OLD SECOND BANCORP INC - Annual Report: 2016 (Form 10-K)

I  

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C.  20549

Form 10-K

 

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2016

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   0-10537

 

 

 

37 South River Street, Aurora, Illinois 60507

(Address of principal executive offices, including zip code)

 

(630) 892-0202

(Registrant's telephone number, including Area Code)

 

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

 

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

Preferred Share Purchase Rights

(Title of Class)

 

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports) and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒     No ☐

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

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by Reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K. ☐

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

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

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant, on June 30, 2016, the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $196.6 million.  The number of shares outstanding of the registrant's common stock, par value $1.00 per share, was 29,556,216 at March 10, 2017.

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Part III – Portions of the Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be held on May 16, 2017 are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof.

 

 

 

 

 

OLD SECOND BANCORP, INC.

Form 10-K

INDEX

 

 

 

PART I

 

Item 1. Business

 

General

 

Old Second Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company" or the "Registrant") was organized under the laws of Delaware on September 8, 1981.  It is a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the "BHCA"). 

 

The Company conducts a full service community banking and trust business through the following wholly owned subsidiaries, which together with the Registrant are referred to as the “Company”:

 

 

Inter-company transactions and balances are eliminated in consolidation.

 

The Bank’s full service banking businesses include the customary consumer and commercial products and services that banking institutions typically provide including demand, NOW, money market, savings, time deposit and individual retirement accounts; commercial, industrial, consumer and real estate lending, including installment loans, agricultural loans, lines of credit and overdraft checking; safe deposit operations; trust services; wealth management services; and an extensive variety of additional services tailored to the needs of individual customers, such as the acquisition of U.S. Treasury notes and bonds, money orders, cashiers’ checks and foreign currency, direct deposit, discount brokerage, debit cards, credit cards, and other special services. The Bank’s lending activities include making commercial and consumer loans, primarily on a secured basis.  Commercial lending focuses on business, capital, construction, inventory and real estate lending.  Installment lending includes direct and indirect loans to consumers and commercial customers.

 

The Bank also offers a full complement of electronic banking services such as online and mobile banking and corporate cash management products including remote deposit capture, mobile deposit capture, investment sweep accounts, zero balance accounts, automated tax payments, ATM access, telephone banking, lockbox accounts, automated clearing house transactions, account reconciliation, controlled disbursement, detail and general information reporting, wire transfers, vault services for currency and coin, and checking accounts.  Additionally, the Bank provides a wide range of wealth management, investment, agency, and custodial services for individual, corporate, and not-for-profit clients.  These services include the administration of estates and personal trusts, as well as the management of investment accounts for individuals, employee benefit plans, and charitable foundations.  The Bank also originates residential mortgages, offering a wide range of mortgage products including conventional, government, and jumbo loans.  Secondary marketing of those mortgages is also handled at the Bank.

 

The Company’s management evaluates the operations of the Company as one operating segment, which is community banking. Financial information concerning the Company’s operations can be found in the financial statements in this annual report.

 

Market Area

 

The Company’s main office is located at 37 South River Street, Aurora, Illinois 60507. The city of Aurora is located in northeastern Illinois, approximately 40 miles west of Chicago. The Bank operates primarily in Kane, Kendall, DeKalb, DuPage, LaSalle, Will and Cook counties in Illinois, and it has developed a strong presence in these counties.  The Bank offers its services to retail, commercial, industrial, and public entity customers in the Aurora, North Aurora, Batavia, St. Charles, Burlington, Elburn, Elgin, Maple Park, Kaneville, Sugar Grove, Naperville, Lisle, Joliet, Yorkville, Plano, Wasco, Ottawa, Oswego, Sycamore, Frankfort, Chicago and Chicago Heights communities and surrounding areas through its 26 banking locations that are located primarily west and south of the Chicago metropolitan area.  The Bank is continually assessing its market presence to ensure it meets the needs of these communities and the Company’s stockholders.  On October 28, 2016, the Bank acquired the Chicago branch of Talmer Bank and Trust, the banking subsidiary of Talmer Bancorp, Inc. (“Talmer”) .  On November 16, 2016, the Bank announced its plan to close the Maple Park branch as of February 24, 2017.  During 2015 the Company closed one of two branches in Batavia.

 

Lending Activities

 

The Bank provides a broad range of commercial and retail lending services to corporations, partnerships, individuals and government agencies.  The Bank actively markets its services to qualified borrowers.  Lending officers actively solicit the business of new borrowers entering our market areas as well as long-standing members of the local business community.  The Bank has established lending policies that include a number of underwriting factors to be considered in making a loan, including location, amortization, loan to value ratio, cash flow, pricing, documentation and the credit history of the borrower.  In 2016, the Bank originated approximately $614.9 million in loans.  Also in 2016, residential mortgage loans of approximately $191.4 million (some of which were originated in 2015) were sold to third parties.  Finally, the Bank’s total loan portfolio grew $221.0 million in late 2016 due to the Talmer branch acquisition. 

 

The Bank’s loan portfolios are comprised primarily of loans in the areas of commercial real estate, residential real estate, construction, general commercial and consumer lending.  As of December 31, 2016, residential mortgages represented approximately 25.6% (31.0% at year-end 2015) of the Bank’s loan portfolio, commercial real estate loans represented approximately 49.8% (53.4% at year-end 2015), construction lending represented approximately 4.4% (1.8% at year-end 2015), general commercial loans, including leases, represented approximately 19.2% (12.5% at year-end 2015), and consumer and other lending represented less than 1.0% (2.0% at year-end 2015).  It is the Bank’s policy to comply at all times with the various consumer protection laws and regulations including, but not limited to, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Community Reinvestment Act, the Truth in Lending Act, and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act.

 

Commercial Loans.  The Bank continues to focus on identifying commercial and industrial prospects in its new business pipeline with positive results in 2016.  As noted above, the Bank is an active commercial lender in the Chicago metropolitan area, with primary markets west and south of Chicago.  Commercial lending reflects revolving lines of credit for working capital, lending for capital expenditures on manufacturing equipment and lending to small business manufacturers, service companies, medical and dental entities as well as specialty contractors.  The Bank also has commercial and industrial loans to customers in food product manufacturing, food process and packing, machinery tooling manufacturing as well as service and technology companies.  Collateral for these loans generally includes accounts receivable, inventory, equipment and real estate.  In addition, the Bank often secures personal guarantees to help assure repayment.  Loans may be made on an unsecured basis if warranted by the overall financial condition of the borrower.  Commercial term loans range principally from one to seven years with the majority falling in the one to five year range.  Interest rates on commercial loans are a mixture of fixed and variable rates, with the variable tied to the prime rate or LIBOR.  While management continued to diversify the loan portfolio, overall demand for working capital and equipment financing remained  soft in the Bank’s primary market area in 2016.

