in non-performing loans could result in a loss of earnings from these loans, an increase in the provision for loan and lease losses, or an increase in loan charge-offs, which could have an adverse impact on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

Guidance adopted by federal banking regulators provides that banks having concentrations in construction, land development or commercial real estate loans are expected to have and maintain higher levels of risk management and, potentially, higher levels of capital, which may adversely affect shareholder returns, or require the Company to obtain additional capital sooner than the Company otherwise would. Excluded from the scope of this guidance are loans secured by non-farm nonresidential properties where the primary source of repayment is the cash flow from the ongoing operations and activities conducted by the party, or affiliate of the party, who owns the property.

Outstanding loans and line of credit balances to directors, officers and their related parties totaled $52.7 million as of December 31, 2015. At December 31, 2015, there were no loans to directors, officers and their related parties that were categorized as criticized loans within the Bank’s risk rating system, meaning they are not considered to present a higher risk of collection than other loans. For more information regarding loans to officers and directors and/or their related parties, please refer to Note 14 — “Related Party Transactions” to the consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 and Item 13, “Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company’s financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected if the ALLL is not sufficient to absorb actual losses or if increases to ALLL were required.

The lending activities in which the Bank engages carry the risk that the borrowers will be unable to perform on their obligations, and that the collateral securing the payment of their obligations may be insufficient to assure repayment. The Company may experience significant credit losses, which could have a material adverse effect on its operating results. The Company makes various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of its loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of its borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of its loans, which it uses as a basis to estimate and establish its reserves for losses. In determining the amount of the ALLL, the Company reviews its loans, its loss and delinquency experience, and evaluates current economic conditions. If these assumptions prove to be incorrect, the ALLL may not cover inherent losses in its loan portfolio at the date of its financial statements. Material additions to the Company’s allowance or extensive charge-offs would materially decrease its net income. At December 31, 2015, the ALLL totaled $8.8 million, representing 1.2% of total loans.

Although the Company believes it has underwriting standards to manage normal lending risks, it is difficult to assess the future performance of its loan portfolio due to the ongoing economic environment and the state of the real estate market. The assessment of future performance of the loan portfolio is inherently uncertain. The Company can give no assurance that non-performing loans will not increase or that non-performing or delinquent loans will not adversely affect the Company’s future performance.

In addition, federal regulators periodically review the Company’s ALLL and may require increases to the ALLL or further loan charge-offs. Any increase in ALLL or loan charge-offs as required by these regulatory agencies could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.

If the Company concludes that the decline in value of any of its investment securities is other-than-temporary, the Company is required to write-down the security, to reflect credit-related impairments through a charge to earnings.

The Company reviews its investment securities portfolio at each quarter-end reporting period to determine whether the fair value is below the current carrying value. When the fair value of any of the Company’s debt investment securities has declined below its carrying value, the Company is required to assess whether the decline is an OTTI. If the Company concludes that the decline is other-than-temporary, it is required to write down the value of that security to reflect the credit-related impairments through a charge to earnings. Changes in the expected cash flows of securities in its portfolio and/or prolonged price declines in future periods may result in impairment of the Company’s investment securities that is other-than-temporary, which would require a charge to earnings. Due to the complexity of the calculations and assumptions used in determining whether an asset is impaired, any impairment disclosed may not accurately reflect the actual impairment in the future. In addition, to the extent that the value of any of the Company’s investment securities is sensitive to fluctuations in interest rates, any increase in interest rates may result in a decline in the value of such investment securities.

The Company held approximately $6.3 million in capital stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Pittsburgh (“FHLB”) as of December 31, 2015. The Company must own such capital stock to qualify for membership in the Federal Home Loan Bank system which enables it to borrow funds under the FHLB advance program. If FHLB were to cease operations, the Company’s business, financial condition, liquidity, capital and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.

Changes in interest rates could reduce income, cash flows and asset values.

The Company’s earnings and cash flows are largely dependent upon its net interest income. Net interest income is the difference between interest income earned on interest-earning assets such as loans and securities and interest expense paid on interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowed funds. Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond the Company’s control, including general economic conditions and policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies and, in particular, the FRB. Changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, could influence not only the interest the Company receives on loans and securities and the amount of interest it pays on deposits and borrowings, but such changes could also affect (i) the Company’s ability to originate loans and obtain deposits, (ii) the fair value of the Company’s financial assets and liabilities, and (iii) the average duration of the Company’s mortgage-backed securities portfolio.

If the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings increase at a faster rate than the interest rates received on loans and investments, the Company’s net interest income, and therefore earnings, could be adversely affected. Earnings could also be adversely affected if the interest rates received on loans and investments fall more quickly than the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowings. Any substantial, unexpected, prolonged change in market interest rates could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company may need to raise additional capital in the future, but that capital may not be available when it is needed and on terms favorable to current shareholders.

Laws, regulations and banking regulators require the Company and Bank to maintain adequate levels of capital to support its operations. In addition, capital levels are determined by the Company’s management and Board of Directors based on capital levels that they believe are necessary to support the Company’s business operations. The Company regularly evaluates its present and future capital requirements and needs and analyzes capital raising alternatives and options. Although the Company succeeded in meeting its current regulatory capital requirements, it may need to raise additional capital in the future to support possible loan losses or potential OTTI during future periods, to meet future regulatory capital requirements or for other reasons.

The Board of Directors may determine from time to time that the Company needs to raise additional capital by issuing additional common shares or other securities. The Company is not restricted from issuing additional common shares, including securities that are convertible into or exchangeable for, or that represent the right to receive, common shares. Because the Company’s decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond its control, the Company cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of any future offerings, or the prices at which such offerings may be affected. Such offerings will likely be dilutive to common shareholders from ownership, earnings and book value perspectives. New investors also may have rights, preferences and privileges that are senior to, and that adversely affect, its then current common shareholders. Additionally, if the Company raises additional capital by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, upon liquidation, holders of the Company’s debt securities and shares of preferred shares, and lenders with respect to other borrowings, will receive distributions of the Company’s available assets prior to the holders of the Company’s common shares. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of existing shareholders or reduce the market price of the Company’s common shares, or both. Holders of the Company’s common shares are not entitled to preemptive rights or other protections against dilution.

The Company cannot assure that additional capital will be available on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit the Company’s access to the capital markets may adversely affect the Company’s capital costs and its ability to raise capital and, in turn, its liquidity. Moreover, if the Company needs to raise capital, it may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would 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 the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations.

Interruptions or security breaches of the Company’s information systems could negatively affect its financial performance or reputation.

In conducting its business, the Company relies heavily on its information systems. The Company collects and stores sensitive data, including proprietary business information and personally identifiable information of its customers and employees, in its data centers and on its networks. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to the Company’s operations and business strategy. Maintaining and protecting those systems is difficult and expensive, as is dealing with any failure, interruption or breach of those systems. Despite security measures, the Company’s information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to security breaches, cyber attacks by hackers or breaches due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any damage, failure or breach could cause an interruption in the Company’s operations. Computer break-ins, phishing and other disruptions could also jeopardize the security of information stored in and transmitted through the Company’s computer systems and network infrastructure. The occurrence of any failures, interruptions or breaches could damage the Company’s reputation, disrupt operations and the services provided to customers, cause a loss of confidence in the products and the services provided, cause the Company to incur additional expenses, result in a loss of customer business and data, result in legal claims or proceedings, result in liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, result in regulatory penalties, or expose the Company to other liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations and the Company’s competitive position.

If the Company’s information technology is unable to keep pace with growth or industry developments or if technological developments result in higher costs or less advantageous pricing, financial performance may suffer.

Effective and competitive delivery of the Company’s products and services increasingly depends on information technology resources and processes, both those provided internally as well as those provided through third party vendors. In addition to better serving customers, the effective use of technology can improve efficiency and help reduce costs. The Company’s future success will depend, in part, upon its ability to address the needs of its customers by using technology to provide products and services to enhance customer convenience, as well as to create efficiencies in its operations. There is increasing pressure to provide products and services at lower prices. This can reduce net interest income and noninterest income from fee-based products and services. In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies could require the Company to make substantial capital expenditures to modify or adapt existing products and services or develop new products and services. The Company may not be successful in introducing new products and services in response to industry trends or developments in technology, or those new products may not achieve market acceptance. Many of the Company’s competitors have greater resources to invest in technological improvements. Additionally, as technology in the financial services industry changes and evolves, keeping pace becomes increasingly complex and expensive. There can be no assurance that the Company will be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services, which could reduce its ability to compete effectively. As a result, the Company could lose business, be forced to price products and services on less advantageous terms to retain or attract customers, or be subject to cost increases.

