Annual Statements Open main menu

LIMESTONE BANCORP, INC. - Quarter Report: 2013 March (Form 10-Q)

a50627738.htm

UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 FORM 10-Q 
 
(Mark One)
x
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the Quarterly Period Ended March 31, 2013
 
Or
 
¨
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 
For the transition period from              to             
 
Commission file number: 001-33033

PORTER BANCORP, INC.
(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
Kentucky
61-1142247
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
(I.R.S. Employer
Identification No.)
   
2500 Eastpoint Parkway, Louisville, Kentucky
40223
(Address of principal executive offices)
(Zip Code)
 
(502) 499-4800
(Registrant’s telephone number, including area code)


 
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 shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes x     No  ¨
 
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 x No ¨
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
 
 
Large accelerated filer  ¨    
Accelerated filer  ¨    
 
Non-accelerated filer  ¨
Smaller reporting company  x
 
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuer’s class of common stock, as of the latest practicable date.

12,139,975 shares of Common Stock, no par value, were outstanding at April 30, 2013.
 
 
1

 
 

INDEX
 

 
 
2

 

 


The following consolidated financial statements of Porter Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiary, PBI Bank, Inc. are submitted:

Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets for March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Operations for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss) for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012
Unaudited Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity for the three months ended March 31, 2013
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements
 
 
3

 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Unaudited Consolidated Balance Sheets
(dollars in thousands except share data)
 
   
March 31,
2013
   
December 31,
2012
 
Assets
               
Cash and due from financial institutions
 
$
68,497
   
$
46,512
 
Federal funds sold
   
2,691
     
3,060
 
Cash and cash equivalents
   
71,188
     
49,572
 
Securities available for sale
   
183,247
     
178,476
 
Mortgage loans held for sale
   
     
507
 
Loans, net of allowance of $39,839 and $56,680, respectively
   
787,237
     
842,412
 
Premises and equipment
   
20,667
     
20,805
 
Other real estate owned
   
44,192
     
43,671
 
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
   
10,072
     
10,072
 
Bank owned life insurance
   
8,472
     
8,398
 
Accrued interest receivable and other assets
   
7,794
     
8,718
 
Total assets
 
$
1,132,869
   
$
1,162,631
 
                 
Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity
               
Deposits
               
Non-interest bearing
 
$
108,841
   
$
114,310
 
Interest bearing
   
927,519
     
950,749
 
Total deposits
   
1,036,360
     
1,065,059
 
Repurchase agreements
   
2,853
     
2,634
 
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
   
5,324
     
5,604
 
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities
   
10,069
     
10,169
 
Subordinated capital note
   
6,525
     
6,975
 
Junior subordinated debentures
   
25,000
     
25,000
 
Total liabilities
   
1,086,131
     
1,115,441
 
                 
Stockholders’ equity
               
Preferred stock, no par, 1,000,000 shares authorized,
               
Series A – 35,000 issued and outstanding;
               
Liquidation preference of $35 million at March 31, 2013
   
34,885
     
34,840
 
Series C – 317,042 issued and outstanding;
               
Liquidation preference of $3.6 million at March 31, 2013
   
3,283
     
3,283
 
    Common stock, no par, 86,000,000 shares authorized, 12,139,975
     and 12,002,421 shares issued and outstanding, respectively
   
112,236
     
112,236
 
Additional paid-in capital
   
20,386
     
20,283
 
Retained deficit
   
(127,069
)
   
(126,517
)
Accumulated other comprehensive income
   
3,017
     
3,065
 
Total stockholders' equity
   
46,738
     
47,190
 
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
 
$
1,132,869
   
$
1,162,631
 
 
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
 
 
4

 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Operations
(dollars in thousands, except per share data)
 
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
Interest income
               
Loans, including fees
 
$
10,033
   
$
14,512
 
Taxable securities
   
867
     
841
 
Tax exempt securities
   
221
     
250
 
Fed funds sold and other
   
137
     
152
 
     
11,258
     
15,755
 
Interest expense
               
Deposits
   
2,704
     
4,000
 
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
   
43
     
57
 
Subordinated capital note
   
58
     
71
 
Junior subordinated debentures
   
154
     
171
 
Federal funds purchased and other
   
1
     
2
 
     
2,960
     
4,301
 
Net interest income
   
8,298
     
11,454
 
Provision for loan losses
   
450
     
3,750
 
Net interest income after provision for loan losses
   
7,848
     
7,704
 
                 
Non-interest income
               
Service charges on deposit accounts
   
493
     
554
 
Income from fiduciary activities
   
517
     
251
 
Bank card interchange fees
   
172
     
177
 
Other real estate owned rental income
   
112
     
37
 
Title insurance commissions
   
13
     
22
 
Secondary market brokerage fees
   
15
     
17
 
Net gain on sales of loans originated for sale
   
58
     
45
 
Net gain on sales of securities
   
     
2,019
 
Other
   
267
     
323
 
     
1,647
     
3,445
 
Non-interest expense
               
Salaries and employee benefits
   
4,139
     
4,312
 
Occupancy and equipment
   
931
     
886
 
Other real estate owned expense
   
791
     
1,257
 
FDIC Insurance
   
639
     
873
 
Loan collection expense
   
853
     
360
 
Professional fees
   
406
     
356
 
State franchise tax
   
537
     
592
 
Communications
   
175
     
180
 
Postage and delivery
   
113
     
122
 
Insurance expense
   
333
     
97
 
Other
   
647
     
612
 
     
9,564
     
9,647
 
Income (loss) before income taxes
   
(69
)
   
1,502
 
Income tax benefit
   
     
 
Net income (loss)
   
(69
)
   
1,502
 
Less:
               
Dividends on preferred stock
   
438
     
437
 
Accretion on Series A preferred stock
   
45
     
45
 
Earnings (losses) allocated to participating securities
   
(28
)
   
35
 
Net income (loss) attributable to common shareholders
 
$
(524
)
 
$
985
 
Basic earnings (loss) per common share
 
$
(0.04
)
 
$
0.08
 
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share
 
$
(0.04
)
 
$
0.08
 
 
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
 
 
5

 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss)
(in thousands)
 
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
Net income (loss)
 
$
(69
)
 
$
1,502
 
Other comprehensive income (loss), net of tax:
               
   Unrealized gain (loss) on securities:
               
      Unrealized gain (loss) arising during the period
   
(74
)
   
622 
 
    Reclassification of amount realized through sales
   
     
(2,019)
 
      Included in net loss
   
(74
)
   
(1,397)
 
    Tax effect
   
26
     
489 
 
      Net of tax
   
(48
)
   
(908)
 
                 
Comprehensive income (loss)
 
$
(117
)
 
$
594
 
 
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
 
 
6

 
 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Unaudited Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity
For Three Months Ended March 31, 2013
(dollars in thousands, except share and per share data)
 
                       
Accumulated
     
 
  Shares
   
  Amount
   
Additional
       
Other
     
       
Series A
 
Series C
       
Series A
 
Series C
 
Paid-In
 
Retained
 
Comprehensive
     
 
Common
   
Preferred
 
Preferred
 
Common
 
Preferred
 
Preferred
 
Capital
 
Deficit
 
Income
 
Total
 
                                                                               
Balances, January 1, 2013
 
12,002,421
     
35,000
     
317,042
   
$
112,236
   
$
34,840
   
$
3,283
   
$
20,283
   
$
(126,517
)
 
$
3,065
   
$
47,190
 
Issuance of unvested stock
 
142,663
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
 
Forfeited unvested stock
 
(5,109
)
   
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
 
Stock-based compensation expense
 
     
     
     
     
     
     
103
             
     
103
 
Net loss
 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
(69
)
   
     
(69
)
Net change in accumulated other comprehensive income, net of taxes
 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
(48
)
   
(48
)
Dividends 5% on Series A preferred stock
 
     
     
     
     
     
     
     
(438
)
   
     
(438
)
Accretion of Series A preferred stock discount
 
     
     
     
     
45
     
     
     
(45
)
   
     
 
                                                                               
Balances, March 31, 2013
 
12,139,975
     
35,000
     
317,042
   
$
112,236
   
$
34,885
   
$
3,283
   
$
20,386
   
$
(127,069
)
 
$
3,017
   
$
46,738
 
 
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
 
 
7

 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Unaudited Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows
For Three Months Ended March 31, 2013 and 2012
(dollars in thousands)
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
Cash flows from operating activities
           
Net income (loss)
 
$
(69
 
$
1,502
 
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to
  net cash from operating activities
               
Depreciation and amortization
   
548
     
570
 
Provision for loan losses
   
450
     
3,750
 
Net amortization on securities
   
610
     
632
 
Stock-based compensation expense
   
103
     
105
 
Net gain on loans originated for sale
   
(58
   
(45
)
Loans originated for sale
   
(1,190
   
(2,328
)
Proceeds from sales of loans originated for sale
   
1,744
     
2,802
 
Net gain on sales of investment securities
   
     
(2,019
)
Net loss on sales of other real estate owned
   
197
     
402
 
Net write-down of other real estate owned
   
307
     
480
 
Earnings on bank owned life insurance
   
(74
   
(74
)
Net change in accrued interest receivable and other assets
   
762
     
3,231
 
Net change in accrued interest payable and other liabilities
   
(537
)    
3,881
 
Net cash from operating activities
   
2,793
     
12,889
 
Cash flows from investing activities
               
Purchases of available-for-sale securities
   
(15,294
   
(45,048
)
Sales of available-for-sale securities
   
     
21,385
 
Maturities and prepayments of available-for-sale securities
   
9,864
     
8,056
 
Proceeds from sale of other real estate owned
   
2,640
     
9,018
 
Improvements to other real estate owned
   
     
(1
)
Loan originations and payments, net
   
50,983
     
30,798
 
Purchases of premises and equipment, net
   
(160
   
(72
)
Net cash from investing activities
   
48,033
     
24,136
 
Cash flows from financing activities
               
Net change in deposits
   
(28,699
   
(70,016
)
Net change in repurchase agreements
   
219
     
188
 
Repayment of Federal Home Loan Bank advances
   
(280
   
(327
)
Repayment of subordinated capital note
   
(450
   
(225
)
Net cash from financing activities
   
(29,210
)    
(70,380
)
Net change in cash and cash equivalents
   
21,616
     
(33,355
)
Beginning cash and cash equivalents
   
49,572
     
105,962
 
Ending cash and cash equivalents
 
$
71,188
   
$
72,607
 
Supplemental cash flow information:
               
Interest paid
 
$
4,992
   
$
4,296
 
Income taxes paid (refunded)
   
     
(2,000
)
Supplemental non-cash disclosure:
               
Transfer from loans to other real estate
 
$
3,680
   
$
4,216
 
Financed sales of other real estate owned
   
15
     
192
 
 
See accompanying notes to unaudited consolidated financial statements.
 
 
8

 
 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
Notes to Unaudited Consolidated Financial Statements


Note 1 – Basis of Presentation and Summary of Significant Accounting Policies

Basis of Presentation – The consolidated financial statements include Porter Bancorp, Inc. (Company or PBI) and its subsidiary, PBI Bank (Bank).  The Company owns a 100% interest in the Bank. All significant inter-company transactions and accounts have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP) for interim financial information and with the instructions to Form 10-Q and Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X.  Accordingly, the financial statements do not include all of the information and footnotes required by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles for complete financial statements.  In the opinion of management, all adjustments (consisting of normal recurring accruals) considered necessary for a fair presentation have been included.  Operating results for three months ended March 31, 2013 are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the entire year.  A description of other significant accounting policies is presented in the notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, 2012 included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Use of Estimates – To prepare financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, management makes estimates and assumptions based on available information.  These estimates and assumptions affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and the disclosures provided, and future results could differ.  The allowance for loan losses, fair values of financial instruments, stock compensation, deferred tax assets, other intangibles, and fair values of other real estate owned are particularly subject to change.

Reclassifications – Some items in the prior year financial statements were reclassified to conform to the current presentation. The reclassifications did not impact net income or stockholders’ equity.

New Accounting Standards – In February 2013, the FASB issued ASU No. 2013-02, “Reporting of Amounts Reclassified Out of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.”  The provisions of ASU No. 2013-02 require an entity to report the effect of significant reclassifications out of accumulated other comprehensive income on the respective line items in net income if the amount being reclassified is required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in its entirety to net income.  For other amounts that are not required under U.S. GAAP to be reclassified in their entirety to net income in the same reporting period, an entity is required to cross-reference other disclosures required under U.S. GAAP that provide additional detail about these amounts.  The provisions of this new guidance are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2012.  The adoption of ASU No. 2013-02 did not have a material impact on the Company’s statements of operations and condition.
 
Note 2 – Going Concern Considerations and Future Plans
 
The consolidated financial statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which contemplates the realization of assets and the satisfaction of liabilities in the normal course of business for the foreseeable future. However, the events and circumstances described in this Note raise substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern.

During the first three months of 2013, we reported net loss to common shareholders of $524,000, compared with net income to common shareholders of $985,000 for the first three months of 2012.  The decrease in net income compared to the first quarter of 2012 was primarily attributable to a $2.0 million gain on sale of investment securities in the first quarter of 2012. The decrease was also attributable to lower net interest margin due to lower average loans outstanding, loans repricing at lower rates, and the level of non-performing assets in our portfolio. These items were offset by a significant decrease in provision expense, which decreased from $3.8 million to $450,000.
 
For the year ended December 31, 2012, we reported net loss to common shareholders of $33.4 million.  This loss was attributable primarily to $40.3 million of provision for loan losses expense.  A continued decline in credit quality in our portfolio resulted in net charge-offs of $36.1 million, and OREO expense of $10.5 million resulting from fair value write-downs driven by new appraisals and reduced marketing prices, net loss on sales, and ongoing operating expense.  We also had lower net interest margin due to lower average loans outstanding, loans re-pricing at lower rates, and the level of non-performing loans in our portfolio.  Net loss to common shareholders of $33.4 million, for the year ended December 31, 2012, compares with net loss to common shareholders of $105.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
 
In the fourth quarter of 2011, we began deferring the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury. At March 31, 2013, cumulative accrued and unpaid dividends on this stock totaled $3.0 million. If we defer dividend payments for six quarters, the holder of our Series A Preferred Stock (currently the U.S. Treasury) would then have the right to appoint up to two representatives to our Board of Directors. We will continue to accrue any deferred dividends, which will be deducted from income to common shareholders for financial statement purposes.
 
In June 2011, the Bank agreed to a Consent Order with the FDIC and KDFI in which the Bank agreed, among other things, to improve asset quality, reduce loan concentrations, and maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9% and a minimum total risk based capital ratio of 12%.  The Consent Order was included in our Current Report on 8-K filed on June 30, 2011. In October 2012, the Bank entered into a new Consent Order with the FDIC and KDFI again agreeing to maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9% and a minimum total risk based capital ratio of 12%. The Bank also agreed that if it should be unable to reach the required capital levels, and if directed in writing by the FDIC, then the Bank would within 30 days develop, adopt and implement a written plan to sell or merge itself into another federally insured financial institution or otherwise immediately obtain a sufficient capital investment into the Bank to fully meet the capital requirements.
 
 
9

 
 
We expect to continue to work with our regulators toward capital ratio compliance as outlined in the written capital plan previously submitted by the Bank. The new Consent Order also requires the Bank to continue to adhere to the plans implemented in response to the June 2011 Consent Order, and includes the substantive provisions of the June 2011 Consent Order. The new Consent Order was included in our Current Report on 8-K filed on September 19, 2012. As of March 31, 2013, the capital ratios required by the Consent Order were not met.
 
In order to meet these capital requirements, the Board of Directors and management are continuing to evaluate strategies to achieve the following objectives:
 
 
Increasing capital through a possible public offering or private placement of common stock to new and existing shareholders.  We have engaged a financial advisor to assist our Board in evaluating our options for increasing capital and redeeming our Series A preferred stock issued to the US Treasury in 2008 under the Capital Purchase Program.

 
Continuing to operate the Company and Bank in a safe and sound manner.  This strategy will require us to continue to reduce the size of our balance sheet, reduce our lending concentrations, consider selling loans, and reduce other noninterest expense through the disposition of OREO.
 
 
Continuing with succession planning and adding resources to the management team.  John T. Taylor was named President and CEO for PBI Bank and appointed to the board of directors in July 2012.   Additionally, John R. Davis was appointed Chief Credit Officer of PBI Bank in August 2012, with responsibility for establishing and executing the credit quality policies and overseeing credit administration for the organization.

 
Evaluating our internal processes and procedures, distribution of labor, and work-flow to ensure we have adequately and appropriately deployed resources in an efficient manner in the current environment.  To this end, we believe the opportunity exists for the centralization of key processes which will lead to improved execution and cost savings.