 

Repayment of commercial loans is largely dependent upon the cash flows generated by the operations of the commercial enterprise.  The Bank’s underwriting procedures identify the sources of those cash flows and seek to match the repayment terms of the commercial loans to the sources.  Secondary repayment sources are typically found in collateralization and guarantor support.

 

Commercial Real Estate Loans.  While management has been actively working to reduce the Bank’s concentration in real estate loans, including commercial real estate loans, a large portion of the loan portfolio continues to be comprised of commercial real estate loans.  As of December 31, 2016, approximately $315.4 million, or 42.8% (49.1%, at year-end 2015) of the total commercial real estate loan portfolio of $736.2 million consisted of loans  to borrowers secured by owner occupied property.  A primary repayment risk for a commercial real estate loan is interruption or discontinuance of cash flows from operations, which are usually derived from rent in the case of nonowner occupied commercial properties.  Repayment could also be influenced by economic events, which may or may not be under the control of the borrower, or changes in regulations that negatively impact the future cash flow and market values of the affected properties.  Repayment risk can also arise from general downward shifts in the valuations of classes of properties over a given geographic area such as the ongoing but diminished price adjustments that have been observed by the Company beginning in 2008.  Property valuations could continue to be affected by changes in demand and other economic factors, which could further influence cash flows associated with the borrower and/or the property.  The Bank attempts to mitigate these risks by staying apprised of market conditions and by maintaining underwriting practices that provide for adequate cash flow margins and multiple repayment sources as well as remaining in regular contact with its borrowers.  In most cases, the Bank has collateralized these loans and/or has taken personal guarantees to help assure repayment.  Commercial real estate loans are primarily made based on the identified cash flow of the borrower and/or the property at origination and secondarily on the underlying real estate acting as collateral.  Additional credit support is provided by the borrower for most of these loans and the probability of repayment is based on the liquidation value of the real estate and enforceability of personal and corporate guarantees if any exist.

 

Construction Loans.  The Bank’s construction and development portfolio increased from $19.8 million at December 31, 2015, to $64.7 million at December 31, 2016, due primarily to the impact of the Talmer branch acquisition.  The Bank uses underwriting and construction loan guidelines to determine whether to issue loans on build-to-suit or build out arrangements of existing borrower properties.

 

Construction loans are structured most often to be converted to permanent loans at the end of the construction phase or, infrequently, to be paid off upon receiving financing from another financial institution.  Construction loans are generally limited to our local market

area.  Lending decisions have been based on the appraised value of the property as determined by an independent appraiser, an analysis of the potential marketability and profitability of the project and identification of a cash flow source to service the permanent loan or verification of a refinancing source.  Construction loans generally have terms of 12 to 18 months, with extensions as needed.  The Bank disburses loan proceeds in increments as construction progresses and as inspections warrant.

 

Development lending often involves the disbursement of substantial funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the ultimate project rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest.  Therefore, construction lending generally involves more risk than other lending because it is based on future estimates of value and economic circumstances.  While appraisals are required prior to funding, and loan advances are limited to the value determined by the appraisal, there is the possibility of an unforeseen event affecting the value and/or costs of the project.  Development loans are primarily used for single-family developments, where the sale of lots and houses are tied to customer preferences and interest rates.  If the borrower defaults prior to completion of the project, the Bank may be required to fund additional amounts so that another developer can complete the project.  The Bank is located in an area where a large amount of development activity has occurred as rural and semi-rural areas are being suburbanized.  This type of growth presents some economic risks should local demand for housing shift.  The Bank addresses these risks by closely monitoring local real estate activity, adhering to proper underwriting procedures, closely monitoring construction projects, and limiting the amount of construction development lending.

 

Residential Real Estate Loans.  Residential first mortgage loans, second mortgages, and home equity line of credit mortgages are included in this category.  First mortgage loans may include fixed rate loans that are generally sold to investors.  The Bank is a direct seller to the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”), Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”) and to several large financial institutions.  The Bank typically retains servicing rights for sold mortgages.  The retention of such servicing rights also allows the Bank an opportunity to have regular contact with mortgage customers and can help to solidify community involvement.  Other loans that are not sold include adjustable rate mortgages, lot loans, and construction loans that are held in the Bank’s portfolio.  Residential mortgage purchase activity has reflected a moderate level of activity as the real estate market in our market area continues to stabilize.  However, with continuing lower interest rates and increased stabilization in our market area, the Bank’s residential mortgage lending reflects a steady volume and mixture of both refinance and purchase financing opportunities.  Home equity lending has continued to slow in the past year but is still a meaningful portion of the Bank’s business.

 

Consumer Loans.  The Bank also provides many types of consumer loans including primarily motor vehicle, home improvement and signature loans.  Consumer loans typically have shorter terms and lower balances with higher yields as compared to other loans but generally carry higher risks of default. Consumer loan collections are dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability and thus are more likely to be affected by adverse personal circumstances.

 

Lease Financing  Receivables.  The Bank continued growth of the lease portfolio in 2016 with the acquisition of leases originated by other equipment financing companies, as well as organic growth by the Bank.  The collateral for lease financing receivables primarily includes manufacturing and transportation equipment, and lease terms typically range from one to seven years, with the majority falling in the one to five year range.  Growth in this portfolio reflects management’s efforts to diversify lending product offerings, and improve loan concentration metrics.

 

Competition

 

The Company’s market area is highly competitive and the Bank’s business activities require it to compete with many other financial institutions.  A number of these financial institutions are affiliated with large bank holding companies headquartered outside of our principal market area as well as other institutions that are based in Aurora's surrounding communities and in Chicago, Illinois.  All of these financial institutions operate banking offices in the greater Aurora area or actively compete for customers within the Company's market area.  The Bank also faces competition from finance companies, insurance companies, credit unions, mortgage companies, securities brokerage firms, money market funds, loan production offices and other providers of financial services.  Many of our nonbank competitors which are not subject to the same extensive federal regulations that govern bank holding companies and banks, such as the Company and the Bank, may have certain competitive advantages.

 

The Bank competes for loans principally through the quality of its client service and its responsiveness to client needs in addition to competing on interest rates and loan fees.  Management believes that its long-standing presence in the community and personal one-on-one service philosophy enhances its ability to compete favorably in attracting and retaining individual and business customers.  The Bank actively solicits deposit-related clients and competes for deposits by offering personal attention, competitive interest rates, and professional services made available through experienced bankers and multiple delivery channels that fit the needs of its market.

 

We believe the financial services industry will likely continue to become more competitive as further technological advances enable more financial institutions to provide expanded financial services without having a physical presence in our market.

 

Employees

 

At December 31, 2016,  the Company employed 467 full-time equivalent employees. 

