HV Bancorp, Inc. - Quarter Report: 2017 December (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

FORM 10-Q

(Mark One)

For the quarterly period ended December 31, 2017

OR

For the transition period from   to                to           

Commission file number: 001-37981

HV BANCORP, INC.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

3501 Masons Mill Road Suite 401 Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania  19006

(Address of Principal Executive Offices and Zip Code)

(267) 280-4000

(Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Not applicable

(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)

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 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    ☒  Yes    ☐  No

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

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

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

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer's classes of common stock, as of the latest practicable date:  As of February 10, 2018, there were 2,182,125 outstanding shares of the issuer’s common stock.

1

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1 – Consolidated Financial Statements – Unaudited

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017 (Dollars in thousands)

See Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

1

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Income for the Three and Six Months Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016; (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

See Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

2

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Three and Six Months Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (Dollars in thousands)

See Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

3

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Shareholders’ Equity for the Six Months Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)

See Notes to the Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

4

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Six Months Ended December 31, 2017 and 2016 (Dollars in thousands)

See Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

5

HV BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements

1. Organization, Basis of Presentation and Recent Accounting Pronouncements

Organization

HV Bancorp, Inc., a Pennsylvania Corporation (the “Company”) is the holding company of Huntingdon Valley Bank (the “Bank”) and was formed in connection with the conversion of the Bank from the mutual to the stock form of organization. On January 11, 2017, the mutual to stock conversion of the Bank was completed and the Company became the parent holding company for the Bank. A total of 2,182,125 shares of common stock were sold to depositors at $10.00 per share through which the Company received gross offering proceeds of approximately $21.8 million. Offering costs from the sale of the common stock totaled $1.4 million, resulting in net proceeds of $20.4 million. Shares of the Company began trading on the Nasdaq Capital Market on January 12, 2017. The Company is subject to regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Bank”).

The Bank is a stock savings bank organized under the laws of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania and is subject to comprehensive regulation and examination by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) and the Pennsylvania Department of Banking (“PADOB”). The Bank was organized in 1871, and currently provides residential and commercial loans to its general service area (Montgomery, Bucks and Philadelphia Counties of Pennsylvania) as well as offering a wide variety of savings, checking and certificate of deposit accounts to its retail and business customers.

Basis of Presentation

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“US GAAP”) for interim information and with the instructions to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q, as applicable to a smaller reporting company.  Accordingly, they do not include all the information and footnotes required by US GAAP for complete financial statements.

The financial statements are unaudited; but in the opinion of management include all adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) necessary for a fair presentation thereof.  The balances as of June 30, 2017 have been derived from the audited consolidated financial statements. These financial statements should be read in conjunction with the audited consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes thereto contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K filed by the Company with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on September 28, 2017. The results of operations for the three and six months ended December 31, 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the year ending June 30, 2018 or any other period.

The Company has evaluated subsequent events through the date of issuance of the financial statements included herein.

Principles of Consolidation

The unaudited interim consolidated financial statements include accounts of the Company and its wholly-owned subsidiary, the Bank.  In January 2017, the mutual to stock conversion of the Bank was completed and the Company became the parent holding company for the Bank. Prior to January 11, 2017, all financial information reflects the Bank’s transactions and balances only. All significant intercompany transactions and balances have been eliminated in consolidation.

6

Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements

In preparing financial statements in conformity with U.S. GAAP, management is required to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities as of the date of the balance sheet and reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Material estimates that are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term relate to the determination of the allowance for loan losses, other-than-temporary impairments of securities, interest rate lock commitments (“IRLCs”), mandatory sales commitments, the valuation of mortgage loans held-for-sale, other real estate owned, and the valuation of deferred tax assets.

Recent Accounting Pronouncements

The Company qualifies under the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (the “JOBS Act”) as an emerging growth company. As an emerging growth company, the Company has elected to use the extended transition period to delay adoption of new or revised accounting pronouncements until such pronouncements are made applicable to private companies.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers. This ASU establishes a comprehensive revenue recognition standard for virtually all industries following U.S. GAAP, including those that previously followed industry-specific guidance such as the real estate and construction industries. The revenue standard’s core principal is built on the contract between a vendor and a customer for the provision of goods and services. It attempts to depict the exchange of rights and obligations between the parties in the pattern of revenue recognition based on the consideration to which the vendor is entitled. To accomplish this, the standard requires five basic steps: (i) identify the contract with the customer, (ii) identify the performance obligations in the contract, (iii) identify the transaction price, (iv) allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (v) recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies the performance obligation. Three basic transition methods are available - full retrospective, retrospective with certain practical expedients, and a cumulative effect approach. Under the cumulative effect alternative, an entity would apply the new revenue standard only to contracts that are incomplete under legacy U.S. GAAP at the date of initial application and recognize the cumulative effect of the new standard as an adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings.  In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Deferral of the Effective Date. The guidance in this ASU is now effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period.  In March 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-08, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Principal versus Agent Considerations (Reporting Revenue Gross versus Net). While the ASU does not change the core provisions of Topic 606, it clarifies the implementation guidance on principal versus agent considerations. Namely, the ASU clarifies and offers guidance to help determine when the reporting entity is providing goods or services to a customer itself (i.e., the entity is a principal), or merely arranging for that good or service to be provided by the other party (i.e., the reporting entity is an agent). If the entity is a principal, it recognizes revenue in the gross amount of consideration to which it expects to be entitled in exchange for the specified good or service transferred to the customer. When the reporting entity is an agent, it recognizes revenue in the amount of any fee or commission to which it expects to be entitled in exchange for arranging for the specified good or service to be provided by the other party. An entity is a principal if it controls the specified good or service before that good or service is transferred to a customer. The guidance includes indicators to assist in determining whether the control criteria are met. If a contract with a customer includes more than one specified good or service, an entity could be a principal for some specified goods or services and an agent for others.  In April 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-10, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Identifying Performance Obligations and Licensing. This ASU clarifies guidance related to identifying performance obligations and licensing implementation guidance contained in the new revenue recognition standard. The ASU includes targeted improvements based on input the FASB received from the Transition Resource Group for Revenue Recognition and other stakeholders. The ASU seeks to proactively address areas in which diversity in practice potentially could arise, as well as to reduce the cost and complexity of applying certain aspects of the guidance both at

7

implementation and on an ongoing basis. The amendments in this ASU affect the guidance in ASU 2014-09, Revenue from Contracts with Customers, which will be effective for fiscal years beginning after December 31, 2017 for public entities.  In May 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-12, Revenue from Contracts with Customers: Narrow-Scope Improvements and Practical Expedients. This ASU clarifies certain aspects of Topic 606 guidance as follows:

The amendments in this ASU clarify that an entity that retrospectively applies the guidance in Topic 606 to each prior reporting period is not required to disclose the effect of the accounting change for the period of adoption. However, an entity is still required to disclose the effect of the changes on any prior periods retrospectively adjusted.

The guidance in the revenue recognition ASUs listed above is effective for annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim reporting periods within that reporting period. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of the various revenue recognition ASUs. The guidance does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans and securities. The Company evaluated its non-interest revenue sources and the adoption of these ASUs will not have a material impact on its financial condition or results of operations.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-01, “Financial Instruments – Overall (Topic 825-10): “Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities.” ASU 2016-01 amends the guidance on the classification and measurement of financial instruments.  Some of the amendments in ASU 2016-01 include the following: 1) requires equity investments (except those accounted for under the equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee) to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income; 2) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment; 3) requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes; and 4) requires 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; among others.  ASU 2016-01 also clarifies that an entity should assess the need for a valuation

8

allowance on a deferred tax asset related to unrealized losses of investments in debt instruments recognized in OCI in combination with the entity’s other deferred tax assets. Prior to this guidance, the alternative approach used in practice evaluated the need for a valuation allowance for a deferred tax asset related to unrealized losses on debt instruments recognized in other comprehensive income separately from other deferred tax assets. This alternative approach will no longer be acceptable. For public business entities, the amendments of ASU 2016-01 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years.  As of December 31, 2017 we do not hold material equity investments for which fair value is accounted through other comprehensive income.  We are analyzing ASU 2016-01 and do not believe that it will have a material effect on our financial statements.

In March 2017, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2017-08, Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities. ASU 2017-08 shortens the amortization for premiums on purchased callable debt securities to the earliest call date (i.e. yield-to-earliest call amortization), rather than amortizing over the full contractual term. The ASU does not change the accounting for securities held at a discount.

The amendments apply to callable debt securities with explicit, noncontingent call features that are callable at fixed prices and on preset dates. If a security may be prepaid based on prepayments of the underlying loans, not because the issuer has exercised a date specific call option, it is excluded from the scope of the new standard. However, for instruments with contingent call features, once the contingency is resolved and the security is callable at a fixed price and preset date, the security is within the scope of the amendment. Further, the amendments apply to all premiums on callable debt securities, regardless of how they were generated.

The amendments require companies to reset the effective yield using the payment terms of the debt security if the call option is not exercised on the earliest call date. If the security has additional call dates, any excess of the amortized cost basis over the amount repayable by the issuer at the next call date should be amortized to the next call date.

The amendments are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those years. For all other entities, including emerging growth entities as further described above, the amendments are effective for fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal periods beginning after December 15, 2020. Early adoption is permitted, including adoption in an interim period. If an entity early adopts the amendments in an interim period, any adjustments should be reflected as of the beginning of the fiscal year that includes that interim period. The Company adopted this standard on July 1, 2017 with no material impact on our consolidated financial statements.  

In February 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-02, Leases. The new leases standard applies a right-of-use (ROU) model that requires a lessee to record, for all leases with a lease term of more than 12 months, an asset representing its right to use the underlying asset and a liability to make lease payments. For leases with a term of 12 months or less, a practical expedient is available whereby a lessee may elect, by class of underlying asset, not to recognize an ROU asset or lease liability. At inception, lessees must classify all leases as either finance or operating based on five criteria. Balance sheet recognition of finance and operating leases is similar, but the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement, as well as the effect on the statement of cash flows, differs depending on the lease classification.

The new leases standard requires a lessor to classify leases as either sales-type, direct financing or operating, similar to existing U.S. GAAP. Classification depends on the same five criteria used by lessees plus certain additional factors. The subsequent accounting treatment for all three lease types is substantially equivalent to existing U.S. GAAP for sales-type leases, direct financing leases, and operating leases. However, the new standard updates certain aspects of the lessor accounting model to align it with the new lessee accounting model, as well as with the new revenue standard under Topic 606.

9

Lessees and lessors are required to provide certain qualitative and quantitative disclosures to enable users of financial statements to assess the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases.

The new leases standard addresses other considerations including identification of a lease, separating lease and non-lease components of a contract, sale and leaseback transactions, modifications, combining contracts, reassessment of the lease term, and re-measurement of lease payments. It also contains comprehensive implementation guidance with practical examples.

The amendments are effective for public business entities for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments are effective for all other entities (including emerging growth entities as further described above) for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. Early adoption is permitted. Specific transition requirements apply. The Company’s leases are operating leases and ASU 2016-02 will require us to add them to our balance sheet. The Company’s operating leases are predominantly related to real estate. The Company is currently evaluating other impacts of the pending adoption of the new standard on our consolidated financial statements.

In June 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) 2016-13, Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.  ASU 2016-13 requires credit losses on most financial assets measured at amortized cost and certain other instruments to be measured using an expected credit loss model (referred to as the current expected credit loss (CECL) model). Under this model, entities will estimate credit losses over the entire contractual term of the instrument (considering estimated prepayments, but not expected extensions or modifications unless reasonable expectation of a troubled debt restructuring exists) from the date of initial recognition of that instrument.

The ASU also replaces the current accounting model for purchased credit impaired loans and debt securities. The allowance for credit losses for purchased financial assets with a more-than insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”), should be determined in a similar manner to other financial assets measured on an amortized cost basis. However, upon initial recognition, the allowance for credit losses is added to the purchase price (“gross up approach”) to determine the initial amortized cost basis. The subsequent accounting for PCD financial assets is the same expected loss model described above.

Further, the ASU made certain targeted amendments to the existing impairment model for available-for-sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For an AFS debt security for which there is neither the intent nor a more-likely-than-not requirement to sell, an entity will record credit losses as an allowance rather than a write-down of the amortized cost basis.

The ASU is effective for public business entities for fiscal years after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. The amendments are effective for all other entities (including emerging growth companies as further described above for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020 and interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2021. In anticipation of the ASU, the Company has entered into a contract with a third party, compiled data for the modeling and is working on developing an estimate using historically and qualitative data based on the requirements of ASU 2016-13. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adoption of the new standard on the consolidated financial statements.

10

2. Investment Securities

Investment securities available-for-sale was comprised of the following:

Investment securities held-to-maturity was comprised of the following:

Investment securities available-for-sale was comprised of the following:

Investment securities held-to-maturity was comprised of the following:

11

The scheduled maturities of securities available-for-sale and held-to-maturity at December 31, 2017 were as follows:

Securities with a fair value of $6.6 million and $8.2 million at December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively, were pledged to secure public deposits and for other purposes as required by law.

Proceeds from the sale of available-for-sale securities for the six months ended December 31, 2017 were $11.2 million. Gross realized gains on such sales were approximately $39,000 and gross realized losses on such sales were $5,000 for the six months ended December 31, 2017.

Proceeds from the sale of available-for-sale securities for the six months ended December 31, 2016 were $2.1 million. Gross realized gains on such sales were approximately $11,000 and gross realized losses on such sales were $0 for the six months ended December 31, 2016.

The following tables summarize the unrealized loss positions of securities available-for-sale and held-to-maturity as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017:

12

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included five and ten U.S. Government securities, respectively, with total market values of $1.4 million and $4.3 million, respectively. Of these securities, two and three were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively. These securities are zero risk weighted for capital purposes and are guaranteed for repayment of principal and interest. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of Other Than Temporary Impairment (“OTTI”) on any of the U.S. Governmental securities in an unrealized loss position held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included fifteen and twenty-four corporate notes with total market values of $8.3 million and $13.2 million, respectively. Of these securities, nine were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017. At the time of purchase and as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, these bonds continue to maintain investment grade ratings. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of OTTI on any of the corporate notes held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than will not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included thirty-eight and thirty-five collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”) with total market values of $13.5 million and $12.6 million, respectively. Of these securities, thirty-six and twenty-eight were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively. The CMO portfolio is comprised of 100% agency (FHLMC, FNMA and GNMA) investment grade bonds. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of OTTI on any of the CMOs held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included fifteen mortgage backed securities (“MBS”) with a total market value of $4.2 million and $4.4 million, respectively. Of these securities, twelve were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively. The MBS portfolio is comprised of 100% agency (FHLMC, FNMA and GNMA) investment grade bonds. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of OTTI on any of the MBS held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

13

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included twenty-seven and thirty municipal securities with a total market value of $12.5 million and $13.4 million, respectively. Of these securities, seventeen and thirteen were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively. The Company’s municipal portfolio issuers are located in Pennsylvania and at the time of purchase, and as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, continue to maintain investment grade ratings. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of OTTI on any of the municipal securities held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

At December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, the investment portfolio included twenty-two and twenty-six Bank Certificate of Deposits (“CDs”) with a total market value of $5.5 million and $6.7 million, respectively. Of these securities, eighteen and twelve were in an unrealized loss position as of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, respectively. The Bank CDs are fully insured by the FDIC. As of December 31, 2017 and June 30, 2017, management found no evidence of OTTI on any of the Bank CDs held in the investment securities portfolio. The Company has the ability to hold to maturity and more likely than not, will not be required to sell the securities before a recovery of the cost has occurred.

3. Loans Receivable

Loans receivable were comprised of the following: