Seneca Financial Corp. - Quarter Report: 2018 September (Form 10-Q)

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-Q

For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2018

OR

For the transition period from _______ to _______

SENECA FINANCIAL CORP.

(Exact Name of Company as Specified in its Charter)

35 Oswego Street, Baldwinsville, NY 13027

(Address of Principal Executive Office) (Zip Code)

(315) 638-0233

(Issuer'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 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   x         NO  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (Section 232.405 of this Chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files).

YES   x         NO  ¨

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES  ¨     NO  x

As of November 9, 2018, there were 1,978,923 shares issued and outstanding of the registrant’s common stock.

SENECA FINANCIAL CORP.

INDEX

PART I - FINANCIAL INFORMATION

Item 1 – Consolidated Financial Statements

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements. 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.

Seneca Financial Corp. (the “Company”), a federal corporation that was organized in 2017, is a savings and loan holding company of Seneca Savings (the “Bank”). The Bank maintains its executive offices and main branch in Baldwinsville, New York, with branches in Liverpool and North Syracuse, New York. The Bank is a community-oriented savings bank whose business primarily consists of accepting deposits from customers within its market area and investing those funds primarily in residential mortgage loans. The Bank has one wholly-owned subsidiary: Seneca Savings Insurance Agency, Inc. dba Financial Quest ("Quest"). Quest offers financial planning and investment advisory services and sells various insurance and investment products through broker networks. The consolidated financial statements of the Company include the accounts of Quest and the Bank. All significant intercompany balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.

The accompanying unaudited financial statements and notes thereto contain all adjustments, consisting only of normal recurring adjustments, necessary to present fairly, in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“U.S. GAAP”), the financial position of the Company as of September 30, 2018 and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the periods presented. The interim financial information should be read in conjunction with the annual financial statements and the notes thereto included in the Form 10-K of the Company.

The results of operations at and for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017 are not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the full year or any other period.

Use of Estimates – The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U. S. GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reported period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. Material estimates common to the banking industry that are particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term include, but are not limited to, the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the estimation of fair values, pension plan and valuation allowances associated with the realization of deferred tax assets, which are based on future taxable income.

Summary of Significant Accounting Policies – The accounting and reporting policies of the Company conform to U.S. GAAP and general practices within the banking industry. There have been no material changes or developments in the application of principles or in our evaluation of the accounting estimates and the underlying assumptions or methodologies that we believe to be Critical Accounting Policies as disclosed in the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2017 included in the Company’s Form 10-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on April 2, 2018.

Change in Accounting Estimate. Due to a change in New York State tax law, mortgage recording tax expenses is a refundable tax credit, at the election of the tax payer. Under New York law, a bank that paid special additional mortgage recording tax (“SMART”) on residential mortgages in most New York counties any year beginning on or before January 1, 2015, may elect to treat the unused portion of the SAMRT credit on those mortgages as overpayment of tax to be carried forward or refunded. Previously, any unused credit was only eligible to be carried forward to future years. The Bank made this election on July 1, 2018 and its impact is immaterial.

In March 2017, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) No. 2017-08, Receivables—Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs (Subtopic 310-20): Premium Amortization on Purchased Callable Debt Securities. The amended guidance shortens the amortization period for the premium paid on some classes of callable debt to the earliest call date instead of the bond’s maturity.

The amendment more closely aligns the interest income recorded on bonds held at a premium or a discount with the economics of the underlying instrument. Public companies will have to begin applying the revisions to FASB ASC 310-20, Receivables – Nonrefundable Fees and Other Costs, and the related amendments in their first fiscal years that start after December 15, 2018. The changes will have to be used for the quarterly reports for those years. The FASB issued the amendment in response to the concerns that were brought to it about the requirements in ASC 310-20 that sometimes-forced bondholders to record a loss once a bond was called by its issuer. The amended guidance largely affects municipal bonds but also could affect the accounting treatment of some callable corporate debt.

For Public Business Entities (“PBEs”) that are U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filers, such as the Company, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, including interim periods within those fiscal years. All entities may adopt the amendments in this update earlier as of the fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. An entity will apply the amendments in this update through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective. The provisions of this new accounting standard are complex and will require substantial analysis prior to the ASU’s implementation. The Company’s management is currently in the process of evaluating the impact that this standard will have on its consolidated financial statements, however, management does not expect the adoption of this ASU to have a material impact on its consolidated financial statements and results of operations.