 
Executing on our commitment to improve credit quality and reduce loan concentrations and balance sheet risk.
 
 
o
We have reduced the size of our loan portfolio significantly from $1.3 billion at December 31, 2010, to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2011, to $899.1 million at December 31, 2012, and $827.1 million at March 31, 2013.   We have significantly improved our staffing in the commercial lending area which is now led by John R. Davis.
 
 
o
Our Consent Order calls for us to reduce our construction and development loans to not more than 75% of total risk-based capital. We are now in compliance with construction and development loans totaling $62.5 million, or 73% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013, down from $70.3 million, or 82% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.
 
 
o
Our Consent Order also requires us to reduce non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, construction and development loans, and multi-family residential real estate loans as a group, to not more than 250% of total risk-based capital.  While we have made significant improvements over the last year, we were not in compliance with this concentration limit at March 31, 2013.  These loans totaled $299.4 million, or 351% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013 and $311.1 million, or 362% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.
 
 
o
We are working to reduce our loan concentrations by curtailing new construction and development lending and new non-owner occupied commercial real estate lending.  We are also receiving principal reductions from amortizing credits and pay-downs from our customers who sell properties built for resale.  We have reduced the construction loan portfolio from $199.5 million at December 31, 2010 to $62.5 million at March 31, 2013.  Our non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans declined from $293.3 million at December 31, 2010 to $187.2 million at March 31, 2013.

 
10

 
 
 
Executing on our commitment to sell other real estate owned and reinvest in quality income producing assets.
 
 
o
The remediation process for loans secured by real estate has led the Bank to acquire significant levels of OREO in 2012, 2011, and 2010.  This trend has continued at a slower pace in 2013.  The Bank acquired $33.5 million, $41.9 million, and $90.8 million during 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.  For the first three months of March 31, 2013, we acquired $3.7 million of OREO.
 
 
o
We have incurred significant losses in disposing of this real estate.   We incurred losses totaling $9.3 million, $42.8 million, and $13.9 million in 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively, from sales and fair value write-downs attributable to declining valuations as evidenced by new appraisals and from changes in our sales strategies.  During the three month period ended March 31, 2013, we incurred OREO losses totaling $504,000, which consisted of $197,000 in loss on sale and $307,000 from declining values as evidenced by new appraisals and reduced marketing prices in connection with our sales strategies.
 
 
o
To ensure that we maximize the value we receive upon the sale of OREO, we continually evaluate sales opportunities and channels.  We are targeting multiple sales opportunities and channels through internal marketing and the use of brokers, auctions, technology sales platforms, and bulk sale strategies.  Proceeds from the sale of OREO totaled $2.7 million during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and $22.5 million, $26.0 million and $25.0 million during 2012, 2011, and 2010, respectively.
 
 
o
At December 31, 2012 the OREO portfolio consisted of 51% construction, development, and land assets.  At March 31, 2013 this concentration had declined to 49%.  This is consistent with our reduction of construction, development and other land loans, which have declined to $62.5 million at March 31, 2013 compared to $70.3 million at December 31, 2012.  Over the past three months, the composition of our OREO portfolio has shifted toward 1-4 family residential properties, which we have found to be more liquid than construction, development, and land assets, while commercial real estate has declined slightly as a percentage of the portfolio.  Commercial real estate of this nature represents 34% of the portfolio at March 31, 2013 compared with 35% at December 31, 2012.  1-4 family residential properties represent 15% of the portfolio at March 31, 2013 compared with 12% at December 31, 2012.
 
 
Evaluating other strategic alternatives, such as the sale of assets or branches.

Bank regulatory agencies can exercise discretion when an institution does not meet the terms of a consent order.  Based on individual circumstances, the agencies may issue mandatory directives, impose monetary penalties, initiate changes in management, or take more serious adverse actions.
 
 
11

 
 
Note 3 – Securities

The fair value of available for sale securities and the related gross unrealized gains and losses recognized in accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) were as follows:
 
   
Amortized
Cost
   
Gross
Unrealized
Gains
   
Gross
Unrealized
Losses
   
Fair
Value
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                       
U.S. Government and federal agency
 
$
23,697
   
$
511
   
$
(41
)
 
$
24,167
 
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
79,937
     
868
     
(472
)
   
80,333
 
State and municipal
   
53,542
     
2,277
     
(146
)
   
55,673
 
Corporate bonds
   
18,880
     
1,510
     
(8
)
   
20,382
 
Other
   
572
     
71
     
     
643
 
Total debt securities
   
176,628
     
5,237
     
(667
)
   
181,198
 
Equity
   
1,359
     
691
     
(1
)
   
2,049
 
Total
 
$
177,987
   
$
5,928
   
$
(668
)
 
$
183,247
 
 
December 31, 2012
                               
U.S. Government and federal agency
 
$
5,603
   
$
530
   
$
   
$
 6,133  
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
94,298
     
1,141
     
(257
)
   
95,182
 
State and municipal
   
52,485
     
2,335
     
(87
)
   
54,733
 
Corporate bonds
   
18,851
     
1,150
     
(37
)
   
19,964
 
Other
   
572
     
46
     
     
618
 
Total debt securities
   
171,809
     
5,202
     
(381
)
   
176,630
 
Equity
   
1,359
     
487
     
     
1,846
 
Total
 
$
173,168
   
$
5,689
   
$
(381
)
 
$
178,476
 

Sales and calls of available for sale securities were as follows:

         
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
                     
 2013
     
 2012
 
     
(in thousands)
 
Proceeds
                 
$
 —
   
$
21,385
 
Gross gains
                   
 —
     
2,019
 
Gross losses
                   
 —
     
 —
 
 
The amortized cost and fair value of the debt investment securities portfolio are shown by contractual maturity.  Contractual maturities may differ from actual maturities if issuers have the right to call or prepay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties. Mortgage-backed securities not due at a single maturity date are detailed separately.
 
   
March 31, 2013
 
   
Amortized
 Cost
   
Fair
 Value
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Maturity
           
Available-for-sale
           
Within one year
 
$
13,105
   
$
13,517
 
One to five years
   
14,663
     
16,123
 
Five to ten years
   
59,149
     
61,044
 
Beyond ten years
   
9,774
     
10,181
 
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
79,937
     
80,333
 
Total
 
$
176,628
   
$
181,198
 
                                                                                                              
 
12

 
 
Securities pledged at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 had carrying values of approximately $60.4 million and $76.4 million, respectively, and were pledged to secure public deposits and repurchase agreements.

The Company evaluates securities for other than temporary impairment (OTTI) on at least a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic or market concerns warrant such evaluation.  Consideration is given to the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than cost, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, underlying credit quality of the issuer, and the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the issuer for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value.  In analyzing an issuer’s financial condition, the Company may consider whether the securities are issued by the federal government or its agencies, whether downgrades by bond rating agencies have occurred, the sector or industry trends and cycles affecting the issuer, and the results of reviews of the issuer’s financial condition.  Management currently intends to hold all securities with unrealized losses until recovery, which for fixed income securities may be at maturity.

At March 31, 2013, the Company held 40 equity securities.  Of these securities, two securities had an unrealized loss less than $1,000.  One had been in an unrealized loss position for less than twelve months, and one for more than twelve months. All other equity securities were in an unrealized gain position at March 31, 2013.  Management monitors the underlying financial condition of the issuers and current market pricing for these equity securities monthly. As of March 31, 2013, management does not believe any securities in our portfolio with unrealized losses should be classified as other than temporarily impaired. Management currently intends to hold all securities with unrealized losses until recovery, which for fixed income securities may be at maturity.

Securities with unrealized losses at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, are as follows:

   
Less than 12 Months
   
12 Months or More
   
Total
 
Description of Securities
 
Fair
Value
   
Unrealized
Loss
   
Fair
Value
   
Unrealized
Loss
   
Fair
Value
   
Unrealized
Loss
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                                   
U.S government & agency
 
$
6,499
   
$
(41
)
 
$
   
$
   
$
6,499
   
$
(41
)
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
30,351
     
(472
)
   
     
     
30,351
     
(472
)
State and municipal
   
11,225
     
(146
)
   
     
     
11,225
     
(146
)
Corporate bonds
   
1,284
     
(8
)
   
     
     
1,284
     
(8
)
Equity
   
2
     
(1
)
   
8
     
     
10
     
(1
)
Total temporarily impaired
 
$
49,361
   
$
(668
)
 
$
8
   
$
   
$
49,369
   
$
(668
)
                                                 
                                                 
December 31, 2012
                                               
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
 
$
23,375
   
$
(257
)
 
$
   
$
   
$
23,375
   
$
(257
)
State and municipal
   
7,961
     
(87
)
   
     
     
7,961
     
(87
)
Corporate bonds
   
3,777
     
(37
)
   
     
     
3,777
     
(37
)
Equity
   
2
     
     
     
     
2
     
 
Total temporarily impaired
 
$
35,115
   
$
(381
)
 
$
   
$
   
$
35,115
   
$
(381
)
 
 
13

 
 
Note 4 – Loans

Loans were as follows:
 
March
 31, 
   
December
31, 
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Commercial
 
$
49,932
   
$
52,567
 
Commercial Real Estate: 
               
Construction
   
62,535
     
70,284
 
Farmland
   
75,347
     
80,825
 
Other
   
289,211
     
322,687
 
Residential Real Estate: 
               
Multi-family
   
49,590
     
50,986
 
1-4 Family
   
259,412
     
278,273
 
Consumer
   
18,129
     
20,383
 
Agriculture
   
22,214
     
22,317
 
Other
   
706
     
770
 
Subtotal
   
827,076
     
899,092
 
Less: Allowance for loan losses
   
(39,839
)
   
(56,680
)
Loans, net
 
$
787,237
   
$
842,412
 
 
The following table presents the activity in the allowance for loan losses by portfolio segment for the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012:
 
    Commercial  
Commercial
Real Estate
 
Residential
Real Estate
  Consumer   Agriculture   Other   Total
     
(in thousands)
March 31, 2013:
   
 
                                 
 
Beginning balance
 
$
4,402
   
$
34,768
   
$
16,235
   
$
857
   
$
403
   
$
15
   
$
56,680
 
Provision for loan losses
   
1,438
     
(445
)
   
(450
)
   
86
     
(178
   
(1
   
450
 
Loans charged off
   
(976
)
   
(12,312
)
   
(4,339
)
   
(318
)  
   
(17
   
     
(17,962
)
Recoveries
   
126
     
158
     
94
     
91
     
202
     
     
671
 
Ending balance
 
$
4,990
   
$
22,169
   
$
11,540
   
$
716
   
$
410
   
$
14
   
$
39,839
 
                                                         
                                                         
March 31, 2012:
                                                       
Beginning balance
 
$
4,207
   
$
33,024
   
$
14,217
   
$
792
   
$
325
   
$
14
   
$
52,579
 
Provision for loan losses
   
89
     
772
     
2,506
     
224
     
161
     
(2
)  
   
3,750
 
Loans charged off
   
(256
)
   
(919
)
   
(1,029
)
   
(237
)
   
(141
   
     
(2,582
)
Recoveries
   
42
     
105
     
26
     
33
     
     
     
206
 
Ending balance
 
$
4,082
   
$
32,982
   
$
15,720
   
$
812
   
$
345
   
$
12
   
$
53,953
 
 
 
14

 
 
The following table presents the balance in the allowance for loan losses and the recorded investment in loans by portfolio segment and based on the impairment method as of March 31, 2013:
 
   
Commercial
   
Commercial
Real Estate
   
Residential
Real Estate
   
Consumer
   
Agriculture
   
Other
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Allowance for loan losses:
                                         
Ending allowance balance attributable to loans:
                                         
Individually evaluated for impairment
 
$
695
   
$
6,138
   
$
1,295
   
$
21
   
$
   
$
12
   
$
8,161
 
Collectively evaluated for impairment
   
4,295
     
16,031
     
10,245
     
695
     
410
     
2
     
31,678
 
Total ending allowance balance
 
$
4,990
   
$
22,169
   
$
11,540
   
$
716
   
$
410
   
$
14
   
$
39,839
 
                                                         
                                                         
Loans:
                                                       
Loans individually evaluated for impairment
 
$
5,668
   
$
114,558
   
$
56,342
   
$
212
   
$
170
   
$
522
   
$
177,472
 
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment
   
44,264
     
312,535
     
252,660
     
17,917
     
22,044
     
184
     
649,604
 
Total ending loans balance
 
$
49,932
   
$
427,093
   
$
309,002
   
$
18,129
   
$
22,214
   
$
706
   
$
827,076
 
 
The following table presents the balance in the allowance for loan losses and the recorded investment in loans by portfolio segment and based on the impairment method as of December 31, 2012:
 
   
Commercial
   
Commercial
Real Estate
   
Residential
Real Estate
   
Consumer
   
Agriculture
   
Other
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Allowance for loan losses:
                                         
Ending allowance balance attributable to loans:
                                         
Individually evaluated for impairment
 
$
263
   
$
16,046
   
$
4,641
   
$
68
   
$
5
   
$
11
   
$
21,034
 
Collectively evaluated for impairment
   
4,139
     
18,722
     
11,594
     
789
     
398
     
4
     
 35,646
 
Total ending allowance balance
 
$
4,402
   
$
34,768
   
$
16,235
   
$
857
   
$
403
   
$
15
   
$
56,680
 
                                                         
                                                         
Loans:
                                                       
Loans individually evaluated for impairment
 
$
5,296
   
$
125,922
   
$
56,799
   
$
212
   
$
55
   
$
524
   
$
188,808
 
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment
   
47,271
     
347,874
     
272,460
     
20,171
     
22,262
     
246
     
710,284
 
Total ending loans balance
 
$
52,567
   
$
473,796
   
$
329,259
   
$
20,383
   
$
22,317
   
$
770
   
$
899,092
 

 
15

 
 
Impaired Loans
 
Impaired loans include restructured loans and commercial, construction, agriculture and commercial real estate loans on nonaccrual or classified as doubtful, whereby collection of the total amount is improbable, or loss, whereby all or a portion of the loan has been written off or a specific allowance for loss has been provided.
 
The following table presents information related to loans individually evaluated for impairment by class of loans as of and for the three months ended March 31, 2013:
 
   
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
   
Recorded
Investment
   
Allowance
For Loan
Losses
Allocated
   
Average
Recorded
Investment
   
Interest
 Income
Recognized
   
Cash
Basis
Income
Recognized
 
   
(in thousands)
       
With No Related Allowance Recorded:
                                   
Commercial
  $ 2,197     $ 1,887     $     $ 1,561     $     $  
Commercial real estate:
                                               
Construction
    948       800             955       5       5  
Farmland
    4,070       4,071             4,259       67       67  
Other
    1,930       1,816             1,854       4       4  
Residential real estate:
                                               
Multi-family
    640       640             641              
1-4 Family
    13,695       13,352             13,255       19       19  
Consumer
    13       13             41              
Agriculture
    170       170             107              
Other
                                   
With An Allowance Recorded:
                                               
Commercial
    4,303       3,781       695       3,921       30        
Commercial real estate:
                                               
Construction
    26,693       24,481       154       24,968       34        
Farmland
    8,362       6,050       270       6,253       11        
Other
    97,688       77,340       5,714       81,951       330        
Residential real estate:
                                               
Multi-family
    14,864       13,155       587       14,031       56        
1-4 Family
    33,389       29,195       708       28,644       103        
Consumer
    268       199       21       171              
Agriculture
                      5              
Other
    522       522       12       523       4        
Total
  $ 209,752     $ 177,472     $ 8,161     $ 183,140     $ 663     $ 95  

The following table presents loans individually evaluated for impairment by class of loan as of December 31, 2012:
 
   
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
   
Recorded
Investment
   
Allowance
For Loan
Losses
Allocated
   
Average
Recorded
Investment
   
Interest
 Income
Recognized
   
Cash
Basis
Income
Recognized
 
   
(in thousands)
       
With No Related Allowance Recorded:
                                   
Commercial
  $ 1,460     $ 1,234     $     $ 1,637     $ 5     $ 4  
Commercial real estate:
                                               
Construction
    1,155       1,109             1,745       2       2  
Farmland
    4,448       4,448             4,706       57       57  
Other
    2,134       1,892             3,436       3       3  
Residential real estate:
                                               
Multi-family
    643       643             910              
1-4 Family
    13,539       13,158             11,291       56       56  
Consumer
    70       70             219       8       5  
Agriculture
    45       45             366       2        
Other
                                   
 
 
16

 
 
   
Unpaid
Principal
Balance
   
Recorded
Investment
   
Allowance
For Loan
Losses
Allocated
   
Average
Recorded
Investment
   
Interest
 Income
Recognized
   
Cash
Basis
Income
Recognized
 
   
(in thousands)
       
With An Allowance Recorded:
                                   
Commercial
    4,108       4,062       263       3,964       169       27  
Commercial real estate:
                                               
Construction
    26,645       25,455       1,543       19,514       348       5  
Farmland
    8,557       6,456       734       5,794       43       2  
Other
    97,699       86,562       13,769       83,087       2,011       185  
Residential real estate:
                                               
Multi-family
    14,906       14,906       1,643       11,187       468        
1-4 Family
    31,021       28,092       2,998       27,404       787       9  
Consumer
    142       142       68       29              
Agriculture
    10       10       5       6              
Other
    524       524       11       533       17        
Total
  $ 207,106     $ 188,808     $ 21,034     $ 175,828     $ 3,976     $ 355  
 
Troubled Debt Restructuring
 
A troubled debt restructuring (TDR) occurs when the Company has agreed to a loan modification in the form of a concession for a borrower who is experiencing financial difficulty.  The majority of the Company’s TDRs involve a reduction in interest rate, a deferral of principal for a stated period of time, or an interest only period.  All TDRs are considered impaired and the Company has allocated reserves for these loans to reflect the present value of the concessionary terms granted to the customer.

The following table presents the types of TDR loan modifications by portfolio segment outstanding as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:
 
   
TDRs
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
TDRs Not
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
Total
TDRs
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                 
Commercial
                 
Rate reduction
 
$
2,000
   
$
   
$
2,000
 
Principal deferral
   
883
     
     
883
 
Interest only payments
   
     
362
     
362
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                       
Construction
                       
Rate reduction
   
3,437
     
6,078
     
9,515
 
Farmland
                       
Rate reduction
   
150
     
     
150
 
Principal deferral
   
719
     
2,438
     
3,157
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
29,718
     
21,665
     
51,383
 
Principal deferral
   
1,188
     
     
1,188
 
Interest only payments
   
2,465
     
2,067
     
4,532
 
Residential Real Estate:
                       
Multi-family
                       
Rate reduction
   
4,727
     
6,946
     
11,673
 
Interest only payments
   
649
     
     
649
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
8,659
     
12,950
     
21,609
 
Consumer
                       
Rate reduction
   
54
     
86
     
140
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
522
     
     
522
 
Total TDRs
 
$
55,171
   
$
52,592
   
$
107,763
 
 
 
17

 
 
   
TDRs
Performing to
Modified Terms
   
TDRs Not
Performing to
Modified Terms
   
Total
TDRs
 
   
(in thousands)
 
December 31, 2012
                 
Commercial
                 
Rate reduction
 
$
1,972
   
$
   
$
1,972
 
Principal deferral
   
887
     
     
887
 
Interest only payments
   
     
958
     
958
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                       
Construction
                       
Rate reduction
   
4,834
     
4,459
     
9,293
 
Farmland
                       
Rate reduction
   
150
     
     
150
 
Principal deferral
   
725
     
2,438
     
3,163
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
36,515
     
22,631
     
59,146
 
Principal deferral
   
1,195
     
     
1,195
 
Interest only payments
   
2,466
     
2,107
     
4,573
 
Residential Real Estate:
                       
Multi-family
                       
Rate reduction
   
13,087
     
     
13,087
 
Interest only payments
   
652
     
     
652
 
1-4 Family
                       
Rate reduction
   
14,323
     
7,871
     
22,194
 
Consumer
                       
Rate reduction
   
14
     
     
14
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
524
     
     
524
 
Total TDRs
 
$
77,344
   
$
40,464
   
$
117,808
 

At March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, 51% and 66%, respectively, of the Company’s TDRs were performing according to their modified terms.  The Company allocated $5.5 million and $15.1 million in reserves to customers whose loan terms have been modified in TDRs as of March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively.  The Company has committed to lend additional amounts totaling $123,000 and $259,000 as of March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, respectively, to customers with outstanding loans that are classified as TDRs.

The following tables present a summary of the types of TDR loan modifications by portfolio type that occurred during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012:
 
   
TDRs
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
TDRs Not
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
Total
TDRs
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                 
Commercial:
                 
Rate reduction
 
$
47
   
$
   
$
47
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                       
Construction
                       
Rate reduction
   
     
1,291
     
1,291
 
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
1,428
     
     
1,428
 
Residential Real Estate:
                       
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
819
     
     
819
 
Consumer:
                       
Rate reduction
   
40
     
86
     
126
 
Total TDRs
 
$
2,334
   
$
1,377
   
$
3,711
 

 
18

 
 
   
TDRs
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
TDRs Not
Performing to
Modified
Terms
   
Total
TDRs
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2012
                 
Commercial:
                 
Interest only payments
 
$
   
$
1,035
   
$
1,035
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                       
Other
                       
Rate reduction
   
3,199
     
     
3,199
 
Interest only payments
   
2,284
     
2,200
     
4,484
 
Residential Real Estate:
                       
Multi-family
                       
Rate reduction
   
8,386
     
     
8,386
 
1-4 Family
                       
Rate reduction
   
5,674
     
— 
     
5,674
 
                         
Total TDRs
 
$
19,543
   
$
3,235
   
$
22,778
 

At March 31, 2012, 86% of the Company’s TDRs were performing according to their modified terms.  The Company allocated $238,000 in reserves to customers whose loan terms had been modified in TDRs during the three months ended March 31, 2012.  The Company committed to lend additional amounts totaling $192,000 as of March 31, 2012 to customers with outstanding loans that were classified as TDRs.
 
During the first three months of 2013, approximately $1.6 million TDRs defaulted on their restructured loan and the default occurred within the 12 month period following the loan modification. These defaults consisted of $1.5 million in commercial real estate loans, and $86,000 in consumer loans. A default is considered to have occurred once the TDR is past due 90 days or more or it has been placed on nonaccrual.

During the first three months of 2012, approximately $7.6 million TDRs defaulted on their restructured loan and the default occurred within the 12 month period following the loan modification.  These defaults consisted of $6.6 million on commercial real estate loans and $1.0 million in commercial loans.  A default is considered to have occurred once the TDR is past due 90 days or more or it has been placed on nonaccrual.
 
 
19

 
 
Nonperforming Loans

Nonperforming loans include impaired loans not on accrual and smaller balance homogeneous loans, such as residential mortgage and consumer loans, that are collectively evaluated for impairment.
 
The following table presents the recorded investment in nonaccrual and loans past due 90 days and still on accrual by class of loan as of March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012:
 
    Nonaccrual    
Loans Past
Due 90 Days
And Over Still
Accruing
 
   
March 31,
2013
   
December 31,
2012
   
March 31,
2013
   
December 31,
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
                         
                         
Commercial
  $ 2,784     $ 2,437     $     $ 36  
Commercial Real Estate:
                               
Construction
    21,845       7,808              
Farmland
    9,252       10,030              
Other
    45,680       46,036              
Residential Real Estate:
                               
Multi-family
    8,132       1,516              
1-4 Family
    32,922       26,501             50  
Consumer
    158       135              
Agriculture
    170       54              
Other
                       
Total
  $ 120,943     $ 94,517     $     $ 86  
 
The following table presents the aging of the recorded investment in past due loans as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012:
 
   
30 – 59
Days
Past Due
   
60 – 89
Days
Past Due
   
90 Days
And Over
Past Due
   
 
 
Nonaccrual
   
Total
Past Due
And
Nonaccrual
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                             
Commercial
 
$
388
   
$
82
   
$
   
$
2,784
   
$
3,254
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                                       
Construction
   
     
     
     
21,845
     
21,845
 
Farmland
   
920
     
176
     
     
9,252
     
10,348
 
Other
   
2,995
     
2,027
     
     
45,680
     
50,702
 
Residential Real Estate:
                                       
Multi-family
   
632
     
     
     
8,132
     
8,764
 
1-4 Family
   
2,795
     
592
     
     
32,922
     
36,309
 
Consumer
   
241
     
51
     
     
158
     
450
 
Agriculture
   
81
     
32
     
     
170
     
283
 
Other
   
     
     
     
     
 
Total
 
$
8,052
   
$
2,960
   
$
   
$
120,943
   
$
131,955
 

 
20

 
 
   
30 – 59
Days
Past Due
   
60 – 89
Days
Past Due
   
90 Days
And Over
Past Due
   
 
 
Nonaccrual
   
Total
Past Due
And
Nonaccrual
 
   
(in thousands)
 
December 31, 2012
                             
Commercial
 
$
1,279
   
$
90
   
$
36
   
$
2,437
   
$
3,842
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                                       
Construction
   
10,510
     
5,815
     
     
7,808
     
24,133
 
Farmland
   
922
     
58
     
     
10,030
     
11,010
 
Other
   
5,138
     
13,037
     
     
46,036
     
64,211
 
Residential Real Estate:
                                       
Multi-family
   
8,762
     
     
     
1,516
     
10,278
 
1-4 Family
   
11,145
     
1,221
     
50
     
26,501
     
38,917
 
Consumer
   
310
     
75
     
     
135
     
520
 
Agriculture
   
153
     
7
     
     
54
     
214
 
Other
   
     
     
     
     
 
Total
 
$
38,219
   
$
20,303
   
$
86
   
$
94,517
   
$
153,125
 
 
Credit Quality Indicators – We categorize loans into risk categories at origination based upon original underwriting. Thereafter, we categorize loans into risk categories based on relevant information about the ability of borrowers to service their debt such as current financial information, historical payment experience, credit documentation, public information, and current economic trends, among other factors.  Loans are analyzed individually by classifying the loans as to credit risk.  This analysis includes loans with an outstanding balance greater than $500,000 and non-homogeneous loans, such as commercial and commercial real estate loans.  This analysis is performed on a quarterly basis.  We do not have any non-rated loans. The following definitions are used for risk ratings:
 
Watch – Loans classified as watch are those loans which have experienced a potentially adverse development which necessitates increased monitoring.
 
Special Mention – Loans classified as special mention do not have all of the characteristics of substandard or doubtful loans. They have one or more deficiencies which warrant special attention and which corrective action, such as accelerated collection practices, may remedy.
 
Substandard – Loans classified as substandard are those loans with clear and defined weaknesses such as a highly leveraged position, unfavorable financial ratios, uncertain repayment sources or poor financial condition which may jeopardize the repayment of the debt as contractually agreed. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some losses if the deficiencies are not corrected.
 
Doubtful – Loans classified as doubtful are those loans which have characteristics similar to substandard loans but with an increased risk that collection or liquidation in full is highly questionable and improbable.
 
Loans not meeting the criteria above that are analyzed individually as part of the above described process are considered to be “Pass” rated loans.  As of March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, and based on the most recent analysis performed, the risk category of loans by class of loans is as follows:
 
 
21

 
 
   
Pass
   
Watch
   
Special
Mention
   
Substandard
   
Doubtful
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
March 31, 2013
                                   
Commercial
 
$
28,627
   
$
8,996
   
$
1,690
   
$
10,559
   
$
60
   
$
49,932
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                                               
Construction
   
21,537
     
11,262
     
2,810
     
26,926
     
     
62,535
 
Farmland
   
42,233
     
13,652
     
3,506
     
15,956
     
     
75,347
 
Other
   
109,294
     
60,987
     
15,443
     
103,224
     
263
     
289,211
 
Residential Real Estate:
                                               
Multi-family
   
18,417
     
14,990
     
     
16,183
     
     
49,590
 
1-4 Family
   
145,798
     
48,304
     
3,364
     
61,946
     
     
259,412
 
Consumer
   
16,018
     
1,271
     
32
     
808
     
     
18,129
 
Agriculture
   
19,276
     
1,408
     
922
     
608
     
     
22,214
 
Other
   
184
     
522
     
     
     
     
706
 
Total
 
$
401,384
   
$
161,392
   
$
27,767
   
$
236,210
   
$
323
   
$
827,076
 

 
   
Pass
   
Watch
   
Special
Mention
   
Substandard
   
Doubtful
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
                                     
December 31, 2012
                                   
Commercial
 
$
27,085
   
$
10,153
   
$
6,495
   
$
8,772
   
$
62
   
$
52,567
 
Commercial Real Estate:
                                               
Construction
   
26,085
     
21,713
     
3,647
     
18,839
     
     
70,284
 
Farmland
   
47,017
     
13,461
     
3,532
     
16,815
     
     
80,825
 
Other
   
122,603
     
66,223
     
14,955
     
118,635
     
271
     
322,687
 
Residential Real Estate:
                                               
Multi-family
   
18,387
     
14,637
     
     
17,962
     
     
50,986
 
1-4 Family
   
159,975
     
47,030
     
5,167
     
66,101
     
     
278,273
 
Consumer
   
17,232
     
2,211
     
35
     
842
     
63
     
20,383
 
Agriculture
   
19,256
     
1,467
     
869
     
725
     
     
22,317
 
Other
   
246
     
524
     
     
     
     
770
 
Total
 
$
437,886
   
$
177,419
   
$
34,700
   
$
248,691
   
$
396
   
$
899,092
 

Note 5 – Other Real Estate Owned
 
Other real estate owned (OREO) is real estate acquired as a result of foreclosure or by deed in lieu of foreclosure.  It is classified as real estate owned until such time as it is sold.  When property is acquired as a result of foreclosure or by deed in lieu of foreclosure, it is recorded at its fair market value less cost to sell.  Any write-down of the property at the time of acquisition is charged to the allowance for loan losses.  Subsequent reductions in fair value are recorded as non-interest expense.  To determine the fair value of OREO for smaller dollar single family homes, we consult with internal real estate sales staff and external realtors, investors, and appraisers.  If the internally evaluated market price is below our underlying investment in the property, appropriate write-downs are taken.
 
For larger dollar residential and commercial real estate properties, we obtain a new appraisal of the subject property in connection with the transfer to other real estate owned.  We obtain updated appraisals each year on the anniversary date of ownership unless a sale is imminent.
 
 
22

 

The following table presents the major categories of OREO at the period-ends indicated:
 
   
March 31,
2013
   
December 31,
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Commercial Real Estate:
           
Construction
 
$
21,960
   
$
22,912
 
Farmland
   
1,008
     
618
 
Other
   
15,333
     
15,577
 
Residential Real Estate:
               
Multi-family
   
200
     
200
 
1-4 Family
   
6,619
     
5,518
 
     
45,120
     
44,825
 
Valuation allowance
   
(928
)
   
(1,154
)
                 
   
$
44,192
   
$
43,671
 
 
   
For the Three
Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
OREO Valuation Allowance Activity:
           
Beginning balance
 
$
1,154
   
$
1,667
 
Provision to allowance
   
307
     
480
 
Write-downs
   
(533
)
   
(465
)
Ending balance
 
$
928
   
$
1,682
 
 
Net activity relating to other real estate owned during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and 2012 is as follows:

   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
OREO Activity
           
OREO as of January 1
 
$
43,671
   
$
41,449
 
Real estate acquired
   
3,680
     
4,216
 
Valuation adjustments for declining market values
   
(307
)
   
(480
)
Improvements
   
     
1
 
Loss on sale
   
(197
)
   
(402
)
Proceeds from sale of properties
   
(2,655
)
   
(9,210
)
OREO as of March 31
 
$
44,192
   
$
35,574
 
 
Expenses related to other real estate owned include:
 
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Net loss on sales
 
$
197
   
$
402
 
Provision to allowance
   
307
     
480
 
Operating expense
   
287
     
375
 
Total
 
$
791
   
$
1,257
 
 
 
23

 
 
Note 6 – Deposits
 
The following table shows deposits by category:
 
   
March 31,
2013
   
December 31,
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Non-interest bearing
 
$
108,841
   
$
114,310
 
Interest checking
   
83,522
     
87,234
 
Money market
   
62,111
     
63,715
 
Savings
   
41,952
     
39,227
 
Certificates of deposit
   
739,934
     
760,573
 
Total
 
$
1,036,360
   
$
1,065,059
 

Time deposits of $100,000 or more were $316.1 million and $319.5 million at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, respectively.
 
Scheduled maturities of total time deposits at March 31, 2013 for each of the next five years are as follows (in thousands):
 
   
Retail
   
Brokered
   
Total
 
Year 1
 
$
377,218
   
$
15,000
   
$
392,218
 
Year 2
   
234,060
     
     
234,060
 
Year 3
   
94,199
     
     
94,199
 
Year 4
   
8,542
     
     
8,542
 
Year 5
   
10,839
     
     
10,839
 
Thereafter
   
76
     
     
76
 
   
$
724,934
   
$
15,000
   
$
739,934
 

Historically, the Bank has utilized brokered and wholesale deposits to supplement its funding strategy. At March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, these deposits totaled $15.0 million. As stipulated in the Consent Order, PBI Bank is currently restricted from accepting, renewing, or rolling-over brokered deposits without the prior receipt of a waiver on a case-by-case basis from our regulators.

Note 7 – Advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank

Advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank were as follows:
 
   
March 31,
   
December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Monthly amortizing advances with fixed rates from 0.00% to 5.25% and
           
maturities ranging from 2013 through 2033, averaging 3.19% for 2013
 
$
5,324
   
$
5,604
 
 
Each advance is payable per terms on agreement, with a prepayment penalty.  The advances are collateralized by first mortgage loans.  The borrowing capacity is based on the market value of the underlying pledged loans rather than the unpaid principal balance of the pledged loans. At March 31, 2013, our additional borrowing capacity with the FHLB was $17.9 million. The availability of our borrowing capacity could be affected by our financial position and the FHLB could require additional collateral or, among other things, exercise its right to deny a funding request, at its discretion. Additionally, any new advances are limited to a one year maturity or less.

Note 8 – Fair Values Measurement

Fair value is the exchange price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (exit price) in the principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between market participants on the measurement date. We use various valuation techniques to determine fair value, including market, income and cost approaches.  There are three levels of inputs that may be used to measure fair values:

Level 1: Quoted prices (unadjusted) for identical assets or liabilities in active markets that an entity has the ability to access as of the measurement date, or observable inputs.
 
 
24

 
 
Level 2: Significant other observable inputs other than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, quoted prices in markets that are not active, and other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data.

Level 3: Significant unobservable inputs that reflect an entity’s own assumptions about the assumptions that market participants would use in pricing an asset or liability.
 
In certain cases, the inputs used to measure fair value may fall into different levels of the fair value hierarchy.  When that occurs, we classify the fair value hierarchy on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.  We used the following methods and significant assumptions to estimate fair value.

Securities: The fair values of securities available for sale are determined by obtaining quoted prices on nationally recognized securities exchanges, if available.  This valuation method is classified as Level 1 in the fair value hierarchy. For securities where quoted prices are not available, fair values are calculated on market prices of similar securities, or matrix pricing, which is a mathematical technique used widely in the industry to value debt securities without relying exclusively on quoted prices for the specific securities but rather by relying on the securities’ relationship to other benchmark quoted securities.  Matrix pricing relies on the securities’ relationship to similarly traded securities, benchmark curves, and the benchmarking of like securities. Matrix pricing utilizes observable market inputs such as benchmark yields, reported trades, broker/dealer quotes, issuer spreads, two-sided markets, benchmark securities, bids, offers, reference data, and industry and economic events. In instances where broker quotes are used, these quotes are obtained from market makers or broker-dealers recognized to be market participants. This valuation method is classified as Level 2 in the fair value hierarchy.  For securities where quoted prices or market prices of similar securities are not available, fair values are calculated using discounted cash flows or other market indicators.  This valuation method is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. Discounted cash flows are calculated using spread to swap and LIBOR curves that are updated to incorporate loss severities, volatility, credit spread and optionality. During times when trading is more liquid, broker quotes are used (if available) to validate the model. Rating agency and industry research reports as well as defaults and deferrals on individual securities are reviewed and incorporated into the calculations.

Impaired Loans: An impaired loan is evaluated at the time the loan is identified as impaired and is recorded at fair value less costs to sell. Fair value is measured based on the value of the collateral securing the loan and is classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy. Fair value is determined using several methods. Generally, the fair value of real estate is determined based on appraisals by qualified licensed appraisers. These appraisals may utilize a single valuation approach or a combination of approaches including comparable sales and the income approach.

Adjustments are routinely made in the appraisal process by the appraisers to adjust for differences between the comparable sales and income data available. These routine adjustments are made to adjust the value of a specific property relative to comparable properties for variations in qualities such as location, size, and income production capacity relative to the subject property of the appraisal. Such adjustments are typically significant and result in a Level 3 classification of the inputs for determining fair value.
 
We routinely apply an internal discount to the value of appraisals used in the fair value evaluation of our impaired loans. The deductions to the appraisal take into account changing business factors and market conditions, as well as potential value impairment in cases where the date of the appraisal of the collateral predates a likely change in market conditions.   These deductions range from 10% for routine real estate collateral to 30% for real estate that is determined (1) to have a thin trading market or (2) to be for unique use.  This is in addition to estimated discounts for cost to sell of ten percent.

We also apply discounts to the expected fair value of collateral for impaired loans where the likely resolution involves litigation of foreclosure. Resolution of this nature generally results in receiving lower values for real estate collateral in a more aggressive sales environment. We have utilized discounts ranging from 10% to 33% in our impairment evaluations when applicable.

Impaired loans are evaluated quarterly for additional impairment. We obtain updated appraisals on properties securing our loans when circumstances are warranted such as at the time of renewal or when market conditions have significantly changed. This determination is made on a property-by-property basis in light of circumstances in the broader economic climate and our assessment of deterioration of real estate values in the market in which the property is located.  The first stage of our assessment involves management’s inspection of the property in question.  Management also engages in conversations with local real estate professionals, investors, and market makers to determine the likely marketing time and value range for the property.  The second stage involves an assessment of current trends in the regional market.  After thorough consideration of these factors, management will either internally evaluate fair value or order a new appraisal.
 
 
25

 
 
Other Real Estate Owned (OREO): OREO is evaluated at the time of acquisition and recorded at fair value as determined by independent appraisal or internal market evaluation less cost to sell.  Our quarterly evaluations of OREO for impairment are driven by property type.  For smaller dollar single family homes, we consult with internal real estate sales staff and external realtors, investors, and appraisers.  Based on these consultations, we determine asking prices for OREO properties we are marketing for sale. If the internally evaluated fair value is below our recorded investment in the property, appropriate write-downs are taken.
 
For larger dollar commercial real estate properties, we obtain a new appraisal of the subject property in connection with the transfer to other real estate owned.  In some of these circumstances, an appraisal is in process at quarter end, and we must make our best estimate of fair value based on our internal evaluation of the property, review of the most recent appraisal, and discussions with the currently engaged appraiser.  We obtain updated appraisals on the anniversary date of ownership unless a sale is imminent.

We routinely apply an internal discount to the value of appraisals used in the fair value evaluation of our OREO. The deductions to the appraisal take into account changing business factors and market conditions, as well as potential value impairment in cases where our appraisal date predates a likely change in market conditions.   These deductions range from 10% for routine real estate to 30% for real estate that is determined (1) to have a thin trading market or (2) to be for unique use.  This is in addition to estimated discounts for cost to sell of ten percent.

Financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis at March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 are summarized below:
 
         
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2013 Using
 
         
(in thousands)
 
         
Quoted Prices In
         
Significant
 
         
Active Markets for
   
Significant Other
   
Unobservable
 
   
Carrying
   
Identical Assets
   
Observable Inputs
   
Inputs
 
Description
 
Value
   
(Level 1)
   
(Level 2)
   
(Level 3)
 
   
Available-for-sale securities
                       
U.S. Government and
                       
federal agency
 
$
24,167
   
$
   
$
24,167
   
$
 
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
80,333
     
     
80,333
     
 
State and municipal
   
55,673
     
     
55,673
     
 
Corporate bonds
   
20,382
     
     
20,382
     
 
Other debt securities
   
643
     
     
     
643
 
Equity securities
   
2,049
     
2,049
     
     
 
Total
 
$
183,247
   
$
2,049
   
$
180,555
   
$
643
 

         
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2012 Using
 
         
(in thousands)
 
Description
 
Carrying
Value
   
Quoted Prices In
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
   
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
   
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 
Available-for-sale securities
                       
U.S. Government and
                       
federal agency
 
$
6,133
   
$
   
$
6,133
   
$
 
Agency mortgage-backed: residential
   
95,182
     
     
95,182
     
 
State and municipal
   
54,733
     
     
54,733
     
 
Corporate bonds
   
19,964
     
     
19,964
     
 
Other debt securities
   
618
     
     
     
618
 
Equity securities
   
1,846
     
1,846
     
     
 
Total
 
$
178,476
   
$
1,846
   
$
176,012
   
$
618
 
 
There were no transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 during 2013 or 2012.
 
 
26

 
 
The table below presents a reconciliation of all assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) for the periods ended March 31, 2013 and 2012:

   
State and Municipal
Securities
   
Other Debt
Securities
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Balances of recurring Level 3 assets at January 1
 
$
   
$
1,173
   
$
618
   
$
606
 
Total gain (loss) for the period:
                               
Included in other comprehensive income (loss)
   
     
(9
)
   
25
     
(11
)
Sales
   
     
(411
)
   
     
 
Balance of recurring Level 3 assets at March 31
 
$
   
$
753
   
$
643
   
$
595
 

Level 3 state and municipal securities valuations are supported by analysis prepared by an independent third party.  Their approach to determining fair value involves using recently executed transactions for similar securities and market quotations for similar securities. As securities of this type are not rated by the rating agencies and trading volumes are thin, it was determined that these were valued using Level 3 inputs. We sold our Level 3 municipal securities in the second quarter of 2012 and had no securities of this nature at March 31, 2013.
 
Our other debt security valuation is determined internally by calculating discounted cash flows using the security’s coupon rate of 6.5% and an estimated current market rate of 9.0% based upon the current yield curve plus spreads that adjust for volatility, credit risk, and optionality.  We also consider the issuer(s) publicly filed financial information as well as assumptions regarding the likelihood of deferrals and defaults.

Financial assets measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis are summarized below:
 
         
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2013 Using
 
         
(in thousands)
 
         
Quoted Prices In
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
   
 
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
   
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 
       
   
Carrying
Value
 
Description
Impaired loans:
                       
Commercial
  $ 3,086     $     $     $ 3,086  
Commercial real estate:
                               
Construction
    24,327                   24,327  
Farmland
    5,780                   5,780  
Other
    71,626                   71,626  
Residential real estate:
                               
Multi-family
    12,568                   12,568  
1-4 Family
    28,487                   28,487  
Consumer
    178                   178  
Other
    510                   510  
Other real estate owned, net:
                               
Commercial real estate:
                               
Construction
    21,508                   21,508  
Farmland
    987                   987  
Other
    15,018                   15,018  
Residential real estate:
                               
Multi-family
    196                   196  
1-4 Family
    6,483                   6,483  
 
 
27

 
 
         
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2012 Using
 
         
(in thousands)
 
         
Quoted Prices In
Active Markets for
Identical Assets
(Level 1)
   
 
Significant Other
Observable Inputs
(Level 2)
   
Significant
Unobservable
Inputs
(Level 3)
 
       
   
Carrying
Value
 
Description
Impaired loans:
                       
Commercial
  $ 3,799     $     $     $ 3,799  
Commercial real estate:
                               
Construction
    23,912                   23,912  
Farmland
    5,722                   5,722  
Other
    72,793                   72,793  
Residential real estate:
                               
Multi-family
    13,263                   13,263  
1-4 Family
    25,094                   25,094  
Consumer
    74                   74  
Agriculture
    5                   5  
Other
    513                   513  
Other real estate owned, net:
                               
Commercial real estate:
                               
Construction
    22,323                   22,323  
Farmland
    602                   602  
Other
    15,175                   15,175  
Residential real estate:
                               
Multi-family
    195                   195  
1-4 Family
    5,376                   5,376  

Impaired loans, which are measured for impairment using the fair value of the collateral for collateral dependent loans, had a carrying amount of $154.7 million at March 31, 2013 with a valuation allowance of $8.2 million.  This resulted in no additional provision for loan losses for the quarter ended March 31, 2013.  At December 31, 2012, impaired loans had a carrying amount of $166.2 million, with a valuation allowance of $21.0 million.

Other real estate owned, which is measured at the lower of carrying or fair value less estimated costs to sell, had a net carrying amount of $44.2 million as of March 31, 2013, compared with $43.7 million at December 31, 2012.  Fair value write-downs of $307,000 were recorded on other real estate owned for the three months ended March 31, 2013.
 
 
28

 
 
The following table presents qualitative information about level 3 fair value measurements for financial instruments measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis at March 31, 2013:
 
     
Fair Value
 
Valuation
Technique(s)
 
Unobservable Input(s)
 
Range (Weighted
Average)
     
(in thousands)
           
                   
Impaired loans – Commercial
 
3,086
 
Market  value approach
 
Adjustment for receivables and inventory discounts
 
16% - 32% (24%)
                   
Impaired loans – Commercial real estate
 
101,733
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
0% - 69% (20%)
                   
Impaired loans – Residential real estate
 
41,055
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
0% - 50% (15%)
                   
Other real estate owned – Commercial real estate
 
$
37,513
 
Sales comparison approach
Income approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
Discount or capitalization rate
 
3% - 50% (18%)
9% - 16% (12%)
                   
Other real estate owned – Residential real estate
 
6,679
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
4% - 31% (12%)

The following table presents qualitative information about level 3 fair value measurements for financial instruments measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis at December 31, 2012:
 
     
Fair Value
 
Valuation
Technique(s)
 
Unobservable Input(s)
 
Range (Weighted
Average)
     
(in thousands)
           
                   
Impaired loans – Commercial
 
3,799
 
Market  value approach
 
Adjustment for receivables and inventory discounts
 
16% - 32% (24%)
                   
Impaired loans – Commercial real estate
 
89,461
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
0% - 69% (19%)
                   
Impaired loans – Residetial real estate
 
38,357
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
0% - 38% (15%)
 
                   
Other real estate owned – Commercial real estate
 
$
38,100
 
Sales comparison approach
Income approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
Discount or capitalization rate
 
3% - 50% (18%)
9% - 16% (12%)
                   
Other real estate owned – Residential real estate
 
5,571
 
Sales comparison approach
 
Adjustment for differences between the comparable sales
 
0% - 30% (9%)
 
 
29

 
 
Carrying amount and estimated fair values of financial instruments were as follows for the periods indicated:

         
Fair Value Measurements at March 31, 2013 Using
 
   
Carrying
Amount
   
Level 1
   
Level 2
   
Level 3
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Financial assets
                             
Cash and cash equivalents
 
$
71,188
   
$
64,495
   
$
6,693
   
$
   
$
71,188
 
Securities available for sale
   
183,247
     
2,049
     
180,555
     
643
     
183,247
 
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
   
10,072
     
N/A
     
N/A
     
N/A
     
N/A
 
Mortgage loans held for sale
   
     
     
     
     
 
Loans, net
   
787,237
     
     
     
798,265
     
798,265
 
Accrued interest receivable
   
4,316
     
     
1,100
     
3,216
     
4,316
 
Financial liabilities
                                       
Deposits
 
$
1,036,360
   
$
108,841
   
$
930,566
   
$
   
$
1,039,407
 
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
   
2,853
     
     
2,853
     
     
2,853
 
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
   
5,324
     
     
5,326
     
     
5,326
 
Subordinated capital notes
   
6,525
     
     
     
6,503
     
6,503
 
Junior subordinated debentures
   
25,000
     
     
     
19,390
     
19,390
 
Accrued interest payable
   
2,083
     
     
1,058
     
1,025
     
2,083
 
 
         
Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2012 Using
 
   
Carrying
Amount
   
Level 1
   
Level 2
   
Level 3
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Financial assets
                             
Cash and cash equivalents
 
$
49,572
   
$
41,938
   
$
7,634
   
$
   
$
49,572
 
Securities available for sale
   
178,476
     
1,846
     
176,012
     
618
     
178,476
 
Federal Home Loan Bank stock
   
10,072
     
N/A
     
N/A
     
N/A
     
N/A
 
Mortgage loans held for sale
   
507
     
     
507
     
     
507
 
Loans, net
   
842,412
     
     
     
853,996
     
853,996
 
Accrued interest receivable
   
5,138
     
     
1,150
     
3,988
     
5,138
 
Financial liabilities
                                       
Deposits
 
$
1,065,059
   
$
114,310
   
$
955,216
   
$
   
$
1,069,526
 
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
   
2,634
     
     
2,634
     
     
2,634
 
Federal Home Loan Bank advances
   
5,604
     
     
5,607
     
     
5,607
 
Subordinated capital notes
   
6,975
     
     
     
6,599
     
6,599
 
Junior subordinated debentures
   
25,000
     
     
     
13,821
     
13,821
 
Accrued interest payable
   
2,104
     
     
1,173
     
931
     
2,104
 

The methods and assumptions, not previously presented, used to estimate fair values are described as follows:

(a) Cash and Cash Equivalents
The carrying amounts of cash and short-term instruments approximate fair values and are classified as either Level 1 or Level 2. Noninterest bearing deposits are Level 1 whereas interest bearing due from bank accounts and fed funds sold are Level 2.

(b) FHLB Stock
It is not practical to determine the fair value of FHLB stock due to restrictions placed on its transferability.

(c) Loans, Net
Fair values of loans, excluding loans held for sale, are estimated as follows:  For variable rate loans that reprice frequently and with no significant change in credit risk, fair values are based on carrying values resulting in a Level 3 classification. Fair values for other loans are estimated using discounted cash flow analyses, using interest rates currently being offered for loans with similar terms to borrowers of similar credit quality resulting in a Level 3 classification.  Impaired loans are valued at the lower of cost or fair value as described previously. The methods utilized to estimate the fair value of loans do not necessarily represent an exit price.

(d) Mortgage Loans Held for Sale
The fair value of loans held for sale is estimated based upon binding contracts and quotes from third party investors resulting in a Level 2 classification.
 
 
30

 
 
(e) Deposits
The fair values disclosed for non-interest bearing deposits are, by definition, equal to the amount payable on demand at the reporting date resulting in a Level 1 classification. The carrying amounts of variable rate interest bearing deposits approximate their fair values at the reporting date resulting in a Level 2 classification.  Fair values for fixed rate interest bearing deposits are estimated using a discounted cash flows calculation that applies interest rates currently being offered on certificates to a schedule of aggregated expected monthly maturities on time deposits resulting in a Level 2 classification.

(f) Securities Sold Under Agreements to Repurchase
The carrying amounts of borrowings under repurchase agreements approximate their fair values resulting in a Level 2 classification.
 
(g) Other Borrowings
The fair values of the Company’s FHLB advances are estimated using discounted cash flow analyses based on the current borrowing rates resulting in a Level 2 classification.

The fair values of the Company’s subordinated capital notes and junior subordinated debentures are estimated using discounted cash flow analyses based on the current borrowing rates for similar types of borrowing arrangements resulting in a Level 3 classification.

(h) Accrued Interest Receivable/Payable
The carrying amounts of accrued interest approximate fair value resulting in a Level 2 or Level 3 classification based on the level of the asset or liability with which the accrual is associated.

Note 9 – Income Taxes
 
Deferred tax assets and liabilities were due to the following as of:

   
March 31,
   
December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Deferred tax assets:
           
Allowance for loan losses
 
$
13,944
   
$
19,838
 
Other real estate owned write-down
   
10,165
     
10,408
 
Net operating loss carry-forward
   
21,184
     
15,051
 
New market tax credit carry-forward
   
208
     
208
 
Alternative minimum tax credit carry-forward
   
692
     
692
 
Net assets from acquisitions
   
618
     
592
 
Other than temporary impairment on securities
   
374
     
374
 
Amortization of non-compete agreements
   
18
     
19
 
Other
   
926
     
936
 
     
48,129
     
48,118
 
                 
Deferred tax liabilities:
               
Fixed assets
   
380
     
409
 
Net unrealized gain on securities available for sale
   
1,841
     
1,858
 
FHLB stock dividends
   
1,276
     
1,276
 
Originated mortgage servicing rights
   
94
     
98
 
Other
   
535
     
549
 
     
4,126
     
4,190
 
Net deferred tax assets before valuation allowance
   
44,003
     
43,928
 
Valuation allowance
   
(44,003
)
   
(43,928
)
Net deferred tax asset
 
$
   
$
 

Our estimate of the realizability of the deferred tax asset depends on our estimate of projected future levels of taxable income as all carryback ability was fully absorbed by our tax loss of approximately $40 million for 2011. In analyzing future taxable income levels, we considered all evidence currently available, both positive and negative. Based on our analysis, we continue to maintain a valuation allowance for all deferred tax assets as of March 31, 2013. Our deferred tax assets and the related valuation allowance are analyzed and adjusted on a quarterly basis.

 
31

 
 
The Company does not have any beginning and ending unrecognized tax benefits.  The Company does not expect the total amount of unrecognized tax benefits to significantly increase or decrease in the next twelve months.  There were no interest and penalties recorded in the income statement or accrued for the three months ended March 31, 2013 or the year ended December 31, 2012 related to unrecognized tax benefits.
 
The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to U.S. federal income tax and the Company is subject to income tax in the Commonwealth of Kentucky.  The Company is no longer subject to examination by taxing authorities for years before 2009.
 
Note 10 – Stock Plans and Stock Based Compensation
 
The Company has two stock incentive plans. On February 23, 2006, the Company adopted the Porter Bancorp, Inc. 2006 Stock Incentive Plan. The 2006 Plan permits the issuance of up to 463,050 shares of the Company’s common stock upon the exercise of stock options or upon the grant of stock awards.  As of March 31, 2013, the Company had granted 273,878 unvested shares net of forfeitures and vesting under the stock incentive plan. Shares issued under the plan vest annually on the anniversary date of the grant over five to ten years. The Company has 68,159 shares remaining available for issue under the plan.  

On May 15, 2006, the Board of Directors approved the Porter Bancorp, Inc. 2006 Non-Employee Directors Stock Ownership Incentive Plan, which was approved by holders of the Company’s voting common stock on June 8, 2006.  On May 22, 2008, shareholders voted to amend the plan to change the form of incentive award from stock options to unvested shares. Under the terms of the plan, 100,000 shares are reserved for issuance to non-employee directors upon the exercise of stock options or upon the grant of unvested stock awards granted under the plan. Prior to the amendment, options were granted automatically under the plan at fair market value on the date of grant.  The options vest over a three-year period and have a five year term.  Unvested shares are granted automatically under the plan at fair market value on the date of grant and vest semi-annually on the anniversary date of the grant over three years.

On May 16, 2012, holders of the Company’s voting common stock voted to further amend the 2006 Non-Employee Directors Stock Ownership Incentive Plan to award restricted shares having a fair market value of $25,000 annually to each non-employee director, and to increase the number of shares issuable under the Directors’ Plan from 100,000 shares to 400,000 shares. Shares issued under the amended plan vest semi-annually on the anniversary date of the grant over three years.

To date, the Company has issued 80,078 unvested shares to non-employee directors. At March 31, 2013, 295,712 shares remain available for issuance under this plan.

The fair value of the 2013 unvested shares issued to certain employees was $111,000, or $0.78 per weighted-average share. The Company recorded $103,000 and $105,000 of stock-based compensation during the first three months of 2013 and 2012, respectively, to salaries and employee benefits.  There was no significant impact on compensation expense resulting from forfeited or expiring shares. We expect substantially all of the unvested shares outstanding at the end of the period will vest according to the vesting schedule.  No deferred tax benefit was recognized related to this expense for either period.

The following table summarizes unvested share activity as of and for the periods indicated:
 
   
Three Months Ended
   
Twelve Months Ended
 
   
March 31, 2013
   
December 31, 2012
 
         
Weighted
         
Weighted
 
         
Average
         
Average
 
         
Grant
         
Grant
 
   
Shares
   
Price
   
Shares
   
Price
 
Outstanding, beginning
   
233,394
   
$
4.49
     
100,226
   
$
13.21
 
Granted
   
142,663
     
0.78
     
191,140
     
1.69
 
Vested
   
(16,992
)
   
11.97
     
(44,781
)
   
8.89
 
Forfeited
   
(5,109
)
   
14.64
     
(13,191
)
   
15.22
 
Outstanding, ending
   
353,956
   
$
2.49
     
233,394
   
$
4.49
 

As of March 31, 2013, all stock options issued to non-employee directors had expired and none were exercised during their grant term.   The Company's stock-based incentive awards have exclusively been restricted stock grants since 2008.
 
 
32

 
 
The following table summarizes stock option activity:
 
   
Three Months Ended
   
Twelve Months Ended
 
   
March 31, 2013
   
December 31, 2012
 
         
Weighted
         
Weighted
 
         
Average
         
Average
 
         
Exercise
         
Exercise
 
   
Shares
   
Price
   
Shares
   
Price
 
Outstanding, beginning
   
   
$
     
29,530
   
$
19.88
 
Forfeited
   
     
     
     
 
Expired
   
     
     
(29,530
)
   
19.88
 
Outstanding, ending
   
   
     
   
$
 
 
No options were issued, outstanding, or exercised during the first three months of 2013.  The Company recorded no stock option compensation expense during the three months ended March 31, 2013.  No options were modified during the period.  As of March 31, 2013, no stock options issued by the Company had been exercised, and all granted options had expired.

Unrecognized stock based compensation expense related to unvested shares for the remainder of 2013 and beyond are estimated as follows (in thousands):

April 2013 – December 2013
 
$
308
 
2014
   
313
 
2015
   
175
 
2016
   
77
 
2017 & thereafter
   
44
 

Note 11 – Earnings (Loss) per Share

The factors used in the basic and diluted earnings per share computations follow:
 
             
   
Three Months Ended
 
   
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands, except
 
   
share and per share data)
 
       
Net income (loss)
 
$
(69
)
 
$
1,502
 
Less:
               
Preferred stock dividends
   
438
 
   
437
 
Accretion of Series A preferred stock discount
   
45
 
   
45
 
Earnings (loss) allocated to unvested shares
   
(13
   
7
 
Earnings (loss) allocated to Series C preferred
   
(15
   
28
 
Net income (loss) allocated to common shareholders, basic and diluted
 
$
(524
)
 
$
985
 
                 
Basic
               
Weighted average common shares including
               
unvested common shares outstanding
   
12,474,476
     
12,156,452
 
Less: Weighted average unvested common shares
   
293,675
 
   
88,107
 
Less: Weighted average Series C preferred
   
332,894
 
   
332,894
 
Weighted average common shares outstanding
   
11,847,907
     
11,735,451
 
Basic earnings (loss) per common share
 
$
(0.04
)
 
$
0.08
 
                 
Diluted
               
Add: Dilutive effects of assumed exercises of common
               
and Preferred Series C stock warrants
   
     
 
Weighted average common shares and potential common shares
   
11,847,907
     
11,735,451
 
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share
 
$
(0.04
)
 
$
0.08
 
 
 
33

 
 
The Company had no outstanding stock options at March 31, 2013.  A warrant for the purchase of 330,561 shares of the Company’s common stock at an exercise price of $15.88 was outstanding at March 31, 2013 and 2012 but was not included in the diluted EPS computation as inclusion would have been anti-dilutive. Finally, warrants for the purchase of 1,380,437 shares of non-voting common stock at an exercise price of $11.50 per share were outstanding at March 31, 2013 and 2012, but were not included in the diluted EPS computation as inclusion would have been anti-dilutive.

Note 12 – Capital Requirements and Restrictions on Retained Earnings

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to regulatory capital requirements administered by federal banking agencies. Capital adequacy guidelines and, additionally for banks, prompt corrective action regulations involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance-sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators. Failure to meet capital requirements can initiate regulatory action.
 
On June 24, 2011, PBI Bank entered into a Consent Order with the FDIC and the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions.  The consent order required the Bank to complete a management study, to maintain Tier 1 capital as a percentage of total assets of at least 9% and a total risk based capital ratio of at least 12%, to develop a plan to reduce our risk position in each substandard asset in excess of $1 million, to complete board review of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses prior to quarterly Call Report submissions, to adopt procedures which strengthen the loan review function and ensure timely and accurate grading of credit relationships, to charge-off all assets classified as loss, to develop a plan to reduce concentrations of construction and development loans to not more than 75% of total risk based capital and non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans to not more than 250% of total risk based capital, to limit asset growth to no more than 5% in any quarter or 10% annually, to not extend additional credit to any borrower classified substandard unless the board of directors adopts in advance a detailed statement giving reasons why the extension is in the best interest of the bank, and to not declare or pay any dividend without the prior consent of our regulators.  We are also restricted from accepting, renewing, or rolling-over brokered deposits without the prior receipt of a waiver on a case-by-case basis from our regulators.

On September 21, 2011, we entered into a Written Agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis.  Pursuant to the Agreement, we made formal commitments to use our financial and management resources to serve as a source of strength for the Bank and to assist the Bank in addressing weaknesses identified by the FDIC and the KDFI, to pay no dividends without prior written approval, to pay no interest or principal on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities without prior written approval, and to submit an acceptable plan to maintain sufficient capital.

In October 2012, PBI Bank entered into a new consent order with the FDIC and KDFI. The new consent order requires the Bank to maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9% and a minimum total risk based capital ratio of 12%. The Bank also agreed that if it should be unable to reach the required capital levels, and if directed in writing by the FDIC, then the Bank would within 30 days develop, adopt and implement a written plan to sell or merge itself into another federally insured financial institution or otherwise immediately obtain a sufficient capital investment into the Bank to fully meet the capital requirements. We expect to continue to work with our regulators toward capital ratio compliance as outlined in the written capital plan previously submitted by the Bank. The new consent order also requires the Bank to continue to adhere to the plans implemented in response to the June 2011 consent order, and includes the substantive provisions of the June 2011 consent order.
 
The following table shows the ratios of Tier 1 capital and total capital to risk-adjusted assets and the leverage ratios for Porter Bancorp, Inc. and PBI Bank at the dates indicated:
 
                     
March 31, 2013
   
December 31, 2012
 
   
Regulatory
Minimums
   
Well-Capitalized
Minimums
   
Minimum Capital
Ratios Under
Consent Order
   
Porter
Bancorp
   
PBI
Bank
   
Porter
Bancorp
   
PBI
Bank
 
                                           
Tier 1 Capital
    4.0 %     6.0 %     N/A       6.77 %     8.21 %     6.46 %     7.71 %
Total risk-based capital
    8.0       10.0       12.0 %     10.16       10.29       9.81       9.82  
Tier 1 leverage ratio
    4.0       5.0       9.0       4.91       5.95       4.50       5.37  
 
At March 31, 2013, PBI Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio was 5.95%, which is below the 9% minimum capital ratio required by the Consent Order, and its total risk-based capital ratio was 10.29%, which is below the 12% minimum capital ratio required by the Consent Order. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could result in additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a materially adverse effect on our financial condition.

Kentucky banking laws limit the amount of dividends that may be paid to a holding company by its subsidiary banks without prior approval. These laws limit the amount of dividends that may be paid in any calendar year to current year’s net income, as defined in the laws, combined with the retained net income of the preceding two years, less any dividends declared during those periods. PBI Bank has agreed with its primary regulators to obtain their written consent prior to declaring or paying any future dividends. As a practical matter, PBI Bank cannot pay dividends to Porter Bancorp for the foreseeable future.
 
 
34

 
 
Note 13 – Contingencies

In 2010, the Company sold common shares, convertible preferred shares and warrants to purchase common shares to accredited investors for $32 million in a private placement.  In the placement, an affiliate of Clinton Group, Inc. (“CGI”) purchased 456,524 common shares and warrants to purchase 228,262 common shares for $10.93 per share for $5,000,016.  The numbers of shares and the warrant exercise price have been adjusted to reflect the Company’s 5% stock dividend in November 2010.

On July 11, 2011, CGI sent a letter to the Company, which was also attached as an exhibit to a Schedule 13D CGI filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the same date.  In its letter CGI set forth concerns about the Company’s executive leadership team and its ability to properly manage the Bank's operations, compliance with GAAP, financial disclosures and relationships with regulators, referencing the consent order PBI Bank entered into with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation and the Commonwealth of Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions on June 24, 2011.  CGI listed a number of steps it believed the Company must take to maximize shareholder value and comply with the consent order. In addition, CGI stated its belief “that it is likely that a number of representations and warranties made when the CGI affiliate entered into an agreement to purchase shares were false,” and demanded that the Company take immediate steps to “redress such breaches and make CGI and the other purchasers whole.”

On July 20, 2011, the Company’s board of directors established a new Risk Policy and Oversight Committee comprised of independent directors, to lead the Board’s oversight of the assessment and management of the risks of Porter Bancorp and PBI Bank.  During the third quarter, the Oversight Committee undertook an investigation of the allegations raised in the CGI 13D to evaluate their merit and to ascertain the reasonableness of the Bank’s allowance for loan losses and OREO valuations at the time of Clinton’s investment.

The Oversight Committee reported its conclusions to the Company’s board of directors in October 2011.  While recognizing that opportunities for procedural improvements existed in the Bank’s lending and non-performing asset administration, the  Oversight Committee concluded that this did not rise to a level that would result in the financial statements, or representations and warranties with respect to the financial statements, being misleading to investors in the 2010 private placement offering of the Company’s stock.  The Oversight Committee further concluded that investors were afforded ample opportunity and access to information for their due diligence, including documentation involving asset valuation estimates, on-site management discussions and additional inquiries during visits to the Company headquarters, and access to loan files of their choosing and the appraisals contained therein, and that the Company’s disclosures were adequate in all material respects.
 
On January 30, 2012, CGI delivered a demand to inspect the Company’s records pursuant to the Kentucky Business Corporation Act.  The Company provided records to CGI in accordance with Kentucky law.

On December 17, 2012, SBAV LP filed a lawsuit against Porter Bancorp, PBI Bank, J. Chester Porter and Maria L. Bouvette in New York state court.  The proceeding was removed to New York federal district court on January 16, 2013. SBAV LP v. Porter Bancorp, et. al., Civ. Action 13 Civ. 0372 (S.D.N.Y).  The complaint alleges violation of the Kentucky Securities Act, negligent misrepresentation and, against defendants Porter Bancorp and Bouvette, breach of contract.  The plaintiff seeks damages in an amount in excess of $4,500,000, or the difference between the $5,000,016 purchase price and the value of the securities when sold by the plaintiff, plus interest at the applicable statutory rate, costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees.  The defendants have filed motions to dismiss the suit or, in the alternative, to transfer it to federal district court in Kentucky. We dispute the material factual allegations made in the complaint and intend to defend the plaintiff’s claims vigorously.  We have not accrued liability related to this matter as we believe we have meritorious defenses.

On June 18, 2010, three real estate development companies filed suit in Kentucky state court against PBI Bank and Managed Assets of Kentucky (“MAKY”). Signature Point Condominiums LLC, et al. v. PBI Bank, et al., Jefferson Circuit Court, Case No 10-CI-04295. The plaintiffs had borrowed funds from PBI Bank to finance a real estate development project in Jefferson County, Kentucky.  In March 2010, PBI agreed to release the plaintiffs and the guarantors on the loans related to the project, and in exchange the plaintiffs conveyed the real estate securing the loans to PBI Bank. PBI Bank also granted the plaintiffs a right of first refusal to repurchase a +/- 30 acre tract of land within the project.  In May 2010, PBI Bank submitted to plaintiffs the required notice of its intent to sell the land subject to the right of first refusal. After plaintiffs declined to exercise their right of first refusal, PBI Bank sold the land to MAKY in June 2010 for $3.8 million.

Plaintiffs filed suit shortly before the closing of the sale and recorded a lis pendens claiming an interest in the land, effectively preventing MAKY from taking clear title.  Plaintiffs have asserted claims of fraud, breach of fiduciary duty, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, tortuous interference with prospective business advantage and conspiracy to commit fraud, negligence, and conspiracy against PBI Bank and MAKY.  Plaintiffs are seeking to rescind the agreement conveying the project to PBI Bank, but only with respect to the +/- 30 acre tract of land.  PBI has filed a counterclaim against the plaintiffs and a third party complaint against the guarantors, asserting claims of fraud. MAKY has asserted claims against the plaintiffs for slander of title and interference with business opportunities.  PBI’s position is that if the conveyance agreement is rescinded, then PBI’s notes, mortgages, and guarantees as well as the obligations of the plaintiffs and guarantors under the loans, which total more than $26 million, would all be reinstated.  PBI would then seek to enforce its rights under such instruments.  The matter is scheduled for trial in July 2013.  We have not accrued liability related to this matter as we believe we have meritorious claims and defenses.
 
 
35

 
 
In the normal course of operations, we are defendants in various legal proceedings.  We record contingent liabilities resulting from claims against us when a loss is assessed to be probable and the amount of the loss is reasonably estimable. Assessing probability of loss and estimating probable losses requires analysis of multiple factors, including in some cases judgments about the potential actions of third party claimants and courts. Recorded contingent liabilities are based on the best information available and actual losses in any future period are inherently uncertain.  Currently, we do not believe that any of our pending legal proceedings or claims will have a material impact on our financial position or results of operations.

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

This item analyzes our financial condition, change in financial condition and results of operations. It should be read in conjunction with the unaudited condensed consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes presented in Part I, Item 1 of this report.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains statements about the future expectations, activities and events that constitute forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements express our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future financial and operating performance and growth plans, taking into account information currently available to us. These statements are not statements of historical fact. The words “believe,” “may,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “objective,” “seek,” “plan,” “strive” or similar words, or the negatives of these words, identify forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations of future results we expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties can be difficult to predict and may be out of our control. Factors that could contribute to differences in our results include, but are not limited to the factors listed in Part II, Item 1A – Risk Factors in this report and the more detailed risks identified, and the cautionary statements included in our December 31, 2012 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
 
Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance or results. A forward-looking statement may include a statement of the assumptions or bases underlying the forward-looking statement. The Company believes it has chosen these assumptions or bases in good faith and that they are reasonable. We caution you however, that assumptions or bases almost always vary from actual results, and the differences between assumptions or bases and actual results can be material. The forward-looking statements included in this report speak only as of the date of the report.  We have no duty, and do not intend to, update these statements unless applicable laws require us to do so.

Overview

Porter Bancorp, Inc. (NASDAQ: PBIB) is a Louisville, Kentucky-based bank holding company which operates 18 full-service banking offices in twelve counties through its wholly-owned subsidiary, PBI Bank. Our markets include metropolitan Louisville in Jefferson County and the surrounding counties of Henry and Bullitt, and extend south along the Interstate 65 corridor to Tennessee. We serve south central Kentucky and southern Kentucky from banking offices in Butler, Green, Hart, Edmonson, Barren, Warren, Ohio and Daviess Counties. We also have an office in Lexington, the second largest city in Kentucky.  The Bank is a traditional community bank with a wide range of commercial and personal banking products, including wealth management and trust services, with an online banking division which delivers competitive deposit products and services under the separate brand of Ascencia.

The Company reported net loss of $69,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2013, compared with net income of $1.5 million for the same period of 2012.  After deductions for dividends on preferred stock, accretion on preferred stock, and loss allocated to participating securities, net loss to common shareholders was $524,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2013, compared with net income to common shareholders of $985,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2012.

Basic and diluted loss per common share were $(0.04) for the three months ended March 31, 2013 compared with basic and diluted income per common share of $0.08 for the three months ended March 31, 2012.
 
 
36

 
 
The following significant developments occurred during the quarter ended March 31, 2013:

 
Provision for loan losses expense was $450,000 for the first quarter of 2013, compared with $3.8 million for the prior year first quarter.  The decrease was primarily attributable to the reduction in the loan portfolio size, the slower pace of loans migrating downward in risk grade classification, and stable collateral values for collateral dependent loans.  Net charge-offs of $17.3 million were recognized for the first quarter.  These elevated charge-offs were primarily the result of charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent in accordance with regulatory guidance.    
 
 
Net interest margin decreased 38 basis points to 3.07% in the first three months of 2013 compared with 3.45% in the first three months of 2012. The decrease in margin between periods was primarily due to a reduction in interest earning assets coupled with lower rates on those assets and elevated non-accrual loan levels. Average loans decreased 22.0% to $872.5 million in the first three months of 2013 compared with $1.1 billion in the first three months of 2012.  Net loans decreased 24.7% to $787.2 million at March 31, 2013, compared with $1.0 billion at March 31, 2012.

 
We continued to execute on our strategy to reduce our commercial real estate and construction and development loans. Construction and development loans totaled $62.5 million, or 73% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013 compared with $70.3 million, or 82% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.  Non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, construction and development loans, and multi-family residential real estate loans as a group totaled $299.4 million, or 351% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013 compared with $311.1 million, or 362% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.

 
Loan proceeds received from the repayment of our commercial real estate and construction and development loans were used primarily to redeem maturing certificates of deposit during the quarter. Deposits decreased 17.3% to $1.0 billion compared with $1.3 billion at March 31, 2012. Certificate of deposit balances declined $20.6 million during the first three months of 2013 to $739.9 million at March 31, 2013, from $760.6 million at December 31, 2012. Demand deposits decreased 4.8% during the first three months of 2013 compared with the fourth quarter of 2012, and the first three months of 2012.

 
Non-performing loans increased $26.3 million to $120.9 million at March 31, 2013, compared with $94.6 million at December 31, 2012. The increase was primarily attributable to loans for two significant borrowing relationships being placed on non-accrual during the quarter.  At December 31, 2012 one of these relationships was past due 30-59 days and totaled $23.5 million; the other was past due 60-89 days and totaled $12.7 million.  The increase in non-performing loans was partially offset by net loan charge-offs in the first quarter of 2013 which totaled $17.3 million.  These elevated charge-offs were primarily the result of charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent, in accordance with regulatory guidance.

 
Loans past due 30-59 days decreased from $38.2 million at December 31, 2012 to $8.1 million at March 31, 2013 and loans past due 60-89 days decreased from $20.3 million at December 31, 2012 to $3.0 million at March 31, 2013.

 
Foreclosed properties were $44.2 million at March 31, 2013, compared with $43.7 million at December 31, 2012, and $35.6 million at March 31, 2012.  The Company acquired $3.7 million of OREO and sold $2.9 million of OREO during the first quarter of 2013. In addition, fair value write-downs of $307,000 were recorded during the first quarter of 2013 to reflect declining values as evidenced by new appraisals and reduced marketing prices in connection with our sales strategies. Our ratio of non-performing assets to total assets increased to 14.58% at March 31, 2013, compared with 11.89% at December 31, 2012, and 9.61% at March 31, 2012.
 
These items are discussed in further detail throughout this “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” Section.  For a discussion of our accounting policies, please see “Application of Critical Accounting Policies” in Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the calendar year ended December 31, 2012.
 
Going Concern Considerations and Future Plans
 
During the first three months of 2013, we reported net loss to common shareholders of $524,000, compared with net income to common shareholders of $985,000 for the first three months of 2012.  This loss was primarily attributable to reduced net interest income, with a lower net interest margin due to lower average loans outstanding, loans repricing at lower rates, and the level of non-performing assets in our portfolio. Also, a gain on sale of securities of $2.0 million was recognized in the first quarter of 2012, while no securities were sold in the first quarter of 2013.

For the year ended December 31, 2012, we reported net loss to common shareholders of $33.4 million.  This loss was attributable primarily to $40.3 million of provision for loan losses expense due to continued decline in credit trends in our portfolio that resulted in net charge-offs of $36.1 million, OREO expense of $10.5 million resulting from fair value write-downs driven by new appraisals and reduced marketing prices, net loss on sales, and ongoing operating expense.  We also had lower net interest margin due to lower average loans outstanding, loans re-pricing at lower rates, and the level of non-performing loans in our portfolio.  We had a net loss to common shareholders of $33.4 million for the year ended December 31, 2012 compared with net loss to common shareholders of $105.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2011.
 
In the fourth quarter of 2011, we began deferring the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury. At March 31, 2013, cumulative accrued and unpaid dividends on this stock totaled $3.0 million. If we defer dividend payments for six quarters, the holder of our Series A Preferred Stock (currently the U.S. Treasury) would then have the right to appoint up to two representatives to our Board of Directors. We will continue to accrue any deferred dividends, which will be deducted from income to common shareholders for financial statement purposes.
 
 
37

 
 
In June 2011, the Bank agreed to a Consent Order with the FDIC and KDFI in which the Bank agreed, among other things, to improve asset quality, reduce loan concentrations, and maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9% and a minimum total risk based capital ratio of 12%.  The Consent Order was included in our Current Report on 8-K filed on June 30, 2011. In October 2012, the Bank entered into a new Consent Order with the FDIC and KDFI again agreeing to maintain a minimum Tier 1 leverage ratio of 9% and a minimum total risk based capital ratio of 12%. The Bank also agreed that if it should be unable to reach the required capital levels, and if directed in writing by the FDIC, then the Bank would within 30 days develop, adopt and implement a written plan to sell or merge itself into another federally insured financial institution or otherwise immediately obtain a sufficient capital investment into the Bank to fully meet the capital requirements.
 
We expect to continue to work with our regulators toward capital ratio compliance as outlined in the written capital plan previously submitted by the Bank. The new Consent Order also requires the Bank to continue to adhere to the plans implemented in response to the June 2011 Consent Order, and includes the substantive provisions of the June 2011 Consent Order. The new Consent Order was included in our Current Report on 8-K filed on September 19, 2012. As of March 31, 2013, the capital ratios required by the Consent Order were not met.
 
In order to meet these capital requirements, the Board of Directors and management are continuing to evaluate strategies to achieve the following objectives:
 
 
Increasing capital through a possible public offering or private placement of common stock to new and existing shareholders.  We have engaged a financial advisor to assist our Board in evaluating our options for increasing capital and redeeming our Series A preferred stock issued to the US Treasury in 2008 under the Capital Purchase Program.
 
 
Continuing to operate the Company and Bank in a safe and sound manner.  This strategy will require us to continue to reduce the size of our balance sheet, reduce our lending concentrations, consider selling loans, and reduce other noninterest expense through the disposition of OREO.

 
Continuing with succession planning and adding resources to the management team.  In March 2012, the Board of Directors formed a search committee comprised of its five independent directors to identify and hire a President and CEO for PBI Bank.   John T. Taylor was named to these positions and appointed to the board of directors in July 2012.   Additionally, John R. Davis was appointed Chief Credit Officer of PBI Bank, with responsibility for establishing and executing the credit quality policies and overseeing credit administration for the organization.

 
Evaluating our internal processes and procedures, distribution of labor, and work-flow to ensure we have adequately and appropriately deployed resources in an efficient manner in the current environment.  To this end, we believe the opportunity exists for the centralization of key processes which will lead to improved execution and cost savings.

 
Executing on our commitment to improve credit quality and reduce loan concentrations and balance sheet risk.
 
 
o  
We have reduced the size of our loan portfolio significantly from $1.3 billion at December 31, 2010, to $1.1 billion at December 31, 2011, to $899.1 million at December 31, 2012, and $827.1 million at March 31, 2013.   We have significantly improved our staffing in the commercial lending area which is now led by John R. Davis.
 
 
o
Our Consent Order calls for us to reduce our construction and development loans to not more than 75% of total risk-based capital. We are now in compliance with construction and development loans totaling $62.5 million, or 73% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013, down from $70.3 million, or 82% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.
 
 
o
Our Consent Order also requires us to reduce non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, construction and development loans, and multi-family residential real estate loans as a group, to not more than 250% of total risk-based capital.  While we have made significant improvements over the last year, we were not in compliance with this concentration limit at March 31, 2013.  These loans totaled $299.4 million, or 351% of total risk-based capital, at March 31, 2013 and $311.1 million, or 362% of total risk-based capital, at December 31, 2012.
 
 
o
We are working to reduce our loan concentrations by curtailing new construction and development lending and new non-owner occupied commercial real estate lending.  We are also receiving principal reductions from amortizing credits and pay-downs from our customers who sell properties built for resale.  We have reduced the construction loan portfolio from $199.5 million at December 31, 2010 to $62.5 million at March 31, 2013.  Our non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans declined from $293.3 million at December 31, 2010 to $187.2 million at March 31, 2013.
 
 
38

 
 
 
Executing on our commitment to sell other real estate owned and reinvest in quality income producing assets.
 
 
o  
The remediation process for loans secured by real estate has led the Bank to acquire significant levels of OREO in 2012, 2011, and 2010.  This trend has continued at a slower pace in 2013.  The Bank acquired $33.5 million, $41.9 million, and $90.8 million during 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.  For the first three months of March 31, 2013, we acquired $3.7 million of OREO. We have nonaccrual loans totaling $120.9 million at March 31, 2013. We expect to resolve many of these loans by foreclosure which could result in further additions to our OREO portfolio.
 
 
o
We have incurred significant losses in disposing of this real estate.   We incurred losses totaling $9.3 million, $42.8 million, and $13.9 million in 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively, from sales and fair value write-downs attributable to declining valuations as evidenced by new appraisals and from changes in our sales strategies.  During the three month period ended March 31, 2013, we incurred OREO losses totaling $504,000, which consisted of $197,000 in loss on sale and $307,000 from declining values as evidenced by new appraisals and reduced marketing prices in connection with our sales strategies.
 
 
o
To ensure that we maximize the value we receive upon the sale of OREO, we continually to evaluate sales opportunities and channels.  We are targeting multiple sales opportunities and channels through internal marketing and the use of brokers, auctions, technology sales platforms, and bulk sale strategies.  Proceeds from the sale of OREO totaled $2.7 million during the three months ended March 31, 2013 and $22.5 million, $26.0 million and $25.0 million during fiscal 2012, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
 
 
o
At December 31, 2012 the OREO portfolio consisted of 51% construction, development, and land assets.  At March 31, 2013 this concentration had declined to 49%.  This is consistent with our reduction of construction, development and other land loans, which have declined to $62.5 million at March 31, 2013 compared to $70.3 million at December 31, 2012.  Over the past three months, the composition of our OREO portfolio has shifted toward 1-4 family residential properties, which we have found to be more liquid than construction, development, and land assets, while commercial real estate has declined slightly as a percentage of the portfolio.  Commercial real estate of this nature represents 34% of the portfolio at March 31, 2013 compared with 35% at December 31, 2012.  1-4 family residential properties represent 15% of the portfolio at March 31, 2013 compared with 12% at December 31, 2012.
 
 
Evaluating other strategic alternatives, such as the sale of assets or branches.
 
Bank regulatory agencies can exercise discretion when an institution does not meet the terms of a consent order.  Based on individual circumstances, the agencies may issue mandatory directives, impose monetary penalties, initiate changes in management, or take more serious adverse actions.
 
 
39

 
 
Results of Operations
 
The following table summarizes components of income and expense and the change in those components for the three months ended March 31, 2013, compared with the same period of 2012:

   
For the Three Months
   
Change from
 
   
Ended March 31,
   
Prior Period
 
   
2013
   
2012
   
Amount
   
Percent
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
                         
Gross interest income
 
$
11,258
   
$
15,755
   
$
(4,497
)
   
(28.5
)% 
Gross interest expense
   
2,960
     
4,301
     
(1,341
)
   
(31.2
Net interest income
   
8,298
     
11,454
     
(3,156
)
   
(27.6
)
Provision for loan losses
   
450
     
3,750
     
(3,300
)
   
(88.0
)
Non-interest income
   
1,647
     
3,445
     
(1,798
)
   
(52.2
)
Non-interest expense
   
9,564
     
9,647
     
(83
)
   
(0.9
)
Net income (loss) before taxes
   
(69
)
   
1,502
     
(1,571
)
   
(104.6
)
Income tax expense (benefit)
   
     
     
     
 
Net income (loss)
   
(69
)
   
1,502
     
(1,571
)
   
(104.6
)
 
Net loss for the three months ended March 31, 2013 decreased $1.6 million to a net loss of $69,000, compared with net income of $1.5 million for the comparable period of 2012.  Provision for loan losses expense decreased $3.3 million in the first quarter of 2013 compared with the same period in 2012.  This decrease in provision expense is primarily attributable to the reduction in the loan portfolio size, the lower pace of loans migrating downward in risk grade classification, and stable collateral values for collateral dependent loans.  Net charge-offs of $17.3 million were recognized for the first quarter.  Those charge-offs were primarily the result of charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent in accordance with regulatory guidance.  Net interest income decreased $3.2 million from the 2012 first quarter due to a 38 basis point decline in net interest margin due to lower earning asset levels and lower average rates on earning assets. In addition, net interest income and net interest margin were adversely affected by $1.5 million and $790,000 of interest lost on nonaccrual loans in the first quarters of 2013 and 2012, respectively.  These results were partially off-set by a decrease in OREO expense of $466,000 for the first quarter of 2013 compared with the same period of 2012 due to lower loss on sales of OREO, lower valuation write-downs, and lower property maintenance expense.

Net Interest Income – Our net interest income was $8.3 million for the three months ended March 31, 2013, a decrease of $3.2 million, or 27.6%, compared with $11.5 million for the same period in 2012.  Net interest spread and margin were 2.93% and 3.07%, respectively, for the first quarter of 2013, compared with 3.30% and 3.45%, respectively, for the first quarter of 2012. Net average non-accrual loans were $111.4 million and $92.0 million in the first three months of 2013 and 2012, respectively.

Average loans receivable declined approximately $246.7 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2013 compared with the first quarter of 2012.  This resulted in a decline in interest revenue of approximately $3.0 million for the quarter ended March 31, 2013 compared with the prior year period.  The decline in loan volume is attributable to our efforts to reduce concentrations in our construction and development loan portfolio and our non-owner occupied commercial real estate loan portfolio, as well as soft loan demand in our markets.

Net interest margin decreased 38 basis points from our margin of 3.45% in the prior year first quarter.  The yield on earning assets declined 58 basis points from the first quarter of 2012, compared with a 21 basis point decline in rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities.  This resulted in a net $1.1 million reduction in net interest income.

Net interest margin for the first quarter of 2013 decreased 12 basis points from our margin of 3.19% in the fourth quarter of 2012, due primarily to lower average loan receivables and lower yield on loans, coupled with lower yield on investment securities. Average loan receivables declined $56.5 million from the fourth quarter of 2012, due to our efforts to reduce concentrations in our construction and development loan portfolio and in our non-owner occupied commercial real estate loan portfolio, and increased charge-offs. Yield on loans was adversely affected by an increase in foregone interest on non-accrual loans. Interest foregone on non-accrual loans totaled $1.5 million in the first quarter of 2013, compared with $1.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2012, and $790,000 in the first quarter of 2012. The decrease in yield on investment securities was the result of our reinvestment of scheduled principal and interest payment proceeds into lower-yielding securities. Yield on average earning assets for the first quarter of 2013 decreased 23 basis points from 4.38% in the fourth quarter of 2012, compared with a 10 basis points decrease in rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities from 1.32% in the fourth quarter of 2012.
 
 
40

 
 
Average Balance Sheets
 
The following table presents the average balance sheets for the three month periods ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, along with the related calculations of tax-equivalent net interest income, net interest margin and net interest spread for the related periods.

   
Three Months Ended March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
Average
Balance
   
Interest
Earned/Paid
   
Average
Yield/Cost
   
Average
Balance
   
Interest
Earned/Paid
   
Average
Yield/Cost
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
ASSETS
                                   
Interest-earning assets:
                                   
Loan receivables (1)(2)
 
$
872,505
   
$
10,033
     
4.66
%
 
$
1,119,181
   
$
14,512
     
5.22
%
Securities
                                               
Taxable
   
145,171
     
852
     
2.38
     
125,502
     
826
     
2.65
 
Tax-exempt (3)
   
28,470
     
221
     
4.84
     
27,103
     
250
     
5.71
 
FHLB stock
   
10,072
     
108
     
4.35
     
10,072
     
114
     
4.55
 
Other equity securities
   
1,359
     
15
     
4.48
     
1,359
     
15
     
4.44
 
Federal funds sold and other
   
53,892
     
29
     
0.22
     
67,661
     
38
     
0.23
 
Total interest-earning assets
   
1,111,469
     
11,258
     
4.15
%
   
1,350,878
     
15,755
     
4.73
%
Less: Allowance for loan losses
   
(55,340
)
                   
(52,894
)
               
Non-interest earning assets
   
95,687
                     
114,622
                 
Total assets
 
$
1,151,816
                   
$
1,412,606
                 
                                                 
LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY
                                               
Interest-bearing liabilities:
                                               
Certificates of deposit and other time deposits
 
$
749,832
   
$
2,537
     
1.37
%
 
$
976,448
   
$
3,772
     
1.55
%
NOW and money market deposits
   
153,524
     
133
     
0.35
     
153,098
     
186
     
0.49
 
Savings accounts
   
40,390
     
34
     
0.34
     
37,085
     
42
     
0.46
 
Repurchase agreements
   
2,566
     
1
     
0.16
     
1,673
     
2
     
0.48
 
FHLB advances
   
5,424
     
43
     
3.22
     
6,906
     
57
     
3.32
 
Junior subordinated debentures
   
31,745
     
212
     
2.71
     
32,645
     
242
     
2.98
 
Total interest-bearing liabilities
   
983,481
     
2,960
     
1.22
%
   
1,207,855
     
4,301
     
1.43
%
                                                 
Non-interest-bearing liabilities:
                                               
Non-interest-bearing deposits
   
110,138
                     
112,656
                 
Other liabilities
   
10,448
                     
7,436
                 
Total liabilities
   
1,104,067
                     
1,327,947
                 
Stockholders’ equity
   
47,749
                     
84,659
                 
Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity
 
$
1,151,816
                   
$
1,412,606
                 
                                                 
Net interest income
         
$
8,298
                   
$
11,454
         
                                                 
Net interest spread
                   
2.93
%
                   
3.30
%
                                                 
Net interest margin
                   
3.07
%
                   
3.45
%
 

(1)
Includes loan fees in both interest income and the calculation of yield on loans.
(2)
Calculations include non-accruing loans averaging $111.4 million and $92.0 million, respectively, in average loan amounts outstanding.
(3)
Taxable equivalent yields are calculated assuming a 35% federal income tax rate.
 
 
41

 
 
Rate/Volume Analysis
 
The table below sets forth certain information regarding changes in interest income and interest expense for the periods indicated. For each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, information is provided on changes attributable to (1) changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by old volume); (2) changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by old rate); and (3) changes in rate-volume (change in rate multiplied by change in volume). Changes in rate-volume are proportionately allocated between rate and volume variance.

   
Three Months Ended March 31,
2013 vs. 2012
 
   
Increase (decrease)
due to change in
   
Net
Change
 
   
Rate
   
Volume
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Interest-earning assets:
                 
Loan receivables
 
$
(1,519
)
 
$
(2,960
)
 
$
(4,479
)
Securities
   
(142
)
   
139
     
(3
)
FHLB stock
   
(6
)
   
     
(6
)
Other equity securities
   
     
     
 
Federal funds sold and other
   
(2
)
   
(7
)
   
(9
)
Total  decrease in interest income
   
(1,669
)
   
(2,828
)
   
(4,497
)
                         
Interest-bearing liabilities:
                       
Certificates of deposit and other time deposits
   
(430
)
   
(805
)
   
(1,235
)
NOW and money market accounts
   
(54
)
   
1
     
(53
)
Savings accounts
   
(12
)
   
4
     
(8
)
Federal funds purchased and repurchased agreements
   
(2
)
   
1
 
   
(1
)
FHLB advances
   
(2
)
   
(12
)
   
(14
)
Junior subordinated debentures
   
(23
)
   
(7
)
   
(30
)
Total decrease in interest expense
   
(523
)
   
(818
)
   
(1,341
)
Increase (decrease) in net interest income
 
$
(1,146
)
 
$
(2,010
)
 
$
(3,156
)
 
 
42

 
 
Non-Interest Income – The following table presents the major categories of non-interest income for the three months ended March 31, 2013:
 
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Service charges on deposit accounts
 
$
493
   
$
554
 
Income from fiduciary activities
   
517
     
251
 
Bank card interchange fees
   
172
     
177
 
Other real estate owned rental income
   
112
     
37
 
Title insurance commissions
   
13
     
22
 
Secondary market brokerage fees
   
15
     
17
 
Gains on sales of loans originated for sale
   
58
     
45
 
Gains on sales of investment securities, net
   
 —
     
2,019
 
Other
   
267
     
323
 
Total non-interest income
 
$
1,647
   
$
3,445
 
 
Non-interest income for the first quarter ended March 31, 2013 decreased $1.8 million, or 52.2%, compared with the first quarter of 2012.  The decrease in non-interest income between the three month comparative periods was primarily due a $2.0 million reduction in gains on sales of investment securities as there were no sales in the first quarter of 2013, as well as lower service charges on deposit accounts, primarily due to decreased overdraft fees due to lower volumes than in the past period. These decreases were partially offset by increased other real estate owned rental income and  income from fiduciary activities.  We expect income from fiduciary activities to decrease over the near term as we work to transition away from non-traditional trust services, such as ESOP and employee benefit plan services, to more traditional trust services throughout our markets.

Non-interest ExpenseThe following table presents the major categories of non-interest expense for the three months ended March 31, 2013:
 
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Salary and employee benefits
 
$
4,139
   
$
4,312
 
Occupancy and equipment
   
931
     
886
 
Other real estate owned expense
   
791
     
1,257
 
FDIC insurance
   
639
     
873
 
Loan collection expense
   
853
     
360
 
Professional fees
   
406
     
356
 
State franchise tax
   
537
     
592
 
Communications
   
175
     
180
 
Postage and delivery
   
113
     
122
 
Office supplies
   
73
     
110
 
Advertising
   
59
     
33
 
Insurance expense
   
333
     
97
 
Other
   
515
     
469
 
Total non-interest expense
 
$
9,564
   
$
9,647
 
 
Non-interest expense for the first quarter ended March 31, 2013 decreased $83,000, or 0.9%, compared with the first quarter of 2012. The decrease in non-interest expense for the first quarter ended March 31, 2013, was primarily attributable to decreased other real estate owned expense due to lower loss on sales of OREO, lower valuation write-downs and lower property maintenance expense, as well as lower FDIC insurance. These improvements were partially offset by higher loan collection expenses and insurance expense.
 
 
43

 
 
Income Tax ExpenseNo income taxes were recorded for the first quarter of 2013. The income tax effect on net loss before taxes for the three months ended March 31, 2013, increased our deferred tax assets and related valuation allowance by $58,000. See Footnote 9, “Income Taxes.”
 
Effective tax rates differ from the federal statutory rate of 35% applied to income before income taxes due to the following:

   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Federal statutory rate times financial statement income
 
$
(24
)
 
$
526
 
Effect of: 
               
Valuation allowance
   
123
     
(419)
 
Tax-exempt income
   
(79
)
   
(88)
 
Non-taxable life insurance income
   
(26
)
   
(26)
 
Other, net
   
6
     
7
 
Total
 
$
   
$
 
 
Analysis of Financial Condition

Total assets decreased $29.8 million, or 2.6%, to $1.1 billion at March 31, 2013, from $1.2 billion at December 31, 2012.  This decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease of $55.2 million in net loans, and was partially offset by increases of $4.8 million and $21.6 million in securities available for sale and cash equivalents, respectively. The decrease in net loans was due to loan payoffs outpacing loan funding and efforts to move impaired loans through the collection, foreclosure, and disposition process. The increase in cash and cash equivalents was due to cash inflows related to loan payments and maturities of securities.

Loans ReceivableLoans receivable decreased $72.0 million, or 8.0%, during the three months ended March 31, 2013 to $827.1 million. Our commercial, commercial real estate and real estate construction portfolios decreased by an aggregate of $49.3 million, or 9.4%, during the three months and comprised 57.7% of the total loan portfolio at March 31, 2013. The decline in loans receivable was attributable to net charge-offs of $17.3 million, transfers to OREO of $3.7 million, and loan payoffs outpacing loan funding by approximately $51.0 million.
 
Loan Portfolio CompositionThe following table presents a summary of the loan portfolio at the dates indicated, net of deferred loan fees, by type. There are no foreign loans in our portfolio. Except for commercial real estate and residential real estate, there is no concentration of loans in any industry exceeding 10% of total loans.

   
As of March 31,
   
As of December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
Amount
   
Percent
   
Amount
   
Percent
 
         
(dollars in thousands)
       
                         
Commercial
 
$
49,932
     
6.03
%
 
$
52,567
     
5.85
%
Commercial Real Estate
                               
Construction
   
62,535
     
7.56
     
70,284
     
7.82
 
Farmland
   
75,347
     
9.11
     
80,825
     
8.99
 
Other
   
289,211
     
34.97
     
322,687
     
35.89
 
Residential Real Estate
                               
Multi-family
   
49,590
     
6.00
     
50,986
     
5.67
 
1-4 Family
   
259,412
     
31.36
     
278,273
     
30.95
 
Consumer
   
18,129
     
2.19
     
20,383
     
2.27
 
Agriculture
   
22,214
     
2.69
     
22,317
     
2.48
 
Other
   
706
     
0.09
     
770
     
0.08
 
Total loans
 
$
827,076
     
100.00
%
 
$
899,092
     
100.00
%
 
 
44

 
 
Non-Performing AssetsNon-performing assets consist of loans past due 90 days or more still on accrual, loans on which interest is no longer accrued, real estate acquired through foreclosure, and repossessed assets.

The following table sets forth information with respect to non-performing assets as of March 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012.
 
   
March 31,
 2013
   
December 31,
2012
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
Loans past due 90 days or more still on accrual
 
$
   
$
86
 
Non-accrual loans
   
120,943
     
94,517
 
Total non-performing loans
   
120,943
     
94,603
 
Real estate acquired through foreclosure
   
44,192
     
43,671
 
Other repossessed assets
   
     
 
Total non-performing assets
 
$
165,135
   
$
138,274
 
Non-performing loans to total loans
   
14.62
%
   
10.52
%
Non-performing assets to total assets
   
14.58
%
   
11.89
%
Allowance for non-performing loans
 
$
 5,838
   
$
13,250
 
Allowance for non-performing loans to non-performing loans
   
4.83
%
   
14.01
%
 
Nonperforming loans at March 31, 2013, were $120.9 million, or 14.62% of total loans, compared with $98.0 million, or 8.92% of total loans, at March 31, 2012, and $94.6 million, or 10.52% of total loans at December 31, 2012.  The increase from December 31, 2012 to March 31, 2013 was primarily attributable to loans for two significant borrowing relationships, which together totaled $36.2 million, being placed on non-accrual.  At December 31, 2012, these relationships were past due 30-59 days and 60-89 days, respectively. The increase in non-accrual loans was partially offset by net loan charge-offs in the first quarter of 2013 which totaled $17.3 million.  These elevated charge-offs were primarily the result of charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent, in accordance with regulatory guidance.
 
Loans past due 30-59 days decreased from $38.2 million at December 31, 2012 to $8.1 million at March 31, 2013.  Loans past due 60-89 days decreased from $20.3 million at December 31, 2012 to $3.0 million at March 31, 2013. This represents a $47.5 million decrease from December 31, 2012 to March 31, 2013, in loans past due 30-89 days.  These decreases were primarily in the 1-4 family residential real estate, and construction segments of the portfolio.  We considered this trend in delinquency levels during the evaluation of qualitative trends in the portfolio when establishing the general component of our allowance for loan losses.
 
A troubled debt restructuring (TDR) occurs when the Company has agreed to a loan modification in the form of a concession for a borrower who is experiencing financial difficulty.  The majority of the Company’s TDRs involve a reduction in interest rate, a deferral of principal for a stated period of time, or an interest only period.  All TDRs are considered impaired, and the Company has allocated reserves for these loans to reflect the present value of the concessionary terms granted to the customer. If the loan is considered collateral dependent, it is reported net of allocated reserves, at the fair value of the collateral.

We do not have a formal loan modification program. Rather, we work with individual customers on a case-by-case basis to facilitate the orderly collection of our principal and interest before a loan becomes a non-performing loan. If a customer is unable to make contractual payments, we review the particular circumstances of that customer’s situation and negotiate a revised payment stream. In other words, we identify performing customers experiencing financial difficulties, and through negotiations, we lower their interest rate, most typically on a short-term basis for three to six months. Our goal when restructuring a credit is to afford the customer a reasonable period of time to remedy the issue causing cash flow constraints within their business so that they can return to performing status over time.
 
Our loan modifications have taken the form of reduction in interest rate and/or curtailment of scheduled principal payments for a short-term period, usually three to six months, but in some cases until maturity of the loan. In some circumstances we restructure real estate secured loans in a bifurcated fashion whereby we have a fully amortizing “A” loan at a market interest rate and an interest-only “B” loan at a reduced interest rate. Our restructured loans are all collateral secured loans. If a customer fails to perform under the modified terms, we place the loan(s) on non-accrual status and begin the process of working with the customer to liquidate the underlying collateral to satisfy the debt.

At March 31, 2013, we had 126 restructured loans totaling $107.8 million with borrowers who experienced deterioration in financial condition compared with 123 loans totaling $117.8 million at December 31, 2012. In general, these loans were granted interest rate reductions to provide cash flow relief to customers experiencing cash flow difficulties.  Of these loans, 5 loans totaling approximately $5.2 million were also granted principal payment deferrals until maturity. There were no concessions made to forgive principal relative to these loans, although we have recorded partial charge-offs for certain restructured loans. In general, these loans are secured by first liens on 1-4 residential or commercial real estate properties, or farmland.  Restructured loans also include $3.2 million of commercial loans. At March 31, 2013, $55.2 million of our restructured loans were accruing and $52.6 million were on nonaccrual.

In accordance with current guidance, we continue to report restructured loans as restructured until such time as the loan is paid in full, otherwise settled, sold, or charged-off. If the customer fails to perform, we place the loan on non-accrual status and seek to liquidate the underlying collateral for these loans. Our non-accrual policy for restructured loans is identical to our non-accrual policy for all loans. Our policy calls for a loan to be reported as non-accrual if it is maintained on a cash basis because of deterioration in the financial condition of the borrower, payment in full of principal and interest is not expected, or principal or interest has been in default for a period of 90 days or more unless the assets are both well secured and in the process of collection. Changes in value for impairment, including the amount attributed to the passage of time, are recorded entirely within the provision for loan losses.
 
 
45

 
 
We consider any loan that is restructured for a borrower experiencing financial difficulties due to a borrower’s potential inability to pay in accordance with contractual terms to be a troubled debt restructure.  Specifically, we consider a concession involving a modification of the loan terms, such as (i) a reduction of the stated interest rate, (ii) reduction or deferral of principal, or (iii) reduction or deferral of accrued interest at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk all to be troubled debt restructurings.  When a modification of terms is made for a competitive reason, we do not consider that to be a troubled debt restructuring.  A primary example of a competitive modification would be an interest rate reduction for a performing customer’s loan to a market rate as the result of a market decline in rates.

See Footnote 4, “Loans,” to the financial statements for additional disclosure related to troubled debt restructuring.


Foreclosed Properties – Foreclosed properties at March 31, 2013 were $44.2 million compared with $35.6 million at March 31, 2012 and $43.7 million at December 31, 2012.  See Footnote 5, “Other Real Estate Owned,” to the financial statements. During the first three months of 2013, we acquired $3.7 million of OREO properties, and sold properties totaling approximately $2.9 million. We value foreclosed properties at fair value less estimated costs to sell when acquired and expect to liquidate these properties to recover our investment in the due course of business.