The Company’s profitability depends significantly on economic conditions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, specifically in Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wayne Counties.

The Company’s success depends primarily on the general economic conditions in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and the specific local markets in which the Company operates. Unlike larger national or other regional banks that are more geographically diversified, the Company provides banking and financial services to customers primarily in the Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wayne County markets. The local economic conditions in these areas have a significant impact on the demand for the Company’s products and services as well as the ability of the Company’s customers to repay loans, the value of the collateral securing loans, and the stability of the Company’s deposit funding sources. A significant decline in general economic conditions, caused by inflation, recession, acts of terrorism, severe weather or natural disasters, outbreak of hostilities or other international or domestic occurrences, unemployment, changes in securities markets or other factors could impact these local economic conditions and, in turn, have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company relies on management and other key personnel and the loss of any of them may adversely affect its operations.

The Company believes each member of the senior management team is important to the Company’s success and the unexpected loss of any of these persons could impair day-to-day operations as well as its strategic direction.

The Company’s success depends, in large part, on its ability to attract and retain key people. Competition for the best people in most activities engaged in by the Company can be intense and the Company may not be able to hire people or retain them. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of the Company’s key personnel could have a material adverse impact on the Company’s business due to the loss of their skills, knowledge of the Company’s market, years of industry experience and to the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel.

The Company may be a defendant from time to time in a variety of litigation and other actions, which could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company has been and may continue to be involved from time to time in a variety of litigation matters arising out of its business. An increased number of lawsuits, including purported class action lawsuits and other consumer driven litigation, have been filed and will likely continue to be filed against financial institutions, which may involve substantial compensatory and/or punitive damages. The Company believes the risk of litigation generally increases during downturns in the national and local economies. The Company’s insurance may not cover all claims that may be asserted against it, and any claims asserted against it, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, may harm the Company’s reputation and may cause it to incur significant expense. Should the ultimate judgments or settlements in any litigation exceed the Company’s insurance coverage, they could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. In addition, the Company may not be able to obtain appropriate types or levels of insurance in the future, nor may the Company be able to obtain adequate replacement policies with acceptable terms, if at all. For additional discussion of the Company’s current legal matters, refer to Item 3, “Legal Proceedings” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting may not achieve their intended objectives.

The Company maintains disclosure controls and procedures designed to ensure the timely filing of reports as specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Company also maintains a system of internal control over financial reporting. These controls may not achieve their intended objectives. Control processes that involve human diligence and compliance, such as its disclosure controls and procedures and internal controls over financial reporting, are subject to lapses in judgment and breakdowns resulting from human failures. Controls can also be circumvented by collusion or improper management override. Because of such limitations, there are risks that material misstatements due to error or fraud may not be prevented or detected and that information may not be reported on a timely basis. If the Company’s controls are not effective, it could have a material adverse effect on its financial condition, results of operations, and market for its common stock, and could subject the Company to additional regulatory scrutiny.

Risks Related to the Company’s Common Stock

The price of the Company’s common shares may fluctuate significantly, which may make it difficult for investors to resell common shares at a time or price they find attractive.

The Company’s share price may fluctuate significantly as a result of a variety of factors, many of which are beyond its control. These factors include, in addition to those described above:

In addition, in recent years, the stock market in general has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations. This volatility has had a significant effect on the market price of securities issued by many companies, including for reasons unrelated to their operating performance. These broad market fluctuations may adversely affect the Company’s share price, notwithstanding the Company’s operating results. The Company expects that the market price of its common shares will continue to fluctuate and there can be no assurances about the levels of the market prices for its common shares.

An active public market for the Company’s common stock does not currently exist. As a result, shareholders may not be able to quickly and easily sell their common shares.

The Company’s common shares are currently quoted on OTC Markets Group, Inc. During the year ended December 31, 2015, an average of 1817 shares traded on a daily basis. There can be no assurance that an active and liquid market for the Company’s common shares will develop, or if one develops that it can be maintained. The absence of an active trading market may make it difficult to subsequently sell the Company’s common shares at the prevailing price, particularly in large quantities. For a further discussion, see Item 5- “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Shareholder Matters, and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company’s ability to pay dividends or repurchase shares is subject to limitiations.

The Company conducts its principal business operations through the Bank and the cash that it uses to pay dividends is derived from dividends paid to the Company by the Bank; therefore, its ability to pay dividends is dependent on the performance of the Bank and on the Bank’s capital requirements. The Bank’s ability to pay dividends to the Company and the Company’s ability to pay dividends to its shareholders are also limited by certain legal and regulatory restrictions.

Risks Related to Government Regulation and Accounting Pronouncements

The Company is subject to extensive government regulation, supervision and possible regulatory enforcement actions, which may subject it to higher costs and lower shareholder returns.

The banking industry is subject to extensive regulation and supervision that govern almost all aspects of its operations. The extensive regulatory framework is primarily intended to protect the federal deposit insurance fund and depositors, not shareholders. The Company and Bank are regulated and supervised by the FRB and the OCC. Compliance with applicable laws and regulations can be difficult and costly and, in some instances, may put banks at a competitive disadvantage compared to less regulated competitors such as finance companies, mortgage banking companies and leasing companies. The Company’s regulatory authorities have extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities, including with respect to the imposition of restrictions on the operation of a bank or a bank holding company, the imposition of significant fines, the ability to delay or deny merger or other regulatory applications, the classification of assets by a bank, and the adequacy of a bank’s allowance for loan losses, among other matters. The Company’s industry is facing increased regulation and scrutiny; for instance, areas such as BSA compliance (including BSA and related anti-money laundering regulations) and real estate-secured consumer lending (such as Truth-in-Lending regulations, changes in Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act regulations, implementation of licensing and registration requirements for mortgage originators and more recently, heightened regulatory attention to mortgage and foreclosure-related activities and exposures) are being confronted with escalating regulatory expectations and scrutiny. Non-compliance with laws and regulations such as these, even in cases of inadvertent non-compliance, could result in litigation, significant fines and/or sanctions. Any failure to comply with, or any change in, any applicable regulation and supervisory requirement, or change in regulation or enforcement by such authorities, whether in the form of policies, regulations, legislation, rules, orders, enforcement actions, or decisions, could have a material impact on the Company, the Bank and other affiliates, and its operations. Federal economic and monetary policy may also affect the Company’s ability to attract deposits and other funding sources, make loans and investments, and achieve satisfactory interest spreads. Any failure to comply with such regulation or supervision could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties and/or reputation damage, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, compliance with any such action could distract management’s attention from the Company’s operations, cause the Company to incur significant expenses, restrict it from engaging in potentially profitable activities and limit its ability to raise capital.

The impact of recent legislation, proposed legislation, and government programs designed to stabilize the financial markets cannot be predicted at this time, and such legislation is subject to change. In addition, the failure of financial markets to stabilize and a continuation or worsening of current financial market conditions could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and access to capital.

New or changed legislation or regulation and regulatory initiatives could adversely affect the Company through increased regulation and increased costs of doing business.

Changes in federal and state legislation and regulation may affect the Company’s operations. New and modified regulation, such as the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel III, may have unforeseen or unintended consequences on the banking industry. The Dodd-Frank Act has implemented significant changes to the U.S. financial system, including the creation of new regulatory agencies (such as the Financial Stability Oversight Council to oversee systemic risk and the CFPB to develop and enforce rules for consumer financial products), changes in retail banking regulations, and changes to deposit insurance assessments. For example, the Dodd-Frank Act has implemented new requirements with respect to “qualified mortgages” and new mortgage servicing standards that may increase costs associated with this business. For a more detailed description, see the section entitled “Business – The Bank – Consumer Financial Protection Bureau” included in Item 1 to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Additionally, final rules to implement Basel III adopted in July 2013 revise risk-based and leverage capital requirements and also limit capital distributions and certain discretionary bonuses if a banking organization does not hold a “capital conservation buffer.” The rule became effective for the Company on January 1, 2015, with some additional transition periods. This additional regulation could increase compliance costs and otherwise adversely affect operations. For a more detailed description of the final rules, see the description in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the heading “Capital Adequacy Requirements”. The potential also exists for additional federal or state laws or regulations, or changes in policy or interpretations, affecting many of the Company’s operations, including capital levels, lending and funding practices, insurance assessments, and liquidity standards. The effect of any such changes and their interpretation and application by regulatory authorities cannot be predicted, may increase the Company’s cost of doing business and otherwise affect the Company’s operations, may significantly affect the markets in which the Company does business, and could have a materially adverse effect on the Company.

The Company is also subject to the guidelines under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLBA”). The GLBA guidelines require, among other things, that each financial institution develop, implement and maintain a written, comprehensive information security program containing safeguards that are appropriate to the financial institution’s size and complexity, the nature and scope of the financial institution’s activities and the sensitivity of any customer information at issue. In recent years there also has been increasing enforcement activity in the areas of privacy, information security and data protection in the United States, including at the federal level. Compliance with these laws, rules and regulations regarding the privacy, security and protection of customer and employee data could result in higher compliance and technology costs. In addition, non-compliance could result in potentially significant fines, penalties and damage to the Company’s reputation and brand.

Changes in accounting standards could impact reported earnings.

From time to time there are changes in the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of financial statements. These changes can materially impact how the Company records and reports its financial condition and results of operations. In some instances, the Company could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in the restatement of prior period financial statements.

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

Item 2. Properties.

The Company currently conducts business from its main office located at 102 East Drinker Street, Dunmore, Pennsylvania, 18512 and from its additional 18 branches located throughout Lackawanna, Luzerne and Wayne counties. At December 31, 2015, aggregate net book value of premises and equipment was $11.2 million. With the exception of potential remodeling of certain facilities to provide for the efficient use of work space and/or to maintain an appropriate appearance, each property is considered reasonably adequate for current and anticipated needs.

Item 3. Legal Proceedings.

On August 8, 2011, the Company announced that it had received document subpoenas from the SEC.  The information requested generally related to disclosure and financial reporting by the Company and the restatement of the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009, and the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010. On January 28, 2015, the Company and the SEC entered into a settlement agreement resolving these issues related to disclosure and financial reporting and the restatements of the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009 and the quarters ended March 31, 2010 and June 30, 2010. As part of this settlement agreement, on January 30, 2015 the Company paid a civil money penalty of $175 thousand to the SEC. The Company accrued for the $175 thousand civil money penalty in its 2014 results of operations.

On May 24, 2012, a putative shareholder filed a complaint in the Court of Common Pleas for Lackawanna County (“Shareholder Derivative Suit”) against certain present and former directors and officers of the Company (the “Individual Defendants”) alleging, inter alia, breach of fiduciary duty, abuse of control, corporate waste, and unjust enrichment. The Company was named as a nominal defendant. The parties to the Shareholder Derivative Suit commenced settlement discussions and on December 18, 2013, the Court entered an Order Granting Preliminary Approval of Proposed Settlement subject to notice to shareholders. On February 4, 2014, the Court issued a Final Order and Judgment for the matter granting approval of a Stipulation of Settlement (the “Settlement”) and dismissing all claims against the Company and the Individual Defendants. As part of the Settlement, there was no admission of liability by the Individual Defendants. Pursuant to the Settlement, the Individual Defendants, without admitting any fault, wrongdoing or liability, agreed to settle the derivative litigation for $5.0 million. The $5.0 million Settlement payment was made to the Company on March 28, 2014. The Individual Defendants reserved their rights to indemnification under the Company’s Articles of Incorporation and Bylaws, resolutions adopted by the Board, the Pennsylvania Business Corporation Law and any and all rights they have against the Company’s and the Bank’s insurance carriers. In addition, in conjunction with the Settlement, the Company accrued $2.5 million related to fees and costs of the plaintiff’s attorneys, which was included in non-interest expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income for the year ended December 31, 2013. On April 1, 2014, the Company paid the $2.5 million related to fees and costs of the plaintiff’s attorneys and partial indemnification of the Individual Defendants in the amount of $2.5 million, and as such, as of December 31, 2015 $2.5 million plus accrued interest remains accrued in other liabilities related to the potential indemnification of the Individual Defendants. The Company settled any and all claims it had or may have had against Demetrius & Company, LLC, John Demetrius and Robert L. Rossi & Company in connection with the Shareholder Derivative Suit in 2014.

On September 5, 2012, Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland (“F&D”) filed an action against the Company and the Bank, as well as several current and former officers and directors of the Company, in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania. F&D has asserted a claim for the rescission of a directors’ and officers’ insurance policy and a bond that it had issued to the Company. On November 9, 2012, the Company and the Bank answered the claim and asserted counterclaims for the losses and expenses already incurred by the Company and the Bank. The Company and the other defendants are defending the claims and have opposed F&D’s requested relief by way of counterclaims, breaches of contract and bad faith claims against F&D for its failure to fulfill its obligations to the Company and the Bank under the insurance policy. At this time, the matter is in the discovery stage and the Company cannot reasonably determine the outcome or potential range of loss in connection with this matter.

On August 13, 2013, Steven Antonik, individually, as Administrator of the Estate of Linda Kluska, William R. Howells, and Louise A. Howells, on behalf of themselves and others similarly situated, filed a consumer protection class action against the Company and Bank in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas, seeking equitable, injunction and monetary relief to address an alleged pattern and practice of wrong doing by the Bank relating to the repossession and sale of the Plaintiffs’ and class members’ financed motor vehicles.  On December 17, 2015 the Honorable Margaret Moyle entered an Order outlining the primary terms of a tentative agreement to settle this matter, pending a finalized, more-detailed settlement agreement, class notice and a class fairness hearing, said Order covering both this matter and the matter involving Plaintiff Charles Saxe, II individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated. The primary terms of the tentative agreement to settle are 1) Defendants to pay the Plaintiffs’ class members, which the Defendants have stated are approximately 430 members, the total sum of $750,000; 2) Plaintiffs will release all claims against Defendants; 3) Defendants will remove to vacate any judgements against any class members arising from the vehicle loans that are the subject of these actions; 4) Defendants will remove the trade line on each class member’s credit report associated with the subject vehicle loans that are at issue in these actions for Experian, Equifax and TransUnion, providing Plaintiffs’ counsel with verification of such; 5) Defendants will verify that the aggregate amount received from class members by Defendants and its agents during the alleged unjust enrichment class period does not exceed $45,000; and 6) Defendants will waive the disputed deficiency balances relating to the subject loans of each class member and agree not to issue IRS Forms 1099-C in connection with these deficiency waivers or to sell, assign , or otherwise collect on the alleged deficiencies.

On September 17, 2013, Charles Saxe, III individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated filed a consumer class action against the Bank in the Lackawanna County Court of Common Pleas alleging violations of the Pennsylvania Uniform Commercial Code in connection with the repossession and resale of financed vehicles.  On December 17, 2015 the Honorable Margaret Moyle entered an Order outlining the primary terms of a tentative agreement to settle this matter, pending a finalized, more-detailed settlement agreement, class notice and a class fairness hearing, said Order covering both this matter and the matter involving Plaintiffs Steven Antonik, individually, as Administrator of the Estate of Linda Kluska, William R. Howells, and Louise A. Howells, on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated. The primary terms of the tentative agreement to settle are 1) Defendants to pay the Plaintiffs’ class members, which the Defendants have stated are approximately 430 members, the total sum of $750,000; 2) Plaintiffs will release all claims against Defendants; 3) Defendants will remove to vacate any judgements against any class members arising from the vehicle loans that are the subject of these actions; 4) Defendants will remove the trade line on each class member’s credit report associated with the subject vehicle loans that are at issue in these actions for Experian, Equifax and TransUnion, providing Plaintiffs’ counsel with verification of such; 5) Defendants will verify that the aggregate amount received from class members by Defendants and its agents during the alleged unjust enrichment class period does not exceed $45,000; and 6) Defendants will waive the disputed deficiency balances relating to the subject loans of each class member and agree not to issue IRS Forms 1099-C in connection with these deficiency waivers or to sell, assign , or otherwise collect on the alleged deficiencies.

On January 22, 2014, the Bank was advised by the Department of Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) that FinCEN was investigating the Bank for alleged violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”).  On May 28, 2014 the Bank was advised by the OCC that the OCC was investigating allegations that the Bank failed to file timely SARS. On November 18, 2014 both FinCEN and OCC advised the Bank that they intended on assessing civil money penalties against the Bank.  Subsequent to November 18, 2014, the Bank had been in discussions with both regulatory agencies about the alleged BSA violations.  On February 27, 2015, the Bank reached a comprehensive settlement with FinCEN and OCC to resolve the BSA allegations.  In order to settle the matter, the Bank consented to an aggregate civil money penalty assessment of $1.5 million which was accrued for at December 31, 2014 and included in non-interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2014. The Company paid the $1.5 million civil money penalty on February 27, 2015.     

The Company has been subject to tax audits and is also a party to routine litigation involving various aspects of its business, such as employment practice claims, claims to enforce liens, condemnation proceedings on properties in which the Company holds security interests, claims involving the making and servicing of real property loans and other issues incident to its business, none of which has or is expected to have a material adverse impact on the consolidated financial condition, results of operations or liquidity of the Company.

Item 4.     Mine Safety Disclosures.

Not Applicable.

PART II

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

Market Prices of Stock and Dividends Paid

Effective February 17, 2015, the Company’s common shares are quoted on the OTCQX Marketplace operated by the OTC Markets Group, Inc. under the sysmbol “FNCB.” Previous to this date, the Company’s common shares were quoted on the OTCQB Venture Marketplace operated by the OTC Markets Group, Inc. The principal market area for the Company’s shares is northeastern Pennsylvania, although shares are held by residents of other states across the country. Quarterly market highs and lows and dividends paid for each of the past two years are presented below.  These prices represent actual transactions.

Holders

As of February 29, 2016 there were approximately 1,778 holders of record of the Company’s common shares. Because many of the Company’s shares are held by brokers and other institutions on behalf of shareholders, the Company is unable to estimate the total number of shareholders represented by these record holders.

Dividends

From February 26, 2010 through September 2, 2015, as a result of the Order and Agreement, the Company suspended paying dividends For a further discussion of the Company’s dividend limitations, refer to the section entitled “Capital Analysis” included in Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Equity Compensation Plans

For more information regarding the Company’s equity compensation plans, see Part III, Item 12 “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Performance Graph

The following graph compares the cumulative total shareholder return (i.e. price change, reinvestment of cash dividends and stock dividends received) on the Company’s common shares against the cumulative total return of the NASDAQ Stock Market (U.S. Companies) Index, the SNL Bank Index for banks with $500 million to $1 billion in assets and the SNL U.S. Bank Pink for banks traded on the OTC with total assets greater than $500 million. The stock performance graph assumes that $100 was invested on December 31, 2010. The graph further assumes the reinvestment of dividends into additional shares of the same class of equity securities at the frequency with which dividends are paid on such securities during the relevant fiscal year. The yearly points marked on the horizontal axis correspond to December 31 of that year. The Company calculates each of the referenced indices in the same manner. All are market-capitalization-weighted indices, so companies judged by the market to be more important (i.e. more valuable) count for more in all indices.

First National Community Bancorp, Inc.

(*) Source: SNL Financial LC, Charlottesville, VA © 2011. SNL Securities is a research and publishing firm specializing in the collection and dissemination of data on the banking, thrift and financial services industries.

Purchase of Equity Securities by the Issuer or Affiliates Purchasers

None.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

On November 25, 2015, the Board of Directors adopted the 2015 Employee Stock Grant Plan (the “2015 Stock Grant Plan”) under which shares of common stock not to exceed 13,550 were authorized to be granted to employees. On the same date the Company granted 50 shares of the Company’s common stock to each active full and part time employee. There were 13,300 shares issued under this grant at a fair value of $5.15 per share on the date of the grant. The total cost of these grants, which was included in salary expense in the Consolidated Statements of Income, amounted to $68 thousand for the year ended December 31, 2015. No additional shares were granted under this plan. This share grant was effected without registration under the Securities Act in reliance upon Section 2(a)(3) of the Securities Act, as a non-sale distribution of securities by the Company. These shares were given to all employees of the Company as a share bonus and not as individual incentive compensation or in lieu of a cash payment, with no investment decision on the part of the recipients or receipt of value by the Company in return. There were no underwriters employed in the issuance of the securities or in connection with this transaction, and no proceeds were received by the Company for this stock grant. There have been no sales of unregistered securities during 2015.

Item 6.  Selected Financial Data

The selected consolidated financial and other data and management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations set forth below and in Item 7 hereof is derived in part from, and should be read in conjunction with, the consolidated financial statements and notes thereto contained elsewhere herein. Certain reclassifications have been made to prior years’ consolidated financial statements to conform to the current year’s presentation. Those reclassifications did not impact net income.

*** Ratio is not meaningful for 2015, 2014 and 2013.

(1) Average balances were calculated using average daily balances. Average balances for loans include non-accrual loans.

(2) Tax-equivalent adjustments were calculated using the prevailing statutory rate of 34.0 percent.

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

Management’s discussion and analysis (“MD&A”) represents an overview of the financial condition and results of operations and should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto included in Item 8 and Risk Factors detailed in Item 1A of Part I to this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The Company is in the business of providing customary retail and commercial banking services to individuals and businesses. The Company’s core market is Northeastern Pennsylvania.

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

The Company may from time to time make written or oral “forward-looking statements,” including statements contained in the Company’s filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”), in its reports to shareholders, and in other communications by the Company, which are made in good faith by the Company pursuant to the “safe harbor” provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.

These forward-looking statements include statements with respect to the Company’s beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, estimates and intentions, that are subject to significant risks and uncertainties, and are subject to change based on various factors (some of which are beyond the Company’s control). The words “may,” “could,” “should,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan” and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. The following factors, among others, could cause the Company’s financial performance to differ materially from the plans, objectives, expectations, estimates and intentions expressed in such forward-looking statements: the strength of the United States economy in general and the strength of the local economies in the Company’s markets; the effects of, and changes in trade, monetary and fiscal policies and laws, including interest rate policies of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System; inflation, interest rate, market and monetary fluctuations; the timely development of and acceptance of new products and services; the ability of the Company to compete with other institutions for business; the composition and concentrations of the Company’s lending risk and the adequacy of the Company’s reserves to manage those risks; the valuation of the Company’s investment securities; the ability of the Company to pay dividends or repurchase common shares; the ability of the Company to retain key personnel; the impact of any pending or threatened litigation against the Company; the marketability of shares of the Company and fluctuations in the value of the Company’s share price; the impact of the Company’s ability to comply with its regulatory agreements and orders; the effectiveness of the Company’s system of internal controls; the ability of the Company to attract additional capital investment; the impact of changes in financial services’ laws and regulations (including laws concerning capital adequacy, taxes, banking, securities and insurance); the impact of technological changes and security risks upon the Company’s information technology systems; changes in consumer spending and saving habits; the nature, extent, and timing of governmental actions and reforms, and the success of the Company at managing the risks involved in the foregoing and other risks and uncertainties, including those detailed in the Company’s filings with the SEC.

The Company cautions that the foregoing list of important factors is not all inclusive. Readers are also cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements, which reflect management’s analysis only as of the date of this report, even if subsequently made available by the Company on its website or otherwise. The Company does not undertake to update any forward-looking statement, whether written or oral, that may be made from time to time by or on behalf of the Company to reflect events or circumstances occurring after the date of this report.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

In preparing the consolidated financial statements, management has made estimates, judgments and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the consolidated statements of condition and results of operations for the periods indicated. Actual results could differ significantly from those estimates.

The Company’s accounting policies are fundamental to understanding management’s discussion and analysis of its financial condition and results of operations. Management has identified the policies on the determination of the allowance for loan and lease losses (“ALLL”), securities’ valuation and impairment evaluation, and the valuation of other real estate owned (“OREO”) and income taxes to be critical, as management is required to make subjective and/or complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available.

The judgments used by management in applying the critical accounting policies discussed below may be affected by a further and prolonged deterioration in the economic environment, which may result in changes to future financial results. Specifically, subsequent evaluations of the loan portfolio, in light of the factors then prevailing, may result in significant changes in the ALLL in future periods, and the inability to collect on outstanding loans could result in increased loan losses. In addition, the valuation of certain securities in the Company’s investment portfolio could be negatively impacted by illiquidity or dislocation in marketplaces resulting in significantly depressed market prices thus leading to impairment losses.

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

Management evaluates the credit quality of the Company’s loan portfolio on an ongoing basis, and performs a formal review of the adequacy of the ALLL on a quarterly basis. The ALLL is established through a provision for loan losses charged to earnings and is maintained at a level management considers adequate to absorb estimated probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the evaluation date. Loans, or portions of loans, determined by management to be uncollectible are charged off against the ALLL, while recoveries of amounts previously charged off are credited to the ALLL.

Determining the amount of the ALLL is considered a critical accounting estimate because it requires significant judgment and the use of estimates related to the amount and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on pools of homogeneous loans based on historical loss experience, qualitative factors, and consideration of current economic trends and conditions, all of which may be susceptible to significant change. Banking regulators, as an integral part of their examination of the Company, also review the ALLL. Such regulators may require, based on their judgments about information available to them at the time of their examination, that certain loan balances be charged off or require that adjustments be made to the ALLL. Additionally, the ALLL is determined, in part, by the composition and size of the loan portfolio.

The ALLL consists of two components, a specific component and a general component. The specific component relates to loans that are classified as impaired. For such loans, an allowance is established when the discounted cash flows, collateral value or observable market price of the impaired loan is lower than the carrying value of that loan. The general component covers all other loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted by qualitative factors. The general reserve component of the ALLL is based on pools of unimpaired loans segregated by loan segment and risk rating categories of “Pass”, “Special Mention” or “Substandard and Accruing.” Historical loss factors and various qualitative factors are applied based on the risk profile in each risk rating category to determine the appropriate reserve related to those loans. Substandard loans on nonaccrual status above the $100 thousand loan relationship threshold and all loans considered troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”) are classified as impaired.

See Note 2-“Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” and Note 5-“Loans” of the notes to consolidated financial statements included in Item 8-“Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information about the ALLL.

Securities Valuation and Evaluation for Impairment

Management utilizes various inputs to determine the fair value of its investment portfolio. To the extent they exist, unadjusted quoted market prices in active markets (Level 1) or quoted prices for similar assets or models using inputs that are observable, either directly or indirectly (Level 2) are utilized to determine the fair value of each investment in the portfolio. In the absence of observable inputs or if markets are illiquid, valuation techniques are used to determine fair value of any investments that require inputs that are both unobservable and significant to the fair value measurement (Level 3). For Level 3 inputs, valuation techniques are based on various assumptions, including, but not limited to, cash flows, discount rates, adjustments for nonperformance and liquidity, and liquidation values. A significant degree of judgment is involved in valuing investments using Level 3 inputs. The use of different assumptions could have a positive or negative effect on the consolidated statements of financial condition or results of operations. See Note 6-“Securities” and Note 7-“Fair Value Measurements” of the notes to consolidated financial statements included in Item 8 – “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information about the Company’s securities valuation techniques.

On a quarterly basis, management evaluates individual investment securities classified as held-to-maturity and available-for-sale having unrealized losses to determine whether or not the security is other-than-temporarily-impaired (“OTTI”). The analysis of OTTI requires the use of various assumptions, including but not limited to, the length of time an investment’s fair value is less than book value, the severity of the investment’s decline, any credit deterioration of the issuer, whether management intends to sell the security, and whether it is more-likely-than-not that the Company will be required to sell the security prior to recovery of its amortized cost basis. Debt investment securities deemed to be OTTI are written down by the impairment related to the estimated credit loss, and the non-credit related impairment loss is recognized in other comprehensive income. The Company did not recognize OTTI charges on investment securities for years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 within the consolidated statements of income.

See Note 2-“Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” and Note 4-“Securities” of the notes to consolidated financial statements included in Item 8-“Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information about valuation of securities.

Other Real Estate Owned

OREO consists of property acquired through foreclosure, abandonment or conveyance of deed in-lieu of foreclosure of a loan, and bank premises that is no longer used for operation or for future expansion. OREO is held for sale and is initially recorded at fair value less costs to sell at the date of acquisition or transfer, which establishes a new cost basis. Upon acquisition of the property through foreclosure or deed-in-lieu of foreclosure, any write-down to fair value less estimated selling costs is charged to the ALLL. The determination is made on an individual asset basis. Bank premises no longer used for operations or future expansion are transferred to OREO at fair value less estimated selling costs with any related write-down included in non-interest expense unless conditions warrant an adjustment to value, as determined by management. Subsequent to acquisition, valuations are periodically performed by management and the assets are carried at the lower of cost basis or fair value less cost to sell. Fair value is determined through external appraisals, current letters of intent, broker price opinions or executed agreements of sale. Costs relating to the development and improvement of the OREO properties may be capitalized, while holding period costs and any subsequent changes to the valuation allowance are charged to expense as incurred.

Income Taxes

The objectives of accounting for income taxes are to recognize the amount of taxes payable or refundable for the current year and deferred tax liabilities and assets for the future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in an entity’s financial statements or tax returns. Judgment is required in assessing the future tax consequences of events that have been recognized in the Company’s consolidated financial statements or tax returns. Fluctuations in the actual outcome of these future tax consequences could impact the Company’s consolidated financial condition or results of operations.

The Company records an income tax provision or benefit based on the amount of tax, including alternative minimum tax, currently payable or receivable and the change in deferred tax assets and liabilities. Deferred income taxes reflect the net tax effects of temporary differences between the carrying amounts of assets and liabilities for financial and tax reporting purposes. Management conducts quarterly assessments of all available positive and negative evidence to determine the amount of deferred tax assets that will more likely than not be realized. A valuation allowance is established for deferred tax assets and records a charge to income if management determines, based on available evidence at the time the determination is made, that it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. In evaluating the need for a valuation allowance, management considers past operating results, estimates of future taxable income based on approved business plans, future capital requirements and ongoing tax planning strategies. This evaluation process involves significant management judgment about assumptions that are subject to change from period to period depending on the related circumstances. The recognition of deferred tax assets requires management to make significant assumptions and judgments about future earnings, the periods in which items will impact taxable income, future corporate tax rates, and the application of inherently complex tax laws. The use of different estimates can result in changes in the amounts of deferred tax items recognized, which can result in equity and earnings volatility because such changes are reported in current period earnings. On December 31, 2010, management established a valuation allowance equal to 100 percent of the Company’s net deferred tax asset, excluding deferred tax assets and liabilities related to unrealized holding gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, and has maintained such an allowance through December 31, 2014. As part of its evaluation conducted as of December 31, 2015, management reviewed all the positive and negative evidence available at that time and concluded that significant positive evidence outweighed any negative evidence and the valuation allowance previously established for the Company’s deferred tax assets should be reversed, except for the amount established for charitable contribution carryovers.

In connection with determining the income tax provision or benefit, the Company considers maintaining liabilities for uncertain tax positions and tax strategies that management believes contain an element of uncertainty. Periodically, the Company evaluates each of its tax positions and strategies to determine whether a liability for uncertain tax benefits is required. As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company determined that it did not have any uncertain tax positions or tax strategies and that no liability was required to be recorded.

See Note 2-“Summary of Significant Accounting Policies” and Note 13-“Income Taxes” of the notes to consolidated financial statements included in Item 8-“Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” to this Annual Report on Form 10-K for additional information about the reversal of the valuation allowance for deferred tax assets and the accounting for income taxes.

New Authoritative Accounting Guidance

Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2014-04, Receivables-Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors (Subtopic 310-40): “Reclassification of Residential Real Estate Collateralized Consumer Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure,” clarifies that an in substance repossession or foreclosure occurs, and a creditor is considered to have received physical possession of residential real estate property collateralizing a consumer mortgage loan, upon either (a) the creditor obtaining legal title to residential real estate property upon completion of a foreclosure or (b) the borrower conveying all interest in the residential real estate property to the creditor to satisfy that loan through completion of a deed in lieu of foreclosure or through a similar legal agreement. Additionally, the amendments require interim and annual disclosure of both the amount of foreclosed residential real estate property held by the creditor and the recorded investment in consumer mortgage loans collateralized by residential real estate property that are in the process of foreclosure according to local requirements of the applicable jurisdiction. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2015 did not have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2014-08, Presentation of Financial Statements (Topic 205) and Property, Plant and Equipment (Topic 360): “Reporting Discontinued Operations and Disclosures of Disposals of Components of an Entity,” changes the criteria for reporting a discontinued operation. Under the new guidance, a disposal of a component of an entity or group of components of an entity is required to be reported in discontinued operations if the disposal represents a strategic shift that has (or will have) a major effect on the entity’s operations and financial results. This new guidance reduces complexity by removing the complex and extensive implementation guidance and illustrations that are necessary to apply the current definition of a discontinued operation. The new guidance also requires expanded disclosures about discontinued operations that will provide users with more information about the assets, liabilities, revenues and expenses of a discontinued operation and will require pre-tax income attributable to a disposal of a significant part of an organization that does not qualify for discontinued operations reporting, which will provide users with information about the ongoing trends in a reporting organization’s results from continuing operations. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2015 did not have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2014-11, Transfers and Servicing (Topic 860): “Repurchase-to-Maturity Transactions, Repurchase Financings, and Disclosures,” changes the accounting for repurchase-to-maturity transactions and repurchase financing arrangements by aligning the accounting for these transactions with the accounting for other typical repurchase agreements. Going forward, these transactions would all be accounted for as secured borrowings. The new guidance eliminates sale accounting for repurchase-to-maturity transactions and supersedes the guidance under which a transfer of a financial assets and a contemporaneous repurchase financing could be accounted for on a combined basis as a forward arrangement, which has resulted in outcomes referred to as off-balance sheet accounting. ASU 2014-11 also requires a new disclosure for transactions economically similar to repurchase agreements in which the transferor retains substantially all of the exposure to the economic return on the transferred financial assets throughout the term of the transaction, and requires expanded disclosure about the nature of the collateral pledged in repurchase agreements and similar transactions accounted for as secured borrowings. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2015 did not have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2014-14, Receivables – Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors (Subtopic 310-40): “Classification of Certain Government-Guaranteed Mortgage Loans Upon Foreclosure,” requires that a mortgage loan be derecognized and that a separate other receivable be recognized upon foreclosure if the following conditions are met: (1) the loan has a government guarantee that is not separable from the loan before foreclosure; (2) at the time of foreclosure, the creditor has the intent to convey the real estate property to the guarantor and make a claim on the guarantee, and the creditor has the ability to recover under that claim; and (3) at the time of foreclosure, any amount of the claim that is determined on the basis of the fair value of the real estate is fixed. Upon foreclosure, the separate other receivable should be measured based on the amount of the loan balance (principal and interest) expected to be recovered from the guarantor. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2015 did not have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company

Accounting Guidance to be Adopted in Future Periods

ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): Section A, “Summary and Amendments That Create Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) and Other Assets and Deferred Costs-Contract with Customers (Subtopic 340-40);” Section B, “Conforming Amendments to Other Topics and Subtopics in the Codification and Status Tables;” and Section C, “Background Information and Basis for Conclusions,” provides a robust framework for addressing revenue recognition issues, upon its effective date, and replaces almost all existing revenue recognition guidance, including industry specific guidance, in current GAAP. The core principle of ASU 2014-09 is for companies to recognize revenue to depict the transfer of goods or services to customers in amounts that reflect the consideration to which the company expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 will also result in enhanced interim and annual disclosures, both qualitative and quantitative, about revenue in order to help financial statement users understand the nature, amount, timing and uncertainty of revenue and related cash flows. ASU 2014-09 is effective in annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2016 and the interim periods within that year for public business entities, not-for-profit entities that have issued, or are conduit bond obligors for, securities that are traded, listed or quoted on an exchange or over-the-counter market and employee benefit plans that file or furnish financial statements to the SEC. On August 12, 2015, the FASB issued ASU 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606): “Deferral of the Effective Date,” which defers the adoption of ASU 2014-09 for one year for all entities. Accordingly, the Company will adopt this guidance on January 1, 2018 in accordance with ASU 2015-14, and is currently evaluating the effect this guidance may have on its operating results or financial position.

ASU 2014-12, Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): “Accounting for Share-Based Payments When the Terms of an Award Provide that a Performance Target Could be Achieved after the Requisite Service Period,” requires a performance target that affects vesting and that can be achieved after the requisite service period to be treated as a performance condition. To account for such awards, an entity should apply existing guidance as it relates to awards with performance conditions that affect vesting. As such, the performance target should not be reflected in estimating the grant-date fair value of the award. Compensation cost should be recognized in the period in which it becomes probable that the performance target will be achieved and should represent compensation cost attributable to the period(s) for which the requisite service already has been rendered. If the performance target becomes probable of being achieved before the end of the requisite service period, the remaining unrecognized compensation cost should be recognized prospectively over the remaining requisite service periods. The total amount of compensation cost should reflect the number of awards that are expected to vest and should be adjusted to reflect those awards that ultimately vest. ASU 2014-12 is effective for annual periods and interim periods within those annual periods beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2014-15, Presentation of Financial Statements – Going Concern (Subtopic 205-40): “Disclosure of Uncertainties about an Entity’s Ability to Continue as a Going Concern,” defines management’s responsibility to evaluate whether there is substantial doubt about an entity’s ability to continue as a going concern and provide guidance for related footnote disclosures. ASU 2014-15 requires an entity’s management to assess the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern by incorporating and expanding upon certain principles that are currently in U.S. auditing standards. Specifically ASU 2014-15: (1) provides a definition of the term substantial doubt; (2) requires an evaluation as to whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the entity’s ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date the financial statements are issued (or within one year after the date that the financial statements are available to be issued when applicable); (3) provides principles for considering the mitigating effect of management’s plans; (4) requires certain disclosures when substantial doubt is alleviated; and (5) require an express statement and other disclosures when substantial doubt is not alleviated. ASU 2014-15 is effective for annual periods ending after December 15, 2016, and for annual periods and interim periods thereafter. Early application is permitted. The adoption of this guidance on December 31, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2015-01, Income Statement – Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20): “Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items,” will alleviate uncertainty for preparers, auditors and regulators because auditors and regulators will no longer be required to evaluate whether a preparer presented an unusual and/or infrequent item appropriately. Although ASU 2015-01 eliminates the concept of extraordinary items, the presentation and disclosure guidance for items that are unusual in nature or infrequent in occurrence has been retained and has been expanded to include items that are both unusual in nature or infrequent in occurrence. The nature and financial effects of each event or transaction is required to be presented as a separate component of income from continuing operations or, alternatively, in the notes to the financial statements. ASU 2015-01 is effective for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption of this guidance is permitted provided that the guidance is applied from the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2015-02, Consolidation (Topic 810): “Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis,” improves targeted areas of the consolidation guidance and reduces the number of consolidation models. The new consolidation standard changes the way reporting enterprises evaluate whether (a) they should consolidate limited partnerships and similar entities, (b) fees paid to a decision maker or service provider are variable interests in a variable interest entity (“VIE”), and (c) variable interests in a VIE held by related parties of the reporting enterprise require the reporting enterprise to consolidate the VIE. It also eliminates the VIE consolidation model based on majority exposure to variability that applied to certain investment companies and similar entities. ASU 2015-02 is effective for public entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2015-03, Interest – Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): “Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs,” more closely aligns the presentation of debt issuance costs under U.S. GAAP with the presentation under comparable IFRS standards. Under ASU 2015-03, debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability will no longer be recorded as a separate asset, but will be presented on the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the debt liability, similar to the presentation of debt discounts. The costs will continue to be amortized to interest expense using the effective interest method. ASU 2015-03 is effective for public entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015, and requires retrospective application to all prior periods presented in the financial statements. Early adoption of this guidance is permitted. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2015-05, Intangibles – Goodwill and Other Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): “Customer’s Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement,” provides explicit guidance on a customer’s accounting for fees paid in a cloud computing environment. Specifically, the amendments in this ASU provide guidance to customers about whether a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license. If a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, then the customer should account for the software license element of the arrangement consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses. If a cloud computing arrangement does not include a software license, the customer should account for the arrangement as a service contract. ASU 2015-05 is effective for public entities for fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2015. Early adoption of this guidance is permitted. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2016 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2016-01, Financial Instruments – Overall (Subtopic 825-10): “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities” requires all equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in the fair value recognized through net income (other than those accounted for under equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee). The amendments in this Update also require an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments. In addition, this ASU eliminates the requirement to disclose the fair value of financial instruments measured at amortized cost for entities that are not public business entities and the requirement to disclose the method(s) and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet for public business entities. ASU 2016-01 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 for public entities. The adoption of this guidance on January 1, 2018 is not expected to have a material effect on the operating results or financial position of the Company.

ASU 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842): “Leases” will require organizations that lease assets to recognize on the balance sheet the assets and liabilities for the rights and obligations created by those leases with lease terms of more than 12 months. Consistent with current GAAP, the recognition, measurement and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease by the lessee will primarily depend on its classification as a finance or operating lease. However, unlike current GAAP, which requires only capital leases to be recognized on the balance sheet, the new ASU will require both types of leases to be recognized on the balance sheet. ASU 2016-02 will also require disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand the amount, timing and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases. The new disclosures will include both qualitative and quantitative requirements that provide additional information about the amounts recorded in the financial statements. ASU 2016-02 is effective with fiscal years, and interim periods within those fiscal years, beginning after December 15, 2018 for public entities. Accordingly, the Company will adopt this guidance on January 1, 2019, and is currently evaluating the effect this guidance may have on its operating results or financial position.

EXECUTIVE OVERVIEW

The following overview should be read in conjunction with this Management’s Discussion and Analysis in its entirety.

Results of Operations

The year ended December 31, 2015 was a successful and pivotal year for the Company from not only a profitability standpoint, but a regulatory, strategic and operational standpoint as well. The Company reported record earnings in 2015 of $35.8 million, or $2.17 per diluted common share, an increase of $22.4 million, or 167.1%, compared to $13.4 million, or $0.81 per diluted common share, in 2014. The strong earnings performance was impacted by the reversal of the deferred tax asset (“DTA”) valuation allowance. The Company’s earnings performance in 2015 was also impacted by a $5.1 million, or 15.2%, reduction in non-interest expense, a $0.9 million, or 3.3%, increase in net interest income, a $7.1 million, or 47.7%, decrease in non-interest income and a $4.5 million, or 77.1%, decrease in the credit for loan and lease losses. Return on average assets and return on average shareholders’ equity equaled 3.57% and 63.24%, respectively, in 2015, compared to 1.38% and 29.50%, respectively, in 2014. For the three months ended December 31, 2015, return on average assets and return on average shareholders’ equity were 10.99% and 192.68%, respectively, compared to (0.01)% and (0.24)%, respectively, for the same three months of 2014. The Company did not pay any dividends during the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014.

Release of Regulatory Enforcement Actions and Improved Risk Profile

On September 8, 2015, the Company was notified by the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia (the “Reserve Bank”) that effective September 2, 2015 it was released from the Written Agreement it had been under with the Reserve Bank since November 24, 2010. Previously, on March 25, 2015, the OCC notified First National Community Bank, the Company’s wholly-owned subsidiary (the “Bank”), that it was fully and completely released from the Consent Order it entered into with the OCC in September 2010. These releases signify that the Reserve Bank and OCC have determined that the Company and the Bank have met all of the requirements mandated by the Written Agreement and Consent Order.

The release of regulatory enforcement actions, coupled with an improved risk profile, directly resulted in reductions in certain noninterest expenses, specifically regulatory assessments and insurance expense which had been elevated due to operating under the Consent Order and Written Agreement. Regulatory assessments, which include FDIC insurance and OCC assessments, decreased $0.9 million, or 47.3%, while insurance expense decreased $0.3 million, or 30.7%, comparing 2015 and 2014.

In addition, while operating under the Consent Order, the Company was prohibited from using brokered deposits as a source of liquidity. After the release from the Consent Order, the Company began utilizing this lower-costing funding alternative in the second quarter of 2015.

Management’s Focus in 2015

In 2015, management developed strategies and initiatives focused on maximizing profitability and taxable income generation in order to facilitate the reversal of the DTA valuation allowance, and improving customer service and creating efficiencies through the conversion of the Bank’s core operating system. These initiatives, which are discussed in further detail in this MD&A, involved, but are not limited to, the following:

Balance Sheet Profile

Total assets increased $0.1 billion, or 12.4%, to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2015 from $1.0 billion at December 31, 2014. Net loans grew $66.2 million, or 10.0%, which reflected strong demand for both commercial and consumer loan products. In addition, available-for-sale securities increased $34.8 million, or 15.9%. The balance sheet increase also reflected the change in the DTA valuation allowance in the amount of $30.0 million. Total deposits increased $26.2 million, or 3.3%, to $821.5 million at December 31, 2015 from $795.3 million at the end of 2014. Specifically, non-interest-bearing demand deposits increased $30.5 million, or 24.6%, while interest-bearing deposits decreased $4.3 million, or 0.6%. The increase in non-interest bearing demand deposits primarily reflected the positive balance fluctuations of several large commercial customer relationships. The decrease in interest-bearing deposits was largely related to lower deposit balances of the Company’s municipal customers due to a state budget impasse, and the planned runoff of higher-costing certificates of deposit generated through a national deposits listing service. These decreases were partially offset by the attainment of a large commercial deposit relationship. Due to their lower cost, the Company increased its utilization of FHLB borrowings as an alternative funding source of liquidity by $74.6 million or 121.9%. This was the primary factor leading to a $63.6 million, or 65.9%, increase in total borrowed funds. Partially offsetting the increase in FHLB advances was the $11.0 million principal prepayment of the Company’s subordinated debentures.

Impacted by the DTA valuation allowance reversal, total shareholders’ equity improved $34.8 million, or 67.7%, to $86.2 million at December 31, 2015 from $51.4 million at the end of 2014. Net income for 2015 of $35.8 million, which included an income tax benefit of $27.8 million related to the reversal of the DTA valuation allowance, was the primary factor leading to the Company’s improved capital position.

At December 31, 2015, the Company’s total risk-based capital ratio and the Tier 1 leverage ratio were 11.75% and 7.27%, respectively. The respective ratios for the Bank at December 31, 2015 were 13.79% and 9.79%. The ratios for both the Company and the Bank exceeded the 10.00% and 5.00% required to be well capitalized under the prompt corrective action provisions of the Basel III capital framework for U.S. Banking organizations, which became effective for the Company and the Bank on January 1, 2015.

Looking Ahead to 2016

For 2016, management plans to utilize the Company’s improved capital position to reduce its leverage and enhance shareholder value. On January 29, 2016, the Company announced that the board of directors authorized the payment on March 1, 2016 of all interest that the Company had previously been deferring on the Notes. The aggregate payments totaling $10.8 million represent interest accrued and deferred on the Notes from September 1, 2010 through May 31, 2015.

Also on January 29, 2016, the Company announced that the board of directors had declared a first quarter dividend of $0.02 per share on its common stock, payable March 15, 2016 to shareholders of record March 1, 2016. The dividend represents a 1.53% annualized yield based on the the closing stock price of the Company’s common stock on December 31, 2015.

In addition, the Company is focused on developing strategies aimed at building on accomplishments achieved in 2015 to improve long-term financial performance, creating process efficiencies post core conversion, and increasing the level of core deposits through collaboration between the Company’s retail and commercial banking units and instituting a governmental banking unit in 2016.

Summary of Performance

Net Interest Income

2015 compared to 2014

Net interest income is the difference between (i) interest income, interest and fees on interest-earning assets, and (ii) interest expense, interest paid on the Company’s deposits and borrowed funds. Net interest income represents the largest component of the Company’s operating income and, as such, is the primary determinant of profitability. Net interest income is impacted by variations in the volume, rate and composition of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, changes in general market rates and the level of non-performing assets. Interest income is shown on a fully tax-equivalent basis and is calculated by adjusting tax-free interest using a marginal tax rate of 34.0% in order to equate the yield to that of taxable interest rates.

Tax-equivalent net interest income in 2015 was $28.1 million, a decrease of $0.1 million from $28.2 million in 2014. Tax-equivalent interest income decreased $1.4 million, which was almost entirely offset by a $1.3 million reduction in interest expense.Tax-equivalent interest income was negatively impacted by a continued decline in loan yields and the sell off of tax-free securities and reinvestment into taxable securities, partially offset by higher loan volumes. The decrease in interest expense largely reflected the 44.0% partial prepayment and the modification of the interest rate of the Company’s Notes, which had a positive effect on funding costs. In addition, the Company’s cost of funds was also favorably impacted by reinstituting the use of lower-costing brokered deposits, including CDARs, as a source of funding.

The Company’s tax-equivalent interest margin compressed 9 basis points to 2.99% in 2015 from 3.08% in 2014. Tax-equivalent net interest margin, a key measurement used in the banking industry to measure income from earning assets relative to the cost to fund those assets, is calculated by dividing tax-equivalent net interest income by average interest-earning assets. Rate spread, the difference between the average yield on interest-earning assets and the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities shown on a fully tax-equivalent basis, was 2.89% for the year ended December 31, 2015, a decrease of 6 basis points compared to 2.95% for the year ended December 31, 2014.

Tax-equivalent interest income was decreased $1.4 million, or 4.0%, to $32.9 million in 2015 from $34.3 million in 2014. Tax-equivalent interest income was significantly impacted by the repositioning of the investment portfolio from tax-exempt obligations of state and political subdivisions to taxable investments. As a result, the average balance of tax-exempt investments decreased $37.9 million, or 94.0%, to $2.4 million in 2015 from $40.3 million in 2014, which caused a $2.6 million corresponding decrease to tax-equivalent interest income. The average balance of taxable investments increased $45.1 million, or 25.0%, but was only able to mitigate the decrease by $1.1 million. The tax-equivalent yield on the investment portfolio decreased 71 basis points from 3.15% in 2014 to 2.44% in 2015. However, a 12 basis point increase in the yield on taxable investment securities more than offset the effects of a 25 basis point decrease in the yield on tax-exempt investment securities. Overall, changes in the volumes and rates on the investment portfolio resulted in a $1.4 million decrease in tax-equivalent interest income in 2015.

With regard to the loan portfolio, the Company experienced strong loan demand in 2015, which resulted in a $30.3 million, or 4.5%, increase in average total loans to $696.6 million in 2015 compared to $666.3 million in 2014. The average loan growth resulted in additional tax-equivalent interest income of $1.2 million. However, this additional interest income was entirely offset by a 17 basis point decline in the tax-equivalent yield on the loan portfolio to 3.93% in 2015 compared to 4.10% in 2014, which caused a corresponding decrease in tax-equivalent interest income of $1.2 million. The decrease in loan yields reflected competitive pressures for commercial loans within the Company’s market area and current promotions involving short-term residential mortgage products and indirect auto loans.

Almost entirely offsetting the decrease in tax-equivalent interest income was a $1.3 million, or 21.9%, decrease in interest expense to $4.8 million in 2015 from $6.1 million in 2014. The decrease in interest expense was driven primarily by a 19 basis point decrease in the Company’s cost of funds to 0.61% in 2015 compared to 0.80% in 2014, which resulted in a $1.4 million corresponding decrease in interest expense due to change in rates. Specifically, the modification of the interest rate on the subordinated debentures from 9.0% to 4.5% had the greatest impact on interest expense, as it was the leading factor driving a 116 basis point decrease in the cost of borrowed funds to 2.01% in 2015 from 3.17% in 2014. The decrease in borrowing costs resulted in a $1.2 million reduction in interest expense. In addition, the Company’s cost of deposits decreased 8 basis points to 0.39% in 2015 from 0.47% in 2014, which resulted from decreases in the cost of time deposits greater than $100,000 and other time, paritially offset by an increase in the average rate paid for interest-bearing demand deposits. Changes in the average deposit rates resulted in a $0.2 million decrease in interest expense.

Average interest-bearing liabilities increased $11.0 million, or 1.4%, to $782.5 million in 2015 from $771.5 million in 2014. Specifically, a $14.3 million, or 15.2%, increase in average borrowed funds, resulted in additional interest expense of $0.4 million. The additional interest from borrowed funds was almost entirely offset by a $0.3 million reduction in interest expenses resulting from a $3.2 million decrease in average interest-bearing deposits. One of the Company’s ALCO initiatives in 2015 included the replacement of higher-costing certificates of deposit originated through a national deposit listing service and maturing certificates of deposit bearing higher interest rates with lower-costing brokered deposits and FHLB of Pittsburgh advances.

2014 compared to 2013

Comparing the years ended December 31, 2014 and 2013, tax-equivalent net interest income was stable, decreasing only $26 thousand, or 0.09%. The Company’s tax-equivalent net interest margin contracted 13 basis points to 3.08% in 2014 from 3.21% in 2013,while the rate spread decreased 13 basis points to 2.95% in 2014 compared to 3.08% in 2013. The Company’s net interest margin and rate spread were impacted by several strategic tax planning and ALCO initiatives in 2014, as well as an ongoing challenging rate environment and competitive pressures that continued to impact loan pricing.

In 2014, management continued tax planning strategies designed to generate taxable income and reduce the amount of credit and concentration risk within the investment portfolio. Accordingly, management continued repositioning the investment portfolio by selling the majority of the Company’s tax-exempt obligations of state and political subdivisions and replacing them with taxable obligations of U.S. government and government-sponsored agencies including collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”), residential mortgage-backed securities and single-maturity bonds. The effect of this repositioning was the primary factor leading to a $534 thousand, or 7.1%, decrease in tax-equivalent interest income genereated from the investment portfolio.

Despite increased demand for the Company’s loan products, competition within its market area for loans escalated, which along with the already challenging rate environment, forced loan yields down. In addition, one of the Company’s niche markets is indirect auto lending. Demand for these loans increased in 2014 due to several promotions directed at the Company’s automobile dealer customers. However, rates offered on consumer automobile loans are generally lower than those offered on other types of loan products offered to commercial customers.

Tax-equivalent interest income decreased $1.1 million, or 3.0%, to $34.3 million in 2014 from $35.4 million in 2013. The repositioning of the investment portfolio accounted for $534 thousand, or 50.6%, of the overall decrease in tax-equivalent interest income. In addition, the tax-equivalent yield on the loan portfolio decreased 27 basis points from 4.37% in 2013 to 4.10% in 2014, which resulted in a corresponding decrease in tax-equivalent interest income of $1.8 million. Specifically, the yield on taxable loans decreased 27 basis points, while the yield on tax-exempt loans fell 37 basis points, and accounted for corresponding decreases in interest income of $1.6 million and $147 thousand, respectively. Partially offsetting this decrease due to loan yields was a $29.9 million, or 4.7%, increase in average total loans to $666.3 million in 2014 from $636.5 million in 2013. The growth in average loans resulted in an increase in tax-equivalent interest income of $1.3 million.

However, the effects of the securities portfolio repositioning and declining loan yields was almost entirely mitigated by a $1.0 million, or 14.3%, reduction in interest expense, which resulted primarily from the planned replacement of maturing certificates of deposit with lower-costing advances from the FHLB. Overall, the Company’s cost of funds decreased 14 basis points to 0.80% in 2014 from 0.94% in 2013. The decrease in funding costs resulted in a $1.8 million decrease in interest expense. Partially offsetting the reduction in interest expense due to changes in rates was a $5.8 million, or 0.8%, increase in average interest-bearing liabilities to $771.5 million in 2014 from $765.7 million in 2013.

Total average time deposits decreased $49.0 million, or 15.4%. Of the total decrease in average time deposits, $25.1 million, or 51.2%, resulted from a decrease in average time deposits generated through QwickRate®, a national deposit listing service. In addition, the cost of time deposits decreased 12 basis points to 0.99% in 2014 from 1.11% in 2013, as these rate-sensitive deposits continued to runoff at maturing rates that were higher than current rates. The decrease in volume and cost of time deposits resulted in a combined decrease in interest expense of $0.8 million. Average borrowed funds increased $33.5 million, or 55.5%, to $93.7 million in 2014 from $60.2 million in 2013. The increase in borrowed funds was entirely attributable to an increase in advances through the FHLB of Pittsburgh and resulted in additional interest expense of $1.3 million. However, this was more than entirely offset by a 183 basis point reduction in the cost of borrowed funds, which resulted in a corresponding decrease in interest expense of $1.3 million. Changes in the volumes and rates paid for borrowed funds resulted in a combined net decrease in interest expense of $45 thousand.

Interest-bearing demand deposits and savings deposits averaged $18.5 million and $2.8 million higher in 2014 as compared to 2013, respectively, while the cost of interest-bearing demand deposits and savings accounts each decreased 4 basis points. The changes in volumes and rates for interest-bearing demand deposits and savings accounts netted a combined decrease in interest expense of $139 thousand.

 Non-accrual loans

The interest income that would have been earned on non-accrual and restructured loans outstanding at December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 in accordance with their original terms approximated $406 thousand, $406 thousand and $572 thousand, respectively. Interest income on impaired loans of $258 thousand, $235 thousand, and $366 thousand was recognized based on payments received in 2015, 2014 and 2013.

The following table reflects the components of net interest income for each of the three years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:

Summary of Net Interest Income

Rate Volume Analysis

The most significant impact on net income between periods is derived from the interaction of changes in the volume and rates earned or paid on interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities. The volume of earning assets, specifically loans and investments, compared to the volume of interest-bearing liabilities represented by deposits and borrowings, combined with the spread, produces the changes in net interest income between periods.  Components of interest income and interest expense are presented on a tax-equivalent basis using the statutory federal income tax rate of 34%.

The following table summarizes the effect that changes in volumes of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the interest rates earned and paid on these assets and liabilities have on net interest income comparing years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014. The net change or mix component attributable to the combined impact of rate and volume changes has been allocated proportionately to the change due to volume and the change due to rate.

Net Interest Income Changes Due to Rate and Volume