In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU 2016-13, “Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments” (“ASU 2016-13”). ASU 2016-13 requires credit losses on most financial assets measured at amortized cost and certain other instruments to be measured using an expected credit loss model (referred to as the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model). Under the CECL model entities will estimate credit losses over the entire contractual term of the instrument (considering estimated prepayments, but not expected extensions or modifications unless reasonable expectation of a troubled debt restructuring exits) from the date of initial recognition of that instrument. Further, ASU 2016-13 made certain targeted amendments to the existing impairment model for available for sale (“AFS”) debt securities. For an AFS debt security for which there is neither the intent nor a more-likely-than-not requirement to sell, an entity will record credit losses as an allowance rather than a write-down of the amortized cost basis.  ASU 2016-13 is effective for annual reporting periods, including interim reporting periods within those periods, beginning after December 15, 2019 for all public business entities that are SEC filers. Early application is permitted as of the annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those periods. An entity will apply the amendments in this ASU 2016-13 through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective. The Company’s management is evaluating the potential impact on our consolidated financial statements; however, due to the significant differences in the revised guidance from existing U.S. GAAP, the implementation of this guidance may result in material changes in our accounting for credit losses on financial instruments. We are also reviewing the impact of additional disclosures required under ASU 2016-13 on our ongoing financial reporting.

In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, Leases (Topic 842). ASU No. 2016-02 to increase transparency and comparability among organizations by recognizing lease assets and lease liabilities on the balance sheet and by disclosing key information about leasing arrangements.

Under the new guidance a lessee will be required to recognize assets and liabilities for leases with lease terms of more than 12 months. Consistent with current U.S. GAAP, the recognition, measurement, and presentation of expenses and cash flows arising from a lease by a lessee will depend primarily on its classification as a finance or an operating lease (i.e., the classification criteria for distinguishing between finance leases and operating leases are substantially like the classification criteria for distinguishing between capital leases and operating leases under the previous guidance). However, unlike current U.S. GAAP, which requires only capital leases to be recognized on the balance sheet, ASU No. 2016-02 will require both operating and finance leases to be recognized on the balance sheet. Additionally, the ASU will require disclosures to help investors and other financial statement users better understand the amount, timing, and uncertainty of cash flows arising from leases, including qualitative and quantitative requirements. Lessor accounting will remain largely unchanged from current U.S. GAAP. However, the ASU contains some targeted improvements that are intended to align, where necessary, lessor accounting with the lessee accounting model and with the updated revenue recognition guidance issued in 2014.

The amendments in ASU No. 2016-02 are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, for (1) public business entities, (2) not-for-profit entities that have issued, or are conduit bond obligors for, securities that are traded, listed, or quoted on an exchange or an over-the-counter market, and (3) employee benefit plans that file financial statements with the SEC. For all other entities, the amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and for interim periods within fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2020. Early application is permitted for all entities. The Company is currently evaluating the effects of the ASU 2016-02 on its consolidated financial statements and disclosures, if any.

In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)”. The objective of ASU 2014-09 is to align the recognition of revenue with the transfer of promised goods or services provided to customers in an amount that reflects consideration which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. ASU 2014-09 will replace most existing revenue recognition guidelines under U.S. GAAP when it becomes effective. In August 2015, the FASB issued an amendment (ASU 2015-14) which defers the effective date of this new guidance by one year. More detailed implementation guidance on ASU 2014-09 was issued in March 2016 (ASU 2016-08), April 2016 (ASU 2016-10) and May 2016 (ASU 2016-12), and the effective date and transition requirements for these ASUs are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2014-09. The amendments in ASU 2014-09 are effective for public business entities for annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2017. The guidance allows an entity to apply the new standard either retrospectively or through a cumulative effect adjustment as of January 1, 2018. ASU 2014-09 does not apply to revenue associated with financial instruments, including loans, securities, and derivatives, that are accounted for under other U.S. GAAP guidance. For that reason, it did not have a material impact on our consolidated results of operations for elements of the statement of income associated with financial instruments, including securities gains, interest income and interest expense. However, the new standard did result in new disclosure requirements. See footnote 11.

The Company is continuing to evaluate the effect of the new guidance on revenue sources other than financial instruments on our financial position and consolidated results of operations. The Company’s revenue is primarily comprised of interest income on financial instruments, including investment securities and loans, which are excluded from the scope of ASU 2014-09. The Company adopted the standard in the current quarter. The most significant impact of the update for the Company was the additional disclosure requirements relating to non-interest income, specifically service charges and deposit-related fees.

In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, Financial Instruments-Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Liabilities. The amendments in this update address certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation, and disclosure of financial instruments. The amendments in this update require all equity investments to be measured at fair value with changes in the fair value recognized through net income (other than those accounted for under equity method of accounting or those that result in consolidation of the investee). The amendments in this update also require an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the total change in the fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments. In addition, the amendments in this update also simplify the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring assessment for impairment qualitatively at each reporting period. For public business entities, the amendments in this update are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods with those fiscal years. The adoption had no impact on the consolidated financial statements and only impacted fair value measurement disclosures.

In May 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-06, Codification Improvements to Topic 942, Financial Services - Depository and Lending. This update superseded outdated guidance related to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s Banking Circular 202, Accounting for Net Deferred Tax Charges. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07, Compensation - Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployee Share-Based Payment Accounting. This update expands the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. As a result, nonemployee share-based payment awards will be measured at the grant-date fair value of the equity instruments that an entity is obligated to issue when the service has been rendered, subject to the probability of satisfying performance conditions when applicable. For public entities, this update is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-08, Not for Profit Entities (Topic 958): Clarifying the Scope and the Accounting Guidance for Contributions Received and Contributions Made. This update clarifies the guidance about whether a transfer of assets (or the reduction, settlement or cancellation of liabilities) is a contribution or an exchange transaction. In addition, the guidance clarifies the determination of whether a transaction is conditional. For public entities, this update is effective for contributions made in fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018.

In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-09, Codification Improvements to address stakeholder suggestions for minor corrections and clarifications within the codification. The transition and effective date guidance are based on the facts and circumstances of each amendment. Some of the amendments in this update do not require transition guidance and will be effective upon issuance of this update. However, many of the amendments in this update do have transition guidance with effective dates for annual periods beginning after December 15, 2018, for public business entities. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-10, Codification Improvements to Topic 842. Leases to address certain narrow aspects of the guidance issued in ASU No. 2016-02. This guidance did not change the Company’s assessment of the impact of ASU No. 2016-02 on the consolidated financial statements as described above.

In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-11, Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements, which amends FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) Topic 842, Leases, to (1) add an optional transition method that would permit entities to apply the new requirements by recognizing a cumulative-effect adjustment to the opening balance of retained earnings in the year of adoption, and (2) provide a practical expedient for lessors regarding the separation of the lease and non-lease components of a contract. This guidance did not change the Company’s assessment of the impact of ASU No. 2016-02 on the consolidated financial statements as described above.

In August 2018, the FASB has issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-15, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer's Accounting for Implementation Costs Incurred in a Cloud Computing Arrangement That Is a Service Contract, a consensus of the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force, which amends the FASB Accounting Standards Codification (ASC) to provide guidance on accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-05, Intangibles—Goodwill and Other—Internal-Use Software (Subtopic 350-40): Customer's Accounting for Fees Paid in a Cloud Computing Arrangement, which provided guidance to customers concerning whether a cloud computing arrangement (e.g., software, platform, or infrastructure offered as a service) includes a software license. Pursuant to that guidance, (1) if a cloud computing arrangement includes a software license, the software license element of the arrangement should be accounted for in a manner consistent with the acquisition of other software licenses, or (2) if the arrangement does not include a software license, then the arrangement should be accounted for as a service contract, with the fees associated with the hosting element (service) of the arrangement expensed as they are incurred.

Following the issuance of ASU No. 2015-05, constituents requested that the FASB provide additional guidance on the accounting for costs of implementation activities performed in a cloud computing arrangement that is a service contract. Accordingly, because United States generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) do not contain explicit guidance on accounting for such costs, and to address the resulting diversity in practice, the FASB has issued ASU No. 2018-15 to align the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred in a hosting arrangement that is a service contract with the requirements for capitalizing implementation costs incurred to develop or obtain internal-use software (and hosting arrangements that include an internal-use software license). Note that the guidance on accounting for the service element of a hosting arrangement that is a service contract is not affected by the amendments in ASU No. 2018-15.

For Public Business Entities, the amended guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 (i.e., calendar-year 2020), and for interim periods within those fiscal years. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