Other real estate owned (OREO) is recorded at fair market value less estimated cost to sell at time of acquisition.  Any write-down of the property at the time of acquisition is charged to the allowance for loan losses.  Subsequent reductions in fair value are recorded as non-interest expense.  To determine the fair value of OREO for smaller dollar single family homes, we consult with internal real estate sales staff and external realtors, investors, and appraisers.  If the internally evaluated market price is below our underlying investment in the property, appropriate write-downs are recorded. 

For larger dollar commercial real estate properties, we obtain a new appraisal of the subject property in connection with the transfer to OREO.  In some of these circumstances, an appraisal is in process at quarter end and we must make our best estimate of the fair value of the underlying collateral based on our internal evaluation of the property, our review of the most recent appraisal, and discussions with the currently engaged appraiser.  We obtain updated appraisals on the anniversary date of ownership unless a sale is imminent.

Net loss on sales, write-downs, and operating expenses for OREO totaled $791,000 for the three months ended March 31, 2013, compared with $1.3 million for the same period of 2012. During the three months ended March 31, 2013, fair value write-downs of $307,000 were recorded to reflect declining values evidenced by new appraisals and our reduction of marketing prices in connection with our sales strategies.
 
 
46

 
 
Allowance for Loan LossesThe allowance for loan losses is based on management’s continuing review and evaluation of individual loans, loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various categories of loans and such other factors that, in management’s judgment, require current recognition in estimating loan losses.
 
Management has established loan grading procedures that result in specific allowance allocations for any estimated inherent risk of loss.  For loans not individually evaluated, a general allowance allocation is computed using factors developed over time based on actual loss experience.  The specific and general allocations plus consideration of qualitative factors represent management’s best estimate of probable losses contained in the loan portfolio at the evaluation date.  Although the allowance for loan losses is comprised of specific and general allocations, the entire allowance is available to absorb any credit losses.

Our loan loss reserve, as a percentage of total loans at March 31, 2013, decreased to 4.82% from 4.91% at March 31, 2012, and from 6.30% at December 31, 2012.  Provision for loan losses decreased $3.3 million to $450,000 for the first quarter of 2013 compared with $3.8 million for the first quarter of 2012. The decrease in the first quarter was primarily attributable to the reduction in the loan portfolio size, net loan charge-offs of $17.3 million, the lower pace of loans migrating downward in risk grade classification, and stable collateral values for collateral dependent loans.

Net loan charge-offs for the first quarter of 2013 were $17.3 million, or 1.98% of average loans, compared with $2.4 million, or 0.21% of average loans, for the first quarter of 2012, and $4.3 million, or 0.47% of average loans, for the fourth quarter of 2012. Our allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans was 32.94% at March 31, 2013, compared with 59.91% at December 31, 2012, and 55.07% at March 31, 2012.  Additionally, the elevated charge-offs in the first quarter were primarily the result of charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent during the quarter in accordance with regulatory guidance.  The change in this metric between periods is attributable to the fluctuation in historical loss experience, qualitative factors, non-accrual loans, and provision expense.  

The majority of our nonperforming loans are secured by real estate collateral and the underlying collateral coverage for nonperforming loans supports the likelihood of collection of our principal. We have assessed these loans for collectability and considered, among other things, the borrower’s ability to repay, the value of the underlying collateral, and other market conditions to ensure the allowance for loan losses is adequate to absorb probable incurred losses. Our allowance for non-performing loans to non-performing loans was 4.8% at March 31, 2013 compared with 13.8% at March 31, 2012, and 14.0% at December 31, 2012.  The decline in this metric from December 31, 2012 to March 31, 2013 was primarily attributable to charging off specific reserves for loans that were deemed to be collateral dependent during the quarter in accordance with regulatory guidance.

An analysis of changes in the allowance for loan losses and selected ratios for the three month periods ended March 31, 2013 and 2012, and for the year ended December 31, 2012 follows: 
 

             
   
Three Months Ended
March 31,
   
Year Ended
December 31,
2012
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Balance at beginning of period
 
$
56,680
   
$
52,579
   
$
52,579
 
Provision for loan losses
   
450
     
3,750
     
40,250
 
Recoveries
   
671
     
206
     
1,366
 
Charge-offs
   
(17,962
)
   
(2,582
)
   
(37,515
)
Balance at end of period
   
39,839
     
53,953
     
56,680
 
                         
Allowance for loan losses to period-end loans
   
4.82%
     
4.91%
     
6.30%
 
Net charge-offs to average loans
   
1.98%
     
0.21%
     
3.50%
 
Allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans
   
32.94%
     
55.07%
     
59.91%
 
                         
Allowance for loan losses for loans individually evaluated for impairment
 
$
8,161
   
$
7,833
   
$
21,034
 
Loans individually evaluated for impairment
   
177,472
     
192,360
     
188,808
 
Allowance for loan losses to loans individually evaluated for impairment
   
4.60%
     
4.07%
     
11.14%
 
                         
Allowance for loan losses for loans collectively evaluated for impairment
 
$
31,678
   
$
46,120
   
$
35,646
 
Loans collectively evaluated for impairment
   
649,604
     
906,352
     
710,284
 
Allowance for loan losses to loans collectively evaluated for impairment
   
4.88%
     
5.09%
     
5.02%
 
 
 
47

 
 
LiabilitiesTotal liabilities at March 31, 2013 were $1.1 billion compared with $1.1 billion at December 31, 2012, a decrease of $29.3 million, or 2.6%. This decrease was primarily attributable to a decrease in deposits of $28.7 million, or 2.7%, to $1.0 billion at March 31, 2013 from $1.1 billion at December 31, 2012. Certificate of deposit balances declined $20.6 million during the first three months of 2013 to $739.9 million at March 31, 2013 from $760.6 million at December 31, 2012. The decrease in deposits follows management’s strategy to match liability funding levels with lower loan balances.

Federal Home Loan Bank advances decreased by $280,000, or 5.0%, to $5.3 million at March 31, 2013, from $5.6 million at December 31, 2012.  These advances are used from time to time to fund asset growth and manage interest rate risk in accordance with our asset/liability management strategies.

Deposits are our primary source of funds. The following table sets forth the average daily balances and weighted average rates paid for our deposits for the periods indicated:

   
For the Three Months
   
For the Year
 
   
Ended March 31,
   
Ended December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
Average
   
Average
   
Average
   
Average
 
   
Balance
   
Rate
   
Balance
   
Rate
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
Demand
 
$
110,138
           
$
113,325
       
Interest checking
   
88,173
     
0.28
%
   
89,820
     
0.37
%
Money market
   
65,351
     
0.45
     
63,212
     
0.49
 
Savings
   
40,390
     
0.34
     
38,665
     
0.40
 
Certificates of deposit
   
749,832
     
1.37
     
912,061
     
1.52
 
Total deposits
 
$
1,053,884
     
1.04
%
 
$
1,217,083
     
1.20
%
 
The following table sets forth the average daily balances and weighted average rates paid for our certificates of deposit for the periods indicated:

   
For the Three Months
   
For the Year
 
   
Ended March 31,
   
Ended December 31,
 
   
2013
   
2012
 
   
Average
   
Average
   
Average
   
Average
 
   
Balance
   
Rate
   
Balance
   
Rate
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
Less than $100,000
 
$
432,682
     
1.31
%
 
$
478,502
     
1.40
%
$100,000 or more
   
317,150
     
1.46
%
   
433,559
     
1.64
%
Total
 
$
749,832
     
1.37
%
 
$
912,601
     
1.52
%

The following table shows at March 31, 2013 the amount of our time deposits of $100,000 or more by time remaining until maturity:
 
Maturity Period
 
Retail
   
Brokered
   
Total
 
   
(in thousands)
 
Three months or less
 
$
39,605
   
$
15,000
   
$
54,605
 
Three months through six months
   
45,301
     
     
45,301
 
Six months through twelve months
   
59,882
     
     
59,882
 
Over twelve months
   
156,332
     
     
156,332
 
 Total
 
$
301,120
   
$
15,000
   
$
316,120
 
 
 
48

 
 
Liquidity

Liquidity risk arises from the possibility we may not be able to satisfy current or future financial commitments, or may become unduly reliant on alternative funding sources. The objective of liquidity risk management is to ensure that we meet the cash flow requirements of depositors and borrowers, as well as our operating cash needs, taking into account all on- and off-balance sheet funding demands. Liquidity risk management also involves ensuring that we meet our cash flow needs at a reasonable cost. We maintain an investment and funds management policy, which identifies primary sources of liquidity, establishes procedures for monitoring and measuring liquidity, and establishes minimum liquidity requirements in compliance with regulatory guidance. Our Asset Liability Committee regularly monitors and reviews our liquidity position.

Funds are available from a number of sources, including the sale of securities in the available-for-sale portion of the investment portfolio, principal pay-downs on loans and mortgage-backed securities, customer deposit inflows, brokered deposits and other wholesale funding. Historically, we have utilized brokered and wholesale deposits to supplement our funding strategy. At March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012, these deposits totaled $15.0 million and mature in May 2013. We are currently restricted from accepting, renewing, or rolling-over brokered deposits without the prior receipt of a waiver on a case-by-case basis from our regulators.  We intend to redeem the brokered deposits at maturity in the normal course of business.

Traditionally, we have borrowed from the FHLB to supplement our funding requirements. The advances are collateralized by first mortgage residential loans. The borrowing capacity is based on the market value of the underlying pledged loans. At March 31, 2013, our additional borrowing capacity with the FHLB was $17.9 million. Any new advances are limited to a one year maturity or less.
 
We also have federal funds borrowing lines from major correspondent banks totaling $5.0 million on a secured basis. Management believes our sources of liquidity are adequate to meet expected cash needs for the foreseeable future.  However, the availability of these lines could be affected by our financial position, and our lenders could exercise their right to deny a funding request at their discretion. We are also subject to FDIC interest rate restrictions for deposits. As such, we are permitted to offer up to the “national rate” plus 75 basis points as published weekly by the FDIC.
 
We use cash to pay dividends on common stock, if and when declared by the Board of Directors, and to service debt. The main sources of funding include dividends paid by PBI Bank and financing obtained in the capital markets. During 2011, Porter Bancorp contributed $13.1 million to its subsidiary, PBI Bank, which substantially decreased its liquid assets. The contribution was made to strengthen the Bank’s capital in an effort to help it comply with its capital ratio requirements under the consent order. Liquid assets decreased from $20.3 million at December 31, 2010, to $3.5 million at March 31, 2013. Since the Bank is unlikely to be in a position to pay dividends to the parent company for the foreseeable future, cash inflows for the parent are limited to earnings on investment securities, sales of investment securities, and interest on deposits with the Bank. These cash inflows along with the liquid assets held at March 31, 2013, totaling $3.5 million, are needed for the ongoing cash operating expenses of the parent company which have been reduced and are expected to be $1.1 million for 2013. We have elected to defer payments on our Series A preferred stock and on our trust preferred securities. Parent company liquidity could be improved if a capital raise was completed.
 
 
49

 
 
Capital

In the fourth quarter of 2011, we began deferring the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on our Series A Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury.  At March 31, 2013, cumulative accrued and unpaid dividends on this stock totaled $3.0 million. If we defer dividend payments for six quarters, the holder of our Series A Preferred Stock (currently the U.S. Treasury) would then have the right to appoint up to two representatives to our Board of Directors. We will continue to accrue any deferred dividends, which will be deducted from income to common shareholders for financial statement purposes.

In addition, effective with the fourth quarter of 2011, we began deferring interest payments on our junior subordinated notes which resulted in a deferral of distributions on our trust preferred securities. We have the option to defer interest payments from time-to-time for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarters. Thereafter, we must pay all deferred interest and resume quarterly interest payments or we will be in default. Future cash dividends on our common stock are subject to the prior payment of all deferred distributions on our trust preferred securities. At March 31, 2013, cumulative accrued and unpaid interest on our junior subordinated notes totaled $1.0 million.

Stockholders’ equity decreased $452,000 to $46.7 million at March 31, 2013, compared with $47.2 million at December 31, 2012. The decrease was due to the current year net loss, further reduced by dividends declared on cumulative preferred stock and net reduction in unrealized gain on available for sale securities.

Each of the federal bank regulatory agencies has established risk-based capital requirements for banking organizations. In addition, PBI Bank has agreed with its primary regulators to maintain a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets (“total risk-based capital ratio”) of at least 12.0%, and a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets (“leverage ratio”) of 9.0%.

The following table shows the ratios of Tier 1 capital and total capital to risk-adjusted assets and the leverage ratios for Porter Bancorp, Inc. and PBI Bank at the dates indicated:
 
                     
March 31, 2013
   
December 31, 2012
 
   
Regulatory
Minimums
   
Well-Capitalized
Minimums
   
Minimum Capital
Ratios Under
Consent Order
   
Porter
Bancorp
   
PBI
Bank
   
Porter
Bancorp
   
PBI
Bank
 
                                           
Tier 1 Capital
    4.0 %     6.0 %     N/A       6.77 %     8.21 %     6.46 %     7.71 %
Total risk-based capital
    8.0       10.0       12.0 %     10.16       10.29       9.81       9.82  
Tier 1 leverage ratio
    4.0       5.0       9.0       4.91       5.95       4.50       5.37  
 
At March 31, 2013, PBI Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio was 5.95%, which is below the 9% minimum capital ratio required by the Consent Order, and its total risk-based capital ratio was 10.29%, which is below the 12% minimum capital ratio required by the Consent Order. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could result in additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a materially adverse effect on our financial condition.
 
 
50

 
 
Item 3. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk

The Company’s interest sensitivity profile was asset sensitive at March 31, 2013, and December 31, 2012. Given a 100 basis point increase in interest rates sustained for one year, base net interest income would increase by an estimated 3.6% at March 31, 2013, compared with an increase of 4.11% at December 31, 2012, and is within the risk tolerance parameters of our risk management policy. Given a 200 basis point increase in interest rates sustained for one year, base net interest income would increase by an estimated 7.1% at March 31, 2013, compared with an increase of 8.11% at December 31, 2012, and is within the risk tolerance parameters of our risk management policy.

The following table indicates the estimated impact on net interest income under various interest rate scenarios for the twelve months following March 31, 2013, as calculated using the static shock model approach:
 
   
Change in Future
Net Interest Income
 
   
Dollar
Change
   
Percentage
Change
 
   
(dollars in thousands)
 
+ 200 basis points
 
$
2,151
     
7.06
%
+ 100 basis points
   
1,097
     
3.60
 

We did not run a model simulation for declining interest rates as of March 31, 2013, because the Federal Reserve effectively lowered the federal funds target rate between 0.00% to 0.25% in December 2008.  Therefore, no significant further short-term rate reductions can occur.

Item 4. Controls and Procedures

As of the end of the period covered by this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2013, we carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934).  Based on this evaluation, our chief executive officer and chief financial officer concluded that, as of the end of the fiscal quarter covered by this report, these disclosure controls and procedures are effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed by us in the reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is: (a) recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the Securities and Exchange Commission, and (b) accumulated and communicated to our management, including our chief executive officer and chief financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.  Additionally, there was no change in our internal control over financial reporting during the fiscal quarter covered by this report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the internal control over financial reporting.
 
 
51

 
 
PART II – OTHER INFORMATION

Item 1. Legal Proceedings

In the normal course of operations, we are defendants in various legal proceedings.  Except as described in Footnote 13, “Contingencies” in the Notes to our consolidated financial statement, in the opinion of management, there is no known legal proceeding pending which an adverse decision would be expected to result in a material adverse change in our business or consolidated financial position. See Footnote 13, “Contingencies” in the Notes to our consolidated financial statements for additional detail regarding ongoing legal proceedings.

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Information regarding risk factors appears in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2012 under Item 1A – Risk Factors.  There have been no material changes from the risk factors previously discussed in our Form 10-K.

Item 2. Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds

Not applicable.

Item 3. Default Upon Senior Securities

Not applicable.

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

Item 5. Other Information

Not applicable.

Item 6. Exhibits

(a)           Exhibits
The following exhibits are filed or furnished as part of this report:

Exhibit Number
Description of Exhibit
 
31.1
Certification of Principal Executive Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a - 14(a).
 
31.2
Certification of Principal Financial Officer, pursuant to Rule 13a - 14(a).
 
32.1
Certification of Principal Executive Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350,
 
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
 
32.2
Certification of Principal Financial Officer, pursuant to 18 U.S.C Section 1350,
 
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
   
101
The following financial statements from the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2013, formatted in XBRL: (i) Consolidated Balance Sheets, (ii) Consolidated Statements of Operations, (iii) Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income (Loss), (iv) Consolidated Statement of Changes in Stockholders’ Equity, (v) Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
 
 
52

 
 
SIGNATURES

Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act if 1934, the Registrant had duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.

 
PORTER BANCORP, INC.
 
(Registrant)
 
May 15, 2013
By:
/s/ Maria L. Bouvette
   
Maria L. Bouvette
   
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer
 
May 15, 2013
By:
/s/ Phillip W. Barnhouse
   
Phillip W. Barnhouse 
   
Chief Financial Officer and Chief
   
Accounting Officer
 
53