 

Internet

 

The Company maintains a corporate website at http://www.oldsecond.com.  The Company makes available free of charge on or through its website the Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company electronically files such material with, or furnishes it to, the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).  Many of the Company’s policies, committee charters and other investor information including our Code of Business Conduct and Ethics, are available on the Company’s website.  The Company’s reports, proxy and informational statements and other information regarding the Company are available free of charge on the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov).  The Company will also provide copies of its filings free of charge upon written request to: Investor Relations, Old Second Bancorp, Inc., 37 South River Street, Aurora, Illinois 60507.

 

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

This report and other publicly available documents of the Company, including the documents incorporated herein by reference, contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, including with respect to management’s expectations regarding future plans, strategies and financial performance, regulatory developments, industry and economic trends, and other matters.  Forward-looking statements, which may be based upon beliefs, expectations and assumptions of the Company's management and on information currently available to management, can be identified by the inclusion of such qualifications as “expects,” “intends,” “believes,” “may,” “will,” “would,” “could,” “should,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “possible,” “likely” or other indications that the particular statements are not historical facts and refer to future periods.  Because forward-looking statements relate to the future, they are subject to inherent uncertainties, risks and changes in circumstances that are difficult to predict and may be outside of the Company’s control. Actual events and results may differ significantly from those described in such forward-looking statements, due to numerous factors, including:

 

 

Because the Company’s ability to predict results or the actual effect of future plans or strategies is inherently uncertain, there can be no assurances that future actual results will correspond to any forward-looking statements and you should not rely on any forward-looking statements.  Additionally, all statements in this Form 10-K, including forward-looking statements, speak only as of the date they are made, and the Company undertakes no obligation to update any statement in light of new information or future events.

 

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

FDIC-insured institutions, their holding companies and their affiliates, are extensively regulated under federal and state law.  As a result, the Company’s growth and earnings performance may be affected not only by management decisions and general economic conditions, but also by the requirements of federal and state statutes and by the regulations and policies of various bank regulatory agencies, including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”).  Furthermore, taxation laws administered by the Internal Revenue Service and state taxing authorities, accounting rules developed by the Financial Accounting Standards Board, securities laws administered by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and state securities authorities, and anti-money laundering laws enforced by the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) have an impact on the Company's business.  The effect of these statutes, regulations, regulatory policies and accounting rules are significant to the Company's operations and results.

Federal and state banking laws impose a comprehensive system of supervision, regulation and enforcement on the operations of FDIC-insured institutions, their holding companies and affiliates that is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC-insured deposits and depositors of banks, rather than stockholders.  These laws, and the regulations of the bank regulatory agencies issued under them, affect, among other things, the scope of the Company’s business, the kinds and amounts of investments the Company and the Bank may make, reserve requirements, required capital levels relative to assets, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, the Company’s ability to merge, consolidate and acquire, dealings with the Company's and the Bank's insiders and affiliates and the Company’s payment of dividends.  In the last several years, the Company has experienced heightened regulatory requirements and scrutiny following the global financial crisis and as a result of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”).  Although the reforms primarily targeted systemically important financial service providers, their influence filtered down in varying degrees to community banks over time, and the reforms have caused the Company’s compliance and risk management processes, and the costs thereof, to increase.  While it is anticipated that the Trump administration will not increase the regulatory burden on community banks and may reduce some of the burdens associated with implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act, the true impact of the new administration is impossible to predict with any certainty.

This supervisory and regulatory framework subjects banks and their bank holding companies to regular examination by their respective regulatory agencies, which results in examination reports and ratings that are not publicly available and that can impact the conduct and growth of their business.  These examinations consider not only compliance with applicable laws and regulations, but also capital levels, asset quality and risk, management ability and performance, earnings, liquidity, and various other factors.  The regulatory agencies generally have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity where the agencies determine, among other things, that such operations are unsafe or unsound, fail to comply with applicable law or are otherwise inconsistent with laws and regulations or with the supervisory policies of these agencies.  

The following is a summary of the material elements of the supervisory and regulatory framework applicable to the Company and the Bank, beginning with a discussion of the continuing regulatory emphasis on the Company's capital levels.  It does not describe all of the statutes, regulations and regulatory policies that apply, nor does it restate all of the requirements of those that are described.  The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provision.

 

Regulatory Emphasis on Capital

 

Regulatory capital represents the net assets of a banking organization available to absorb losses. Because of the risks attendant to their business, FDIC-insured institutions are generally required to hold more capital than other businesses, which directly affects the Company’s earnings capabilities. While capital has historically been one of the key measures of the financial health of  both bank holding companies and banks, its role became fundamentally more important in the wake of the global financial crisis, as the banking regulators recognized that the amount and quality of capital held by banks prior to the crisis was insufficient to absorb losses during periods of severe stress.  Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and Basel III, discussed below, establish strengthened capital standards for banks and bank holding companies that are meaningfully more stringent than those in place previously.

Minimum Required Capital Levels.  Banks have been required to hold minimum levels of capital based on guidelines established by the bank regulatory agencies since 1983.  The minimums have been expressed in terms of ratios of capital divided by total assets.  As discussed below, bank capital measures have become more sophisticated over the years and have focused more on the quality of capital and the risk of assets.  Bank holding companies have historically had to comply with less stringent capital standards than their bank subsidiaries and have been able to raise capital with hybrid instruments such as trust preferred securities.  The Dodd-Frank Act mandated the Federal Reserve to establish minimum capital levels for holding companies on a consolidated basis as stringent as those required for FDIC-insured institutions.  A result of this change is that the proceeds of hybrid instruments, such as trust preferred securities, are being excluded from capital over a phase-out period. However, if such securities were issued prior to May 19, 2010 by bank holding companies with less than $15 billion of assets, they may be retained, subject to certain restrictions.  Because the Company has assets of less than $15 billion, the Company is able to maintain its trust preferred proceeds as capital but the Company has to comply with new capital mandates in other respects and will not be able to raise capital in the future through the issuance of trust preferred securities.

 

The Basel International Capital Accords.  The risk-based capital guidelines for U.S. banks since 1989 were based upon the 1988 capital accord known as “Basel I” adopted by the international Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, a committee of central banks and bank supervisors that acts as the primary global standard-setter for prudential regulation, as implemented by the U.S. bank regulatory agencies on an interagency basis. The accord recognized that bank assets for the purpose of the capital ratio calculations needed to be risk weighted (the theory being that riskier assets should require more capital) and that off-balance sheet exposures needed to be factored in the calculations.  Basel I had a very simple formula for assigning risk weights to bank assets from 0% to 100% based on four categories.  In 2008, the banking agencies collaboratively began to phase-in capital standards based on a second capital accord, referred to as “Basel II,” for large or “core” international banks (generally defined for U.S. purposes as having total assets of $250 billion or more, or consolidated foreign exposures of $10 billion or more) known as “advanced approaches” banks.  The primary focus of Basel II was on the calculation of risk weights based on complex models developed by each advanced approaches bank. Because most banks were not subject to Basel II, the U.S. bank regulators worked to improve the risk sensitivity of Basel I standards without imposing the complexities of Basel II. This “standardized approach” increased the number of risk-weight categories and recognized risks well above the original 100% risk weighting. The standardized approach is institutionalized by the Dodd-Frank Act for all banking organizations as a floor.

On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, announced agreement on a strengthened set of capital requirements for banking organizations around the world, known as Basel III, to address deficiencies recognized in connection with the global financial crisis. 

The Basel III Rule.   In July of 2013, the U.S. federal banking agencies approved the implementation of the Basel III regulatory capital reforms in pertinent part, and, at the same time, promulgated rules effecting certain changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act (the “Basel III Rule”).  In contrast to capital requirements historically, which were in the form of guidelines, Basel III was released in the form of enforceable regulations by each of the regulatory agencies.  The Basel III Rule is applicable to all banking organizations that are subject to minimum capital requirements, including federal and state banks and savings and loan associations, as well as to bank and savings and loan holding companies, other than “small bank holding companies” (generally holding companies with consolidated assets of less than $1 billion that do not have securities registered with the SEC).

The Basel III Rule required higher capital levels, increased the required quality of capital, and required more detailed categories of risk weighting of riskier, more opaque assets.  For nearly every class of assets, the Basel III Rule requires a more complex, detailed and calibrated assessment of credit risk and calculation of risk weightings.

Not only did the Basel III Rule increase most of the required minimum capital ratios in effect prior to January 1, 2015, but it introduced the concept of Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, which consists primarily of common stock, related surplus (net of Treasury stock), retained earnings, and Common Equity Tier 1 minority interests subject to certain regulatory adjustments.  The Basel III Rule also changed the definition of capital by establishing more stringent criteria that instruments must meet to be considered Additional Tier 1 Capital (primarily non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock that meets certain requirements) and Tier 2 Capital (primarily other types of preferred stock and subordinated debt, subject to limitations).  A number of instruments that qualified as Tier 1 Capital under Basel I do not qualify, or their qualifications changed.  For example, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, which qualified as simple Tier 1 Capital under Basel I, does not qualify as Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, but qualifies as Additional Tier 1 Capital. The Basel III Rule also constrained the inclusion of minority interests, mortgage-servicing assets, and deferred tax assets in capital and requires deductions from Common Equity Tier 1 Capital in the event that such assets exceed a certain percentage of a banking institution’s Common Equity Tier 1 Capital. 

The Basel III Rule required minimum capital ratios as of January 1, 2015, as follows:

In addition, institutions that seek the freedom to make capital distributions (including for dividends and repurchases of stock) and pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers without restriction must also maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to a capital conservation buffer being phased in over three years beginning in 2016 (which, as of January 1, 2017, was phased in half-way to 1.25%). The purpose of the conservation buffer is to ensure that banking institutions maintain a buffer of capital that can be used to absorb losses during periods of financial and economic stress. Factoring in the fully phased-in conservation buffer increases the minimum ratios depicted above to 7% for Common Equity Tier 1 Capital, 8.5% for Tier 1 Capital and 10.5% for Total Capital.

Banking organizations (except for large, internationally active banking organizations) became subject to the new rules on January 1, 2015.  However, there are separate phase-in/phase-out periods for: (i) the capital conservation buffer; (ii) regulatory capital adjustments and deductions; (iii) nonqualifying capital instruments; and (iv) changes to the prompt corrective action rules discussed below.  The phase-in periods commenced on January 1, 2016 and extend until 2019.

Well-Capitalized Requirements.   The ratios described above are minimum standards in order for banking organizations to be considered “adequately capitalized.”  Bank regulatory agencies uniformly encourage banks to hold more capital and be “well-capitalized” and, to that end, federal law and regulations provide various incentives for banking organizations to maintain regulatory capital at levels in excess of minimum regulatory requirements. For example, a banking organization that is well-capitalized may: (i)

qualify for exemptions from prior notice or application requirements otherwise applicable to certain types of activities; (ii) qualify for expedited processing of other required notices or applications; and (iii) accept, roll-over or renew brokered deposits.  Higher capital levels could also be required if warranted by the particular circumstances or risk profiles of individual banking organizations.  For example, the Federal Reserve’s capital guidelines contemplate that additional capital may be required to take adequate account of, among other things, interest rate risk, or the risks posed by concentrations of credit, nontraditional activities or securities trading activities.  Further, any banking organization experiencing or anticipating significant growth would be expected to maintain capital ratios, including tangible capital positions (i.e., Tier 1 Capital less all intangible assets), well above the minimum levels.

Under the capital regulations of the OCC, in order to be well‑capitalized, a banking organization must maintain:

 

It is possible under the Basel III Rule to be well-capitalized while remaining out of compliance with the capital conservation buffer discussed above.

As of December 31, 2016: (i) the Bank was not subject to a directive from the OCC to increase its capital and (ii) the Bank was well-capitalized, as defined by OCC regulations.  As of December 31, 2016, the Company had regulatory capital in excess of the Federal Reserve’s requirements and met the Basel III Rule requirements to be well-capitalized.

Prompt Corrective Action.  An FDIC-insured institution’s capital plays an important role in connection with regulatory enforcement as well. Federal law provides the federal banking regulators with broad power to take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions.  The extent of the regulators’ powers depends on whether the institution in question is “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized,” in each case as defined by regulation.  Depending upon the capital category to which an institution is assigned, the regulators’ corrective powers include: (i) requiring the institution to submit a capital restoration plan; (ii) limiting the institution’s asset growth and restricting its activities; (iii) requiring the institution to issue additional capital stock (including additional voting stock) or to sell itself; (iv) restricting transactions between the institution and its affiliates; (v) restricting the interest rate that the institution may pay on deposits; (vi) ordering a new election of directors of the institution; (vii) requiring that senior executive officers or directors be dismissed; (viii) prohibiting the institution from accepting deposits from correspondent banks; (ix) requiring the institution to divest certain subsidiaries; (x) prohibiting the payment of principal or interest on subordinated debt; and (xi) ultimately, appointing a receiver for the institution.

Regulation and Supervision of the Company

General.  The Company, as the sole stockholder of the Bank, is a bank holding company.  As a bank holding company, the Company is registered with, and subject to regulation, supervision and enforcement by, the Federal Reserve under the BHCA.  The Company is legally obligated to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank in circumstances where the Company might not otherwise do so.  Under the BHCA, the Company is subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve and is required to file with the Federal Reserve periodic reports of the Company's operations and such additional information regarding the Company and the Bank as the Federal Reserve may require. 

Acquisitions, Activities and Change in Control.    The primary purpose of a bank holding company is to control and manage banks. The BHCA generally requires the prior approval of the Federal Reserve for any merger involving a bank holding company or any acquisition by a bank holding company of another bank or bank holding company.  Subject to certain conditions (including deposit concentration limits established by the BHCA), the Federal Reserve may allow a bank holding company to acquire banks located in any state of the United States. In approving interstate acquisitions, the Federal Reserve is required to give effect to applicable state law limitations on the aggregate amount of deposits that may be held by the acquiring bank holding company and its FDIC-insured institution affiliates in the state in which the target bank is located (provided that those limits do not discriminate against out-of-state institutions or their holding companies) and state laws that require that the target bank have been in existence for a minimum period of time (not to exceed five years) before being acquired by an out-of-state bank holding company.  Furthermore, in accordance with the Dodd-Frank Act, bank holding companies must be well-capitalized and examiners must rate them well-managed in order to effect interstate mergers or acquisitions.  For a discussion of the capital requirements, see “Regulatory Emphasis on Capital” above.

The BHCA generally prohibits the Company from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any company that is not a bank and from engaging in any business other than that of banking, managing and controlling banks or furnishing services to banks and their subsidiaries.  This general prohibition is subject to a number of exceptions.  The principal exception allows bank holding companies to engage in, and to own shares of companies engaged in, certain businesses found by the Federal Reserve prior to November 11, 1999 to be “so closely related to banking ... as to be a proper incident thereto.”  This authority would permit the Company to engage in a variety of banking-related businesses, including the ownership and operation of a savings association, or any entity engaged in consumer finance, equipment leasing, the operation of a computer service bureau (including software development) and mortgage banking and brokerage services.  The BHCA does not place territorial restrictions on the domestic activities of nonbank subsidiaries of bank holding companies.

Additionally, bank holding companies that meet certain eligibility requirements prescribed by the BHCA and elect to operate as financial holding companies may engage in, or own shares in companies engaged in, a wider range of nonbanking activities, including

securities and insurance underwriting and sales, merchant banking and any other activity that the Federal Reserve, in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury, determines by regulation or order is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity or that the Federal Reserve determines by order to be complementary to any such financial activity and does not pose a substantial risk to the safety or soundness of FDIC-insured institutions or the financial system generally.  The Company has not elected to operate as a financial holding company. 

Federal law also prohibits any person or company from acquiring “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or its holding company without prior notice to the appropriate federal bank regulator.  “Control” is conclusively presumed to exist upon the acquisition of 25% or more of the outstanding voting securities of a bank or bank holding company, but may arise under certain circumstances between 10% and 24.99% ownership.

Capital Requirements.  Bank holding companies are required to maintain capital in accordance with Federal Reserve capital adequacy requirements.  For a discussion of capital requirements, see “Regulatory Emphasis on Capital” above.

Dividend Payments.    The Company’s ability to pay dividends to its stockholders may be affected by both general corporate law considerations and policies of the Federal Reserve applicable to bank holding companies.    As a Delaware corporation, the Company is subject to the limitations of the Delaware General Corporation Law (the “DGCL”).  The DGCL allows the Company to pay dividends only out of its surplus (as defined and computed in accordance with the provisions of the DGCL) or if the Company has no such surplus, out of its net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and/or the preceding fiscal year. 

As a general matter, the Federal Reserve has indicated that the board of directors of a bank holding company should eliminate, defer or significantly reduce dividends to stockholders if: (i) the company's net income available to stockholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends; (ii) the prospective rate of earnings retention is inconsistent with the company's capital needs and overall current and prospective financial condition; or (iii) the company will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios.  The Federal Reserve also possesses enforcement powers over bank holding companies and their non-bank subsidiaries to prevent or remedy actions that represent unsafe or unsound practices or violations of applicable statutes and regulations. Among these powers is the ability to proscribe the payment of dividends by banks and bank holding companies.  In addition, under the Basel III Rule, institutions that seek the freedom to pay dividends will have to maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to the capital conservation buffer to be phased in over three years beginning in 2016.  See “Regulatory Emphasis on Capital” above.

Incentive Compensation. There have been a number of developments in recent years focused on incentive compensation plans sponsored by bank holding companies and banks, reflecting recognition by the bank regulatory agencies and Congress that flawed incentive compensation practices in the financial industry were one of many factors contributing to the global financial crisis. Layered on top of that are the abuses in the headlines dealing with product cross-selling incentive plans. The result is interagency guidance on sound incentive compensation practices and proposed rulemaking by the agencies required under Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Act.

The interagency guidance recognized three core principles; effective incentive plans are required to: (i) provide employees incentives that appropriately balance risk and reward; (ii) be compatible with effective controls and risk-management; and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors. Much of the guidance addresses large banking organizations and, because of the size and complexity of their operations, the regulators expect those organizations to maintain systematic and formalized policies, procedures, and systems for ensuring that the incentive compensation arrangements for all executive and non-executive employees covered by this guidance are identified and reviewed, and appropriately balance risks and rewards.  Smaller banking organizations like the Company that use incentive compensation arrangements are expected to be less extensive, formalized, and detailed than those of the larger banks. 

Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank Act required the banking agencies, the National Credit Union Administration, the SEC and the Federal Housing Finance Agency to jointly prescribe regulations that prohibit types of incentive-based compensation that encourage inappropriate risk taking and to disclose certain information regarding such plans.  On June 10, 2016, the agencies released an updated proposed rule for comment. Section 956 will only apply to banking organizations with assets of greater than $1 billion. The Company has consolidated assets greater than $1 billion and less than $50 billion and the Company is considered a Level 3 banking organization under the proposed rules. The proposed rules contain mostly general principles and reporting requirements for Level 3 institutions so there are no specific prescriptions or limits, deferral requirements or claw-back mandates. Risk management and controls are required, as is board or committee level approval and oversight. Management expects to review its incentive plans in light of the proposed rulemaking and guidance and implement policies and procedures that mitigate unreasonable risk.

Monetary Policy.  The monetary policy of the Federal Reserve has a significant effect on the operating results of financial or bank holding companies and their subsidiaries.  Among the tools available to the Federal Reserve to affect the money supply are open market transactions in U.S. government securities, changes in the discount rate on bank borrowings and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits.  These means are used in varying combinations to influence overall growth and distribution of bank loans, investments and deposits, and their use may affect interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits.

Federal Securities Regulation.  The Company’s common stock is registered with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  Consequently, the Company is subject to the information, proxy solicitation, insider trading and other restrictions and requirements of the SEC under the Exchange Act.

Corporate Governance.  The Dodd-Frank Act addressed many investor protection, corporate governance and executive compensation matters that will affect most U.S. publicly traded companies.  It increased stockholder influence over boards of directors by requiring

companies to give stockholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation and so-called “golden parachute” payments, and authorizing the SEC to promulgate rules that would allow stockholders to nominate and solicit voters for their own candidates using a company’s proxy materials.  The legislation also directed the Federal Reserve to promulgate rules prohibiting excessive compensation paid to executives of bank holding companies, regardless of whether such companies are publicly traded.

Regulation and Supervision of the Bank

General.    The Bank is a national bank, chartered by the OCC under the National Bank Act.  The deposit accounts of the Bank are insured by the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) to the maximum extent provided under federal law and FDIC regulations, currently $250,000 per insured depositor category, and the Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System.  As a national bank, the Bank is subject to the examination, supervision, reporting and enforcement requirements of the OCC, the chartering authority for national banks.  The FDIC, as administrator of the DIF, also has regulatory authority over the Bank.

Deposit Insurance.  As an FDIC-insured institution, the Bank is required to pay deposit insurance premium assessments to the FDIC.   Effective July 1, 2016, the FDIC changed its pricing system for banks under $10 billion, so that mimimum and maximum intial base assessment rates are based on supervisory ratings.  The initial base assessment rates currently range from three basis points to 30 basis points.  At least semi-annually, the FDIC updates its loss and income projections for the DIF and, if needed, increases or decreases the assessment rates, following notice and comment on proposed rulemaking.

The assessment base against which an FDIC-insured institution’s deposit insurance premiums paid to the DIF are calculated based on its average consolidated total assets less its average tangible equity.  This method shifts the burden of deposit insurance premiums toward those large depository institutions that rely on funding sources other than U.S. deposits. 

The reserve ratio is the DIF balance divided by estimated insured deposits. The Dodd-Frank Act altered the minimum reserve ratio of the DIF, increasing the minimum from 1.15% to 1.35% of the estimated amount of total insured deposits, and eliminating the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to FDIC-insured institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds.  The reserve ratio reached 1.15% on June 30, 2016, when revised factors were put in place for calculating the assessment.  If the reserve ratio does not reach 1.35% by December 31, 2018, (provided it is at least 1.15%), the FDIC will impose a shortfall assessment on March 31, 2019, on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more. The FDIC will provide assessment credits to insured depository institutions, like the Bank, with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion for the portion of their regular assessments that contribute to growth in the reserve ratio between 1.15% and 1.35%. The FDIC will apply the credits each quarter that the reserve ratio is at least 1.38% to offset the regular deposit insurance assessments of institutions with credits.

FICO Assessments.   In addition to paying basic deposit insurance assessments, FDIC-insured institutions must pay Financing Corporation (“FICO”) assessments.  FICO is a mixed-ownership governmental corporation chartered by the former Federal Home Loan Bank Board pursuant to the Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987 to function as a financing vehicle for the recapitalization of the former Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation.  FICO issued 30-year noncallable bonds of approximately $8.1 billion that mature in 2017 through 2019.  FICO’s authority to issue bonds ended on December 12, 1991.  Since 1996, federal legislation has required that all FDIC-insured institutions pay assessments to cover interest payments on FICO’s outstanding obligations.  The FICO assessment rate is adjusted quarterly and for the fourth quarter of 2016 was 0.56 basis points (56 cents per $100 dollars of assessable deposits).

Supervisory Assessments.    National banks are required to pay supervisory assessments to the OCC to fund the operations of the OCC.  The amount of the assessment is calculated using a formula that takes into account the bank’s size and its supervisory condition.    During the year ended December 31, 2016, the Bank paid supervisory assessments to the OCC totaling $434,000.

Capital Requirements.  Banks are generally required to maintain capital levels in excess of other businesses.  For a discussion of capital requirements, see “Regulatory Emphasis on Capital” above.

Liquidity Requirements.  Liquidity is a measure of the ability and ease with which bank assets may be converted to cash. Liquid assets are those that can be converted to cash quickly if needed to meet financial obligations.  To remain viable, FDIC-insured institutions must have enough liquid assets to meet their near-term obligations, such as withdrawals by depositors. Because the global financial crisis was in part a liquidity crisis, Basel III also includes a liquidity framework that requires FDIC-insured institutions to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests.  One test, referred to as the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (“LCR”), is designed to ensure that the banking entity has an adequate stock of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets that can be converted easily and immediately in private markets into cash to meet  liquidity needs for a 30-calendar day liquidity stress scenario.  The other test, known as the Net Stable Funding Ratio ("NSFR") is designed to promote more medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of FDIC-insured institutions over a one-year horizon.  These tests provide an incentive for banks and holding companies to increase their holdings in Treasury securities and other sovereign debt as a component of assets, increase the use of long-term debt as a funding source and rely on stable funding like core deposits (in lieu of brokered deposits).

In addition to liquidity guidelines already in place, the federal bank regulatory agencies implemented the Basel III LCR in 2014 and have proposed the NSFR.  While the LCR only applies to the largest banking organizations in the country, as will the NSFR, certain elements are expected to filter down to all FDIC-insured institutions. The Company has adopted a modified version of the LCR as a part of measuring the liquidity at the Bank.  The Company has no plans to adopt the NSFR and has not received regulatory guidance indicating a requirement to do so.

Stress Testing.    A stress test is an analysis or simulation designed to determine the ability of a given FDIC-insured institution to deal with an economic crisis, In October 2012, U.S. bank regulators unveiled new rules mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act that require the largest U.S. banks to undergo stress tests twice per year, once internally and once conducted by the regulators.  Stress tests are not required for banks with less than $10 billion in assets; however, the FDIC now recommends stress testing as means to identify and quantify loan portfolio risk and the Bank is engaged in the process. 

Dividend Payments.  The primary source of funds for the Company is dividends from the Bank. Under the National Bank Act, a national bank may pay dividends out of its undivided profits in such amounts and at such times as the bank’s board of directors deems prudent.  Without prior OCC approval, however, a national bank may not pay dividends in any calendar year that, in the aggregate, exceed the bank’s year-to-date net income plus the bank’s retained net income for the two preceding years. The payment of dividends by any FDIC-insured institution is affected by the requirement to maintain adequate capital pursuant to applicable capital adequacy guidelines and regulations, and an FDIC-insured institution generally is prohibited from paying any dividends if, following payment thereof, the institution would be undercapitalized. As described above, the Bank exceeded its capital requirements under applicable guidelines as of December 31, 2016.  Notwithstanding the availability of funds for dividends, however, the OCC may prohibit the payment of dividends by the Bank if it determines such payment would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice.  In addition, under the Basel III Rule, institutions that seek the freedom to pay dividends will have to maintain 2.5% in Common Equity Tier 1 Capital attributable to the capital conservation buffer to be phased in over three years beginning in 2016.  See “Regulatory Emphasis on Capital” above.

Insider Transactions.  The Bank is subject to certain restrictions imposed by federal law on “covered transactions” between the Bank and its “affiliates.”  The Company is an affiliate of the Bank for purposes of these restrictions, and covered transactions subject to the restrictions include extensions of credit to the Company, investments in the stock or other securities of the Company and the acceptance of the stock or other securities of the Company as collateral for loans made by the Bank.  The Dodd-Frank Act enhanced the requirements for certain transactions with affiliates, including an expansion of the definition of “covered transactions” and an increase in the amount of time for which collateral requirements regarding covered transactions must be maintained.

Certain limitations and reporting requirements are also placed on extensions of credit by the Bank to its directors and officers, to directors and officers of the Company and its subsidiaries, to principal stockholders of the Company and to “related interests” of such directors, officers and principal stockholders.  In addition, federal law and regulations may affect the terms upon which any person who is a director or officer of the Company or the Bank, or a principal stockholder of the Company, may obtain credit from banks with which the Bank maintains a correspondent relationship. 

Safety and Soundness Standards/Risk Management.  The federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines that establish operational and managerial standards to promote the safety and soundness of FDIC-insured institutions.  The guidelines set forth standards for internal controls, information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, compensation, fees and benefits, asset quality and earnings.

In general, the safety and soundness guidelines prescribe the goals to be achieved in each area, and each institution is responsible for establishing its own procedures to achieve those goals.  If an institution fails to comply with any of the standards set forth in the guidelines, the FDIC-insured institution’s primary federal regulator may require the institution to submit a plan for achieving and maintaining compliance.  If an FDIC-insured institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan, or fails in any material respect to implement a compliance plan that has been accepted by its primary federal regulator, the regulator is required to issue an order directing the institution to cure the deficiency.  Until the deficiency cited in the regulator’s order is cured, the regulator may restrict the FDIC-insured institution’s rate of growth, require the FDIC-insured institution to increase its capital, restrict the rates the institution pays on deposits or require the institution to take any action the regulator deems appropriate under the circumstances.  Noncompliance with the standards established by the safety and soundness guidelines may also constitute grounds for other enforcement action by the federal bank regulatory agencies, including cease and desist orders and civil money penalty assessments.

During the past decade, the bank regulatory agencies have increasingly emphasized the importance of sound risk management processes and strong internal controls when evaluating the activities of the FDIC-insured institutions they supervise.  Properly managing risks has been identified as critical to the conduct of safe and sound banking activities and has become even more important as new technologies, product innovation, and the size and speed of financial transactions have changed the nature of banking markets.  The agencies have identified a spectrum of risks facing a banking institution including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, legal, and reputational risk.  In particular, recent regulatory pronouncements have focused on operational risk, which arises from the potential that inadequate information systems, operational problems, breaches in internal controls, fraud, or unforeseen catastrophes will result in unexpected losses.  New products and services, third-party risk and cybersecurity are critical sources of operational risk that FDIC-insured institutions are expected to address in the current environment.  The Bank is expected to have active board and senior management oversight; adequate policies, procedures, and limits; adequate risk measurement, monitoring, and management information systems; and comprehensive internal controls.

Branching Authority.  National banks headquartered in Illinois, such as the Bank, have the same branching rights in Illinois as banks chartered under Illinois law, subject to OCC approval.  Illinois law grants Illinois-chartered banks the authority to establish branches anywhere in the State of Illinois, subject to receipt of all required regulatory approvals.

The Dodd-Frank Act permits well-capitalized and well-managed banks to establish new interstate branches or acquire individual branches of a bank in another state (rather than the acquisition of an out-of-state bank in its entirety) without impediments.

Financial Subsidiaries.    Under federal law and OCC regulations, national banks are authorized to engage, through “financial subsidiaries,” in any activity that is permissible for a financial holding company and any activity that the Secretary of the Treasury, in consultation with the Federal Reserve, determines is financial in nature or incidental to any such financial activity, except (i) insurance underwriting, (ii) real estate development or real estate investment activities (unless otherwise permitted by law), (iii) insurance company portfolio investments and (iv) merchant banking.  The authority of a national bank to invest in a financial subsidiary is subject to a number of conditions, including, among other things, requirements that the bank must be well-managed and well-capitalized (after deducting from capital the bank’s outstanding investments in financial subsidiaries).  The Bank has not applied for approval to establish any financial subsidiaries.

Federal Home Loan Bank System.  The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Chicago (the “FHLBC”), which serves as a central credit facility for its members.  The FHLBC is funded primarily from proceeds from the sale of obligations of the FHLBC system.  It makes loans to member banks in the form of FHLBC advances.  All advances from the FHLBC are required to be fully collateralized as determined by the FHLBC.

Transaction Account Reserves.    Federal Reserve regulations require FDIC-insured institutions to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts).  For 2017 the first $15.5 million of otherwise reservable balances are exempt from reserves and have a zero percent reserve requirement; for transaction accounts aggregating more than $15.5 million to $115.1 million, the reserve requirement is 3% of total transaction accounts; and for net transaction accounts in excess of $115.1 million, the reserve requirement is 3% up to $115.1 million plus 10% of the aggregate amount of total transaction accounts in excess of $115.1 million.  These reserve requirements are subject to annual adjustment by the Federal Reserve.

Community Reinvestment Act Requirements.  The Community Reinvestment Act requires the Bank to have a continuing and affirmative obligation in a safe and sound manner to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods.  Federal regulators regularly assess the Bank’s record of meeting the credit needs of its communities. Applications for additional acquisitions would be affected by the evaluation of the Bank’s effectiveness in meeting its Community Reinvestment Act requirements.

Anti-Money Laundering.  The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) is designed to deny terrorists and criminals the ability to obtain access to the U.S. financial system and has significant implications for FDIC-insured institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the transfer of money.  The Patriot Act mandates financial services companies to have policies and procedures with respect to measures designed to address any or all of the following matters: (i) customer identification programs; (ii) money laundering; (iii) terrorist financing; (iv) identifying and reporting suspicious activities and currency transactions; (v) currency crimes; and (vi) cooperation between FDIC-insured institutions and law enforcement authorities.

Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate.  Concentration risk exists when FDIC-insured institutions deploy too many assets to any one industry or segment.  A concentration in commercial real estate is one example of regulatory concern.  The interagency Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices guidance (“CRE Guidance”) provides supervisory criteria, including the following numerical indicators, to assist bank examiners in identifying banks with potentially significant commercial real estate loan concentrations that may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny: (i) non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans exceeding 300% of capital and increasing 50% or more in the preceding three years; or (ii) construction and land development loans exceeding 100% of capital.  The CRE Guidance does not limit banks’ levels of commercial real estate lending activities, but rather guides institutions in developing risk management practices and levels of capital that are commensurate with the level and nature of their commercial real estate concentrations.  On December 18, 2015, the federal banking agencies issued a statement to reinforce prudent risk-management practices related to CRE lending, having observed substantial growth in many CRE asset and lending markets, increased competitive pressures, rising CRE concentrations in banks, and an easing of CRE underwriting standards.  The federal bank agencies reminded FDIC-insured institutions to maintain underwriting discipline and exercise prudent risk-management practices to identify, measure, monitor, and manage the risks arising from CRE lending.  In addition, FDIC-insured institutions must maintain capital commensurate with the level and nature of their CRE concentration risk.

Based on the Bank's loan portfolio as of December 31, 2016, concentrations in commercial real estate did not exceed the 300% guideline for non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, or the 100% guideline for construction and development loans.

Consumer Financial Services. The historical structure of federal consumer protection regulation applicable to all providers of consumer financial products and services changed significantly on July 21, 2011, when the CFPB commenced operations to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws.  The CFPB has broad rulemaking authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to all providers of consumer products and services, including the Bank, as well as the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices.  The CFPB has examination and enforcement authority over providers with more than $10 billion in assets. FDIC-insured institutions with $10 billion or less in assets, like the Bank, continue to be examined by their applicable bank regulators.

Because abuses in connection with residential mortgages were a significant factor contributing to the global financial crisis, many new rules issued by the CFPB and required by the Dodd-Frank Act address mortgage and mortgage-related products, their underwriting, origination, servicing and sales.  The Dodd-Frank Act significantly expanded underwriting requirements applicable to loans secured by 1-4 family residential real property and augmented federal law combating predatory lending practices.  In addition to numerous disclosure requirements, the Dodd‑Frank Act imposed new standards for mortgage loan originations on all lenders, including all FDIC-insured institutions, in an effort to strongly encourage lenders to verify a borrower’s “ability to repay,” while also establishing a presumption of compliance for certain “qualified mortgages.”  In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act generally required lenders or

securitizers to retain an economic interest in the credit risk relating to loans that the lender sells, and other asset‑backed securities that the securitizer issues, if the loans have not complied with the ability-to-repay standards. The Company does not currently expect the CFPB’s rules to have a significant impact on the Bank’s operations, except for higher compliance costs.

 

 

GUIDE 3 STATISTICAL DATA REQUIREMENTS

 

The statistical data required by Guide 3 of the Guides for Preparation and Filing of Reports and Registration Statements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 is set forth in the following pages.  This data should be read in conjunction with the consolidated financial statements, related notes and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" as set forth in Part II Items 7 and 8.  All dollars in the tables are expressed in thousands.

 

I.Distribution of Assets, Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity; Interest Rate and Interest Differential.

 

The following table sets forth certain information relating to the Company’s average consolidated balance sheets and reflects the yield on average interest earning assets and cost of average interest bearing liabilities for the years indicated obtained by dividing the related interest by the average balance of assets or liabilities.  Average balances are derived from daily balances.

 

Analysis of Average Balances,

Tax Equivalent Interest and Rates

Years ended December 31, 2016, 2015 and 2014

 

 

 

1    Interest income from loans is shown tax equivalent as discussed below and includes fees of $2.5 million, $1.8 million and $2.3 million for 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively.  Nonaccrual loans are included in the above stated average balances.

 

For purposes of discussion, net interest income and net interest income to interest earning assets have been adjusted to a non-GAAP tax equivalent (“TE”) basis using a marginal rate of 35% to more appropriately compare returns on tax-exempt loans and securities to other earning assets.  The table below provides a reconciliation of each non-GAAP TE measure to the GAAP equivalent:

 

 

 

The following table allocates the changes in net interest income to changes in either average balances or average rates for interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities.  Interest income is measured on a tax-equivalent basis using a 35% marginal rate.  Interest income not yet received on nonaacrual loans is reversed upon transfer to nonaccrual status; future receipt of interest income is a reduction to principal while in nonaccrual status. 

 

Analysis of Year-to-Year Changes in Net Interest Income1

 

 

1  The changes in net interest income are created by changes in both interest rates and volumes. In the table above, volume variances are computed using the change in volume multiplied by previous years’s rate. Rate variances are computed using the change in rate multiplied by the previous years’s volume. The change in interest due to both rate and volume has been allocated between factors in proportion to the relationship of absolute dollar amounts of the change in each.  

II.Investment Portfolio

 

The following table presents the composition of the securities portfolio by major category as of December 31 of each year indicated:

 

Securities Portfolio Composition

 

 

 

 

Some of the Company’s holdings of U.S. government agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS) and collateralized mortgage obligations (CMO) are issuances of government-sponsored enterprises, such as Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, which are not backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.  Some holdings of MBS and CMO’s are issued by Ginnie Mae, which does carry the full faith and credit of the U.S. government.  The Company also holds some MBS and CMO’s that were not issued by U.S. government agencies and are typically credit-enhanced via over-collateralization and/or subordination.  Holdings of asset-backed securities (ABS) were largely comprised of securities backed by student loans issued under the U.S. Department of Education’s (“DOE”) FFEL program, which generally provides a minimum 97% U.S. DOE guarantee of principal.  These ABS securities also have added credit enhancement through over-collateralization and/or subordination.  The majority of holdings issued by states and political subdivisions are general obligation bonds that have S&P or Moody’s ratings of AA- or higher.  Other state and political subdivision issuances are unrated and generally consist of smaller investment amounts that involve issuers in the Company’s markets.  The credit quality of these issuers is monitored and none have been identified as posing a material risk of loss.  The Company also holds Collateralized Loan Obligation (CLO) securities that are generally backed by a pool of debt issued by multiple middle-sized and large businesses.  The Company’s CLO’s are roughly split between tranches that have S&P or Moody’s ratings of A and those that are rated AA.  CLO credit enhancement is achieved through over-collateralization and/or subordination.

 

Securities Portfolio Maturity and Yields

 

The following table presents the expected maturities or call dates and weighted average yield (nontax equivalent) of securities by major category as of December 31, 2016.  Securities not due at a single maturity date are shown only in the total column.

 

 

 

 

As of December 31, 2016, net unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities was $13.6 million, which offset by deferred income taxes resulted in an overall reduction to equity capital of $8.2 million.  As of December 31, 2015, net unrealized losses on available-for-sale securities and net losses not accreted on securities transferred from available-for-sale to held-to-maturity was $20.6 million, which offset by deferred income taxes resulted in an overall reduction to equity capital of $12.3 million.