In October 2018, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update (ASU) No. 2018-16 , Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Inclusion of the Secured Overnight Financing Rate (SOFR) Overnight Index Swap (OIS) Rate as a Benchmark Interest Rate for Hedge Accounting Purposes , which adds the SOFR OIS as a benchmark rate that businesses can use to designate hedges of interest rate risk. This update adds to U.S. GAAP a new interest rate from the market for U.S. Treasury repurchase contracts to the list of accepted benchmark rates for hedge accounting. The SOFR is calculated by the Fed based on the interest rates banks charge one another in the overnight market for loans they make to one another, typically called repurchase agreements. In introducing the new rate, the Fed said that because it is based on transactions in the open market, it is more reflective of market conditions than LIBOR, which relies more on judgment. Adding the SOFR OIS as an acceptable hedge accounting benchmark for U.S. GAAP is considered a critical step in helping it gain more acceptance in the market. FASB ASC 815 provides guidance on the risks associated with financial assets or liabilities that are allowed to be hedged. Among those risks is the risk of changes in fair values or cash flows of existing or forecasted issuances or purchases of fixed-rate financial assets or liabilities attributable to a designated benchmark interest rate. U.S. GAAP considers a benchmark rate as a rate that is widely recognized, commonly referenced, and quoted in an active financial market. FASB ASC 815 lists three rates as benchmarks: the rate on direct Treasury obligations of the U.S. government, the Fed Funds Effective Swap Rate (Overnight Index Swap Rate), and the LIBOR swap rate. In 2017, the FASB added a fourth rate, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA) Municipal Swap Rate when it published ASU No. 2017-12 , Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities, which made several other changes to simplify hedge accounting and expand its use. The FASB wants businesses and organizations to adopt the amendments in ASU No. 2018-16 at the same time they adopt the changes in ASU No. 2017-12 . For public companies that have adopted ASU No. 2017-12, the new amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15 and interim periods within those fiscal years. For other companies and organizations that already have adopted ASU No. 2017-12 , the new amendments are effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019, and interim periods within those fiscal years. Early adoption is permitted in any interim period as long as the company or organization already has adopted the broader 2017 hedge accounting update. The Company does not expect the new guidance to have a material impact on the consolidated financial statements.

The amortized cost and fair values of securities, with gross unrealized gains and losses are as follows:

Mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations consist of securities that are issued by Fannie Mae (“FNMA”), Freddie Mac (“FHLMC”), Ginnie Mae (“GNMA”), and are collateralized by residential mortgages. U.S. Government and agency obligations include notes and bonds with both fixed and variable rates. Municipal securities consist of government obligation and revenue bonds. Corporate securities consist of variable rate bonds with large financial institutions.

Investment securities with carrying amounts of $10.2 million and $9.2 million were pledged to secure advances and for other purposes required or permitted by law for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and for the year ended December 31, 2017, respectively. 

The amortized cost and fair value of debt securities based on the contractual maturity are shown below. Actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or prepay obligations.

During the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018, the Company did not sell any securities. During the nine months ended September 30, 2017, the Company sold available-for-sale securities with gross realized gains of $1,258, and gross realized losses of $118.

Management has reviewed its loan, mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations portfolios and determined that, to the best of its knowledge, little or no exposure exists to sub-prime or other high-risk residential mortgages. The Company is not in the practice of investing in, or originating, these types of investments or loans.

Information pertaining to securities with gross unrealized losses aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position follows:

Management evaluates securities for other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) at least on a quarterly basis, and more frequently when economic or market concerns warrant such evaluation. For the three and nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017, the Company did not record an other-than-temporary impairment charge.

At September 30, 2018, fourteen municipal securities and thirteen mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations were in a continuous loss position for more than twelve months. At September 30, 2018, twelve municipal securities, fourteen mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations and eight corporate securities were in a continuous loss position for less than twelve months.

At December 31, 2017, five collateralized mortgage obligations and twelve municipal securities were in a continuous loss position for more than twelve months. At December 31, 2017, nine municipal securities, ten mortgage backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations were in a continuous loss position for less than twelve months.

The mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations were issued by U.S. Government sponsored agencies. The municipal securities and corporate securities are rated investment grade Standard and Poor’s BBB- or higher. All are paying in accordance with their terms with no deferrals of interest or defaults. Because the decline in fair value is attributable to changes in interest rates, not credit quality, and because management does not intend to sell and will not be required to sell these securities prior to recovery or maturity, no declines are deemed to be other-than-temporary.

Net loans at September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 are as follows:

Loan Origination / Risk Management

The Company has lending policies and procedures in place that are designed to maximize loan income within an acceptable level of risk. Management reviews and approves these policies and procedures on a regular basis. A reporting system supplements the review process by frequently providing management with reports related to loan production, loan quality, loan delinquencies, non-performing and potential problem loans. Diversification in the loan portfolio is a means of managing risk associated with fluctuations in economic conditions.

Risk Characteristics of Portfolio Segments

The risk characteristics within the loan portfolio vary depending on the loan segment. Consumer loans generally are repaid from personal sources of income. Risks associated with consumer loans primarily include general economic risks such as declines in the local economy creating higher rates of unemployment. Those conditions may also lead to a decline in collateral values should the Company be required to repossess the collateral securing consumer loans. These economic risks also impact the commercial loan segment, however commercial loans are considered to have greater risk than consumer loans as the primary source of repayment is from the cash flow of the business customer. Real estate loans, including residential mortgages, commercial, and home equity loans, comprise approximately 90% of the portfolio at September 30, 2018 and 92% of the portfolio at December 31, 2017. Loans secured by real estate provide collateral protection and thus significantly reduce the inherent risk in the portfolio.

Management has reviewed its loan portfolio and determined that, to the best of its knowledge, little or no exposure exists to sub-prime or other high-risk residential mortgages. The Company is not in the practice of originating these types of loans.

Description of Credit Quality Indicators

Real estate, commercial and consumer loans are assigned a "Pass" rating unless a loan has demonstrated signs of weakness as indicated by the ratings below:

The risk ratings are evaluated at least annually for commercial loans or when credit deficiencies arise, such as delinquent loan payments, for commercial, real estate or consumer loans.

The following table presents the classes of the loan portfolio, not including net deferred loan costs, summarized by the aggregate pass rating and the classified ratings within the Company's internal risk rating system as of September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017. There were no doubtful accounts at September 30, 2018 or December 31, 2017.

Loans are considered past due if the required principal and interest payments have not been received within thirty days of the payment due date. An age analysis of past due loans, segregated by class of loans, are as follows:

Nonaccrual loans, segregated by class of loan as of September 30, 2018 and December 31, 2017 are as follows:

The following table summarizes impaired loan information by portfolio class:

The following table presents the average recorded investment in impaired loans:

Troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”) occur when we grant borrowers concessions that we would not otherwise grant but for economic or legal reasons pertaining to the borrower’s financial difficulties. A concession is made when the terms of the loan modification are more favorable than the terms the borrower would have received in the current market under similar financial difficulties. These concessions may include, interest by the borrower to satisfy all or part of the debt, or the addition of borrower(s). The Company identifies loans for potential TDRs primarily through direct communication with the borrower and evaluation of the borrower’s financial statements, revenue projections, tax returns, and credit reports. Even if the borrower is not presently in default, management will consider the likelihood that cash flow shortages, adverse economic conditions, and negative trends may result in a payment default in the near future. Generally, we will not return a TDR to accrual status until the borrower has demonstrated the ability to make principal and interest payments under the restructured terms for at least six consecutive months. The Company’s TDRs are impaired loans, which may result in specific allocations and subsequent charge-offs if appropriate.

As of September 30, 2017, the Company modified two commercial mortgage loans valued together at $1.0 million that are considered TDRs. We modified the terms to interest only for a two-year period. These loans are paying according to their modified terms and are classified as substandard and impaired at September 30, 2018.

The following table presents interest income recognized on impaired loans for the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017:

The following table presents interest income recognized on impaired loans for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017:

The following tables summarize the activity in the allowance for loan losses for the three months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017.

The following tables summarize the activity in the allowance for loan losses for the nine months ended September 30, 2018 and 2017.

The balances and changes in the components of accumulated other comprehensive loss, net of tax, are as follows:

Management uses its best judgment in estimating the fair value of the Company’s assets and liabilities; however, there are inherent weaknesses in any estimation technique. Therefore, for substantially all assets and liabilities, the fair value estimates herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts the Company could have realized in a sales transaction on the dates indicated. The estimated fair value amounts have been measured as of their respective year-ends and have not been re-evaluated or updated for purposes of these consolidated financial statements subsequent to those respective dates. As such, the estimated fair values of assets and liabilities subsequent to the respective reporting dates may be different than the amounts reported at each year-end.

Accounting guidance establishes a fair value hierarchy that prioritizes the inputs to valuation methods used to measure fair value. The hierarchy gives the highest priority to unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities (Level 1 measurements) and the lowest priority to unobservable inputs (Level 3 measurements). The three levels of the fair value hierarchy are as follows:

Level 1: Unadjusted quoted prices in active markets that are accessible at the measurement date for identical unrestricted assets or liabilities.

Level 2: Quoted prices in markets that are not active, or inputs that are observable either directly or indirectly, for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.

Level 3: Prices or valuation techniques that require inputs that are both significant to the fair value measurement and unobservable (i.e. supported with little or no market activity).

An asset or liability’s level within the fair value hierarchy is based on the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.

For financial assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis, the fair value measurements by level within the fair value hierarchy used are as follows: