Glacier Bancorp, Inc., headquartered in Kalispell, Montana, is a Montana corporation incorporated in 2004 as a successor corporation to the Delaware corporation originally incorporated in 1990. The terms “Company,” "we," "us" and "our" mean Glacier Bancorp, Inc. and its subsidiaries, when appropriate. The Company is a publicly-traded company and its common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol GBCI. We provide a full range of banking services to individuals and businesses from 181193 locations in Montana, Idaho, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada through our wholly-owned bank subsidiary, Glacier Bank (“Bank”). We offer a wide range of banking products and services, including: 1) retail banking; 2) business banking; 3) real estate, commercial, agriculture and consumer loans; and 4) mortgage origination services.and loan servicing. We serve individuals, small to medium-sized businesses, community organizations and public entities. For information regarding our lending, investment and funding activities, see “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

The Company includes the parent holding company and the Bank. As of December 31, 2019,2020, the Bank consists of sixteen bank divisions a treasury division, an information technology division and a centralized mortgagecorporate division. The Bankbank divisions operate under separate names, management teams and advisory directors.directors and include the following:

The treasurycorporate division includes the Bank’s investment portfolio and wholesale borrowings, the information technology division includes the Bank’s internal data processing, and theother centralized mortgage division includes mortgage loan servicing and secondary market sales.functions. We consider the Bank to be our sole operating segment.

The Bank has subsidiary interests in variable interest entities (“VIE”) for which the Bank has both the power to direct the VIE’s significant activities and the obligation to absorb losses or right to receive benefits of the VIE that could potentially be significant to the VIE. These subsidiary interests are included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. The Bank also has subsidiary interests in VIEs for which the Bank does not have a controlling financial interest and is not the primary beneficiary. These subsidiary interests are not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements.

The parent holding company owns non-bank subsidiaries that have issued trust preferred securities which qualify as Tier 12 regulatory capital instruments. The trust subsidiaries are not included in our consolidated financial statements. Our investments in the trust subsidiaries are included in other assets on our statements of financial condition.

As of December 31, 2019,2020, the Company and its subsidiaries were not engaged in any operations in foreign countries.

Our strategy is to profitably grow our business through internal growth and selective acquisitions. We continue to look for profitable expansion opportunities primarily in existing and new markets in the Rocky Mountain and Western states. We have completed the following acquisitions during the last five years:

See Note 2223 in the Consolidated Financial Statements in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” for additional information regarding the 20192020 and 20182019 acquisitions.

We have 181193 locations, which consists of 164172 branches and 1721 loan or administration offices, in 6671 counties within 8 states including Montana, Idaho, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada. The market area’s economic base primarily focuses on tourism, construction, mining, energy, manufacturing, agriculture, service industry, and health care. The tourism industry is highly influenced by national parks, ski resorts, significant lakes and rural scenic areas.

Commercial banking is a highly competitive business and operates in a rapidly changing environment. There are a large number of depository institutions including savings and loans, commercial banks, and credit unions in the markets in which we have locations. Competition is also increasing for deposit and lending services from internet-based competitors. Non-depository financial service institutions, primarily in the securities, insurance and retail industries, have also become competitors for retail savings, investment funds and lending activities. In addition to offering competitive interest rates, the principal methods used by the Bank to attract deposits include the offering of a variety of services including on-line banking, mobile banking and convenient office locations and business hours. The primary factors in competing for loans are interest rates and rate adjustment provisions, loan maturities, loan fees, relationships with customers and the quality of service.

The Company's Board of Directors (“Board”) has the ultimate authority and responsibility for overseeing risk management at the Company. Some aspects of risk oversight are fulfilled at the Board level, and the Board delegates other aspects of its risk oversight function to its committees. The Board has established, among others, an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee, a Compliance Committee, and a Risk Oversight Committee. Additional information regarding Board committees is set forth under the heading “Meetings and Committees of the Board of Directors - Committee Membership” in the Company’s 20202021 Annual Meeting Proxy Statement (“Proxy Statement”) and is incorporated herein by reference.

Copies of our 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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available free of charge through our website (www.glacierbancorp.com) as soon as reasonably practicable after we have filed the material with, or furnished it to, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Copies can also be obtained by accessing the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov).

We are subject to extensive regulation under federal and state laws. This section provides a general overview of the federal and state regulatory framework applicable to us. In general, this regulatory framework is designed to protect depositors, the federal Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”), and the federal and state banking system as a whole, rather than specifically for the protection of shareholders. Note that this section is not intended to summarize all laws and regulations applicable to us. Descriptions of statutory or regulatory provisions do not purport to be complete and are qualified by reference to those provisions.

These statutes and regulations, as well as related policies, continue to be subject to change by Congress, state legislatures, and federal and state regulators. Changes in statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies applicable to us (including their interpretation or implementation) cannot be predicted and could have a material effect on our business and operations. Numerous changes to the statutes, regulations, and regulatory policies applicable to us have been made or proposed in recent years. Continued efforts to monitor and comply with new regulatory requirements add to the complexity and cost of our business and operations.

to a customer on either 1) a requirement that the customer obtain additional services provided by us; or 2) an agreement by the customer to refrain from obtaining other services from a competitor.

institution must implement a comprehensive written information security program that includes administrative, technical, and physical safeguards appropriate to the institution’s size and complexity and the nature and scope of its activities. The information security program must be designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information, and ensure the proper disposal of customer and consumer information. An institution that fails to meet these standards may be required to submit a compliance plan, or be subject to regulatory sanctions, including restrictions on growth. The Bank has established comprehensive policies and risk management procedures to ensure the safety and soundness of the Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated interstate branching restrictions that were implemented as part of the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 ("Interstate Act"), and removed many restrictions on de novo interstate branching by state and federally chartered banks.  Federal regulators have authority to approve applications by such banks to establish de novo branches in states other than the bank's home state if the host state's banks could establish a branch at the same location. The Interstate Act requires regulators to consult with community organizations before permitting an interstate institution to close a branch in a low-income area. Federal bank regulations prohibit banks from using their interstate branches primarily for deposit production and federal bank regulatory agencies have implemented a loan-to-deposit ratio screen to ensure compliance with this prohibition.

A principal source of the Company’s cash is from dividends received from the Bank, which are subject to regulation and limitation. As a general rule, regulatory authorities may prohibit banks and bank holding companies from paying dividends in a manner that would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. For example, regulators have stated that paying dividends that deplete an institution's capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice and that an institution should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. In addition, a bank may not pay cash dividends if that payment could reduce the amount of its capital below that necessary to meet minimum applicable regulatory capital requirements. Current guidance from the Federal Reserve provides, among other things, that dividends per share on the Company’s common stock generally should not exceed earnings per share, measured over the previous four fiscal quarters. In certain circumstances, Montana law also places limits or restrictions on a bank’s ability to declare and pay dividends.

Rules adopted in accordance with the third installment of the Basel Accords (“Basel III”) also impose limitations on the Bank's ability to pay dividends. In general, these rules limit the Bank's ability to pay dividends unless the Bank's common equity conservation buffer exceeds the minimum required capital ratio by at least 2.5 percent of risk-weighted assets.

The Federal Reserve has also issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies. In general, the policy statement expresses the view that although no specific regulations restrict dividend payments by bank holding companies other than state corporate laws, a bank holding company should not pay cash dividends unless the bank holding company’s earnings for the past year are sufficient to cover both the cash dividends and a prospective rate of earnings retention that is consistent with the bank holding company’s capital needs, asset quality, and overall financial condition. A bank holding company's ability to pay dividends may also be restricted if a subsidiary bank becomes under-capitalized.undercapitalized. These various regulatory policies may affect our ability to pay dividends or otherwise engage in capital distributions.

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal regulatory agencies, which involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items calculated under regulatory guidelines. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting, and other factors. The capital requirements are intended to ensure that institutions have adequate capital given the risk levels of assets and off-balance sheet financial instruments and are applied separately to the Company and the Bank.

Federal regulations require insured depository institutions and bank holding companies to meet several minimum capital standards, including: 1) a common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-based assets ratio of 4.5 percent; 2) a Tier 1 capital to risk-based assets ratio of 6 percent; 3) a total capital to risk-based assets ratio of 8 percent; and 4) a 4 percent Tier 1 capital to total assets leverage ratio. These minimum capital requirements became effective in January 2015 and were the result of final rules implementing certain regulatory amendments based on the recommendation of the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision and certain requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act ("Final Rules").

The application of the Final Rules may result in lower returns on invested capital, require the raising of additional capital or require regulatory action if the Bank were unable to comply with such requirements. In addition, management may be required to modify its business strategy due to the changes to the asset risk-weights for risk-based capital calculations and the requirement to meet the capital conservation buffers. The imposition of liquidity requirements in connection with these rules could also cause the Bank to increase its holdings of liquid assets, change its business strategy, and make other changes to the terms of its funding.

The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“SOX Act”) addresses,addressed, among other things, corporate governance, auditing and accounting, enhanced and timely disclosure of corporate information, and penalties for non-compliance. In general, the SOX Act among other matters 1) requires chief executive officers and chief financial officers to certify to the complianceaccuracy and completeness of periodic reports filed with the SEC;SEC and to certain matters relating to disclosure and accounting controls at public companies; 2) imposes specific and enhanced corporate disclosure requirements; 3) accelerates the time frame for reporting insider transactions and periodic disclosures by public companies; and 4) requires companies to adopt and disclose information about corporate governance practices, including whether or not they have adopted a code of ethics for senior financial officers and whether the audit committee includes at least one “audit committee financial expert”; and 5) requires the SEC, based on certain enumerated factors, to regularly and systematically review corporate filings.practices. As a publicly reporting company with the SEC, the Company is subject to the requirements of the SOX Act and related rules and regulations issued by the SEC and NASDAQ.

The Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) requires all financial institutions to establish a risk-based system of internal controls reasonably designed to prevent money laundering and the financing of terrorism. The BSA also sets forth various recordkeeping and reporting requirements (such as reporting suspicious activities that might signal criminal activity) and certain due diligence and "know your customer" documentation requirements.

The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (“Patriot Act”), intended to combat terrorism, was renewed with certain amendments in 2006. In relevant part, the Patriot Act 1) prohibits banks from providing correspondent accounts directly to foreign shell banks; 2) imposes due diligence requirements on banks opening or holding accounts for foreign financial institutions or wealthy foreign individuals; 3) requires financial institutions to establish an anti-money laundering compliance program; and 4) eliminates civil liability for persons who file suspicious activity reports. The Patriot Act also includes provisions providing the government with power to investigate terrorism, including expanded government access to bank account records. Regulators are directed to consider a bank holding company’s and a bank’s effectiveness

in combating money laundering when reviewing and ruling on applications under the BHCA and the Bank Merger Act. We have established comprehensive compliance programs designed to comply with the requirements of the BSA and Patriot Act.

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999 (“GLBA”) brought about significant changes to the laws affecting banks and bank holding companies. Generally, the GLBA 1) repeals historical restrictions on preventing banks from affiliating with securities firms; 2) provides a uniform framework for the activities of banks, savings institutions, and their holding companies; 3) broadens the activities that may be conducted by national banks and banking subsidiaries of bank holding companies; 4) provides an enhanced framework for protecting the privacy of consumer information and requires notification to consumers of bank privacy policies; and 5) addresses a variety of other legal and regulatory issues affecting both day-to-day operations and long-term activities of financial institutions. The Bank is subject to FDIC regulations implementing the privacy provisions of the GLBA. These regulations require a bank to disclose its privacy policy, including informing consumers of the bank's information sharing practices and their right to opt out of certain practices.

The economic and political environment of the past several years has led to a number of proposed legislative, governmental, and regulatory initiatives that may significantly impact the banking industry. Other regulatory initiatives by federal and state government agencies may also significantly impact our business. We cannot predict whether these or any other proposals will be enacted or the ultimate impact of any such initiatives on our operations, competitive situation, financial conditions, or results of operations. While recentRecent history has demonstrated that new legislation or changes to existing laws or regulations typically result in a greater compliance burden (and therefore increase the general costs of doing business), and the currentnew administration under President Biden has expressed an attemptdemonstrated a general intent to reduce these regulatory burdens.regulate the financial services industry more strictly than the administration of his predecessor.

The Company’s earnings and growth are affected not only by general economic conditions, but also by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government, particularly the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve implements national monetary policy to promote maximum employment, stable prices, and moderate long-term interest rates. Through its open market operations in U.S. government securities, control of the discount rate applicable to borrowings, establishment of reserve requirements against certain deposits, and control of the interest rate applicable to excess reserve balances and reverse repurchase agreements, the Federal Reserve influences the availability and cost of money and credit and, ultimately, a range of economic variables including employment, output, and the prices of goods and services. The nature and impact of future changes in monetary policies and their impact on us cannot be predicted with certainty.

As mentioned above, the Dodd-Frank Act imposed heightened requirements on large bank holding companies and banks, and the EGRRC Act has rolled back certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. In particular, the EGRRC Act increased the asset threshold for certain rules that previously applied to bank holding companies and banks with at least $10 billion in total consolidated assets. As a result of the EGRRC Act and follow-up rules, we are not currently subject to several of those heightened requirements (e.g., stress testing and a dedicated risk committee), but we will remain subject to other requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act left unaffected by the EGRRC Act, such as the requirement that we be examined, primarily by the CFPB, for compliance with federal consumer protection laws. We have established a comprehensive compliance system to ensure compliance with these rules.

Substantially all of the Bank’s loans are to businesses and individuals in Montana, Idaho, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada, and a softening of the economies in these market areas could have a material adverse effect on its business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any future deterioration in economic conditions in the markets the Bank serves could result in the following consequences, any of which could have an adverse impact, which could be material, on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects:

Commercial banking is a highly competitive business and a consolidating industry. The Bank competes with other commercial banks, credit unions, finance, insurance and other non-depository companies operating in its market areas. The Bank is subject to substantial competition for loans and deposits from other financial institutions. Some of its competitors are not subject to the same degree of regulation and restriction as the Bank. Some of the Bank’s competitorsBank while others have greater financial resources than the Bank. If the Bank is unable to effectively compete in its market areas, the Bank’s business, our results of operations and prospects could be adversely affected.

We anticipate that we might issue capital stock in connection with future acquisitions. Acquisitions and related issuances of stock may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share, book value per share, orand the percentage ownership of current shareholders. In acquisitions involving the use of cash as consideration, there will be an impact on our capital position.

Accounting standards require us to account for acquisitions using the acquisition method of accounting. Under acquisition accounting, if the purchase price of an acquired company exceeds the fair value of its net assets, the excess is carried on the acquirer’s balance sheet as goodwill. In accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), goodwill is not amortized but rather is evaluated for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that a potential impairment exists. Our goodwill was not considered impaired as of December 31, 20192020 and 2018;2019; however, there can be no assurance that future evaluations of goodwill will not result in findings of impairment and write-downs, which could be material. Since we have $456$514 million in goodwill, representing 2322 percent of our stockholders' equity, impairment of goodwill could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, even though it is a non-cash item, significant impairment of goodwill could subject us to regulatory limitations, including the ability to pay dividends on our common stock.

We may not be able to continue paying quarterly dividends commensurate with recent levels given that our ability to pay dividends on our common stock depends on a variety of factors. The payment of dividends is subject to government regulation in that regulatory authorities may prohibit banks and bank holding companies from paying dividends that would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. This is heavily based on our earnings and capital levels which currently are strong. Current guidance from the Federal Reserve provides, among other things, that dividends per share should not exceed earnings per share measured over the previous four fiscal quarters. In certain circumstances, Montana law also places limits or restrictions on a bank’s ability to declare and pay dividends. As a result, our future dividends will generally depend on the level of earnings at the Bank.

WeThe Bank maintains an allowance for credit losses (“ACL” or “allowance”) in an amount that it believes is adequate to provide for losses in the loan portfolio. While the Bank strives to carefully manage and monitor credit quality and to identify loans that may become non-performing, at any time there are subjectloans included in the portfolio that will result in losses, but that have not been identified as non-performing or potential problem loans. With respect to extensive regulation, supervisionreal estate loans and examinationproperty taken in satisfaction of such loans (“other real estate owned” or “OREO”), the Bank can be required to recognize significant declines in the value of the underlying real estate collateral quite suddenly as values are updated through appraisals and evaluations (new or updated) performed in the normal course of monitoring the credit quality of the loans. There are many factors that can cause the value of real estate to decline, including declines in the general real estate market, changes in methodology applied by appraisers, and/or using a different appraiser than was used for the prior appraisal or evaluation. The Bank’s ability to recover on real estate loans by selling or disposing of the underlying real estate collateral is adversely impacted by declining values, which increases the likelihood the Bank will suffer losses on defaulted loans beyond the amounts provided for in the ACL. This, in turn, could require material increases in the Bank’s provision for credit losses and ACL. By closely monitoring credit quality, the Bank attempts to identify deteriorating loans before they become non-performing assets and adjust the ACL accordingly. However, because future events are uncertain, and if difficult economic conditions occur, there may be loans that deteriorate to a non-performing status in an accelerated time frame. As a result, future additions to the ACL may be necessary beyond the levels commensurate with any loan growth. Because the loan portfolio contains a number of loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans may cause a significant increase in non-performing loans, requiring an increase to the ACL. Additionally, future significant additions to the ACL may be required based on changes in the mix of loans comprising the portfolio, changes in the financial condition of borrowers, which may result from changes in economic conditions, or changes in the assumptions used in determining the ACL. Additionally, federal and state banking regulators.regulators, as an integral part of their supervisory function, periodically review the Bank’s loan portfolio and the adequacy of the ACL. These regulatory authorities may require the Bank to recognize further provision for credit losses or charge-offs based upon their judgments, which may be different from the Bank’s judgments. Any increase in the ACL could have an adverse effect, which could be material, on our financial condition and results of operations.

The Bank may experience increases in non-performing assets in the future. Non-performing assets (which include OREO) adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations in various ways. The Bank does not record interest income on non-accrual loans or OREO, thereby adversely affecting its earnings. When the Bank takes collateral in foreclosures and similar proceedings, it is required to mark the related asset to the then fair value of the collateral, less estimated cost to sell, which may result in a charge-off of the value of the asset and lead the Bank to increase the provision for credit losses. An increase in the level of non-performing assets also increases the Bank’s risk profile and may impact the capital levels its regulators believe are appropriate in light of such risks. Further decreases in the value of these assets, or the underlying collateral, or in these borrowers’ performance or financial condition, whether or not due to economic and market conditions beyond the Bank’s control, could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition, perhaps materially. In addition to the carrying costs to maintain OREO, the resolution of non-performing assets increases the Bank’s loan administration costs generally, and requires significant commitments of time from management and our directors, which reduces the time they have to focus on profitably growing our business.

The fair value of the Bank’s debt securities could decline as a publicly-traded company,result of factors including changes in market interest rates, tax reform, credit quality and credit ratings, lack of market liquidity and other economic conditions. For debt securities in an unrealized loss position, the Company may be required to record an allowance for credit losses or write down the security depending on the type of security and the circumstances. Any such impairment charge would have an adverse effect, which could be material, on our results of operations and financial condition, including its capital.

While we believe that the terms of our debt securities have been kept relatively short, we are subject to regulationelevated interest rate risk exposure if rates were to increase sharply. Further, debt securities present a different type of asset quality risk than the loan portfolio. While we believe a relatively conservative management approach has been applied to the investment portfolio, there is always potential loss exposure under changing economic conditions.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate, and we could become subject to environmental liabilities with respect to one or more of these properties. During the SEC. Any change in applicable regulationsordinary course of business, we may foreclose on and take title to properties securing defaulted loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or federal, statetoxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous conditions or local legislationtoxic substances are found on these properties, we may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage, civil fines and criminal penalties regardless of when the hazardous conditions or in policiestoxic substances first affected any particular property. Environmental laws may require us to incur substantial expenses to address unknown liabilities and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit our ability to use or sell the affected property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations or regulatory approachesenforcement policies with respect to complianceexisting laws may increase our exposure to environmental liability. Although we have policies and enforcement, income tax lawsprocedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure on nonresidential real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and accounting principlesany other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a substantial impactmaterial adverse effect on usus.

Emerging technologies and advances and the growth of e-commerce have lowered geographic and monetary barriers of other financial institutions, made it easier for non-depository institutions to offer products and services that traditionally were banking products and allowed non-traditional financial service providers and technology companies to compete with traditional financial service companies in providing electronic and internet-based financial solutions and services, including electronic securities trading, marketplace lending, financial data aggregation and payment processing, including real-time payment platforms. Further, clients may choose to conduct business with other market participants who engage in business or offer products in areas we deem speculative or risky, such as cryptocurrencies. Increased competition may negatively affect our operations. Changesearnings by creating pressure to lower prices or credit standards on our products and services requiring additional investment to improve the quality and delivery of our technology and/or reducing our market share, or affecting the willingness of our clients to do business with us.

With Bank branches located in Montana, Idaho, Utah, Washington, Wyoming, Colorado, Arizona and Nevada, our business could be affected by a major natural catastrophe, such as a fire, flood, earthquake, or other natural disaster. The occurrence of any of these events may result in a prolonged interruption of our business, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Failure to appropriately comply with any such laws, regulations or principles could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies or damage to our reputation, all of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations.

UnderAny failures, interruptions or security breaches in the CECL model, we will recognize an impairment allowance equalBank’s information systems could damage its reputation, result in a loss of customer business, result in a violation of privacy or other laws, or expose us to our current estimate of expected creditcivil litigation, regulatory fines or losses for financial instruments as of the end of the reporting period. Measuring expected credit losses will likely be a significant challenge for all entities, including us. Additionally, to estimate expected credit losses, we have incurred one-time and recurring costs, some of which are related to system changes and data collection.not covered by insurance.

We use models and strategies to forecast losses, project revenue, measure and assess capital requirements for credit, market, operational and strategic risks, and assess and control our operations and financial condition. These models require oversight, ongoing monitoring, and periodic reassessment. Models are subject to inherent limitations due to the impairment allowance measured under a CECL model could differ materiallyuse of historical trends and simplifying assumptions, uncertainty regarding economic and financial outcomes, and emerging risks from the impairment allowance measured under our incurred loss model. To initially apply the CECL amendments, for most debt instruments, we would record a cumulative-effect adjustmentuse of applications that may rely on artificial intelligence. Our models and strategies may not be adequate due to its statement of financial condition aslimited historical data and shocks caused by extreme or unanticipated market changes, especially during severe market downturns or stress events. Regardless of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance issteps we take to ensure effective (a modified retrospective approach). The amendments in ASU 2016-13 are effective for us as of January 1, 2020,controls, governance, monitoring and are requiredtesting, and implement new risk management tools, we could suffer operational, reputational and financial harm if our models and strategies and other risk management tools fail to be adopted through a modified retrospective approach, with a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the ASU is effective.

Our articles of incorporation include certain provisions that could make it more difficult to acquire us by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest, merger or otherwise. These provisions include a requirement that any “Business Combination” (as defined in the articles of incorporation) be approved by at least 80 percent of the voting power of the then outstanding shares, unless it is either approved by our Board or certain price and procedural requirements are satisfied. In addition, the authorization of preferred stock, which is intended primarily as a financing tool and not as a defensive measure against takeovers, may potentially be used by management to make more difficult uninvited attempts to acquire control of us. These provisions may have the effect of lengthening the time required to acquire control of us through a tender offer, proxy contest or otherwise, and may deter any potentially unfriendly offers or other efforts to obtain control of us. This could deprive our shareholders of opportunities to realize a premium for their common stock in the Company, even in circumstances where such action is favored by a majority of our shareholders.

On March 15, 2016, the FDIC adopted a final rule to increase insurance premiums and has imposed special assessments to rebuild and maintain the DIF, and any additional future premium increases or special assessments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

The Dodd-Frank Act broadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act established 1.35 percent as the minimum DIF reserve ratio. The FDIC has determined that the fund reserve ratio should be 2.0 percent (which is beyond what is required by law) and has adopted a plan under which it will meet the statutory minimum fund reserve ratio of 1.35 percent. The Dodd-Frank Act made banks with $10 billion or more in total assets responsible for the increase from 1.15 percent to 1.35 percent. The increase is effective for banks in the first quarter following four consecutive quarters of total consolidated assets exceeding $10 billion. Since the Bank exceeded the $10 billion asset threshold in the first quarter of 2018, the increase in deposit insurance assessments to be paid by the Bank was effective in the first quarter of 2019. Additionally, under the FDIC’s assessment system for determining payments to the DIF, insured depository institutions with more than $10 billion in assets are assessed under a “scorecard” system.

We are subject to the risks of earthquakes, floods, fires,extensive regulation, supervision and other natural catastrophes.

None

We believe that all of our facilities are well maintained, generally adequate and suitable for the current operations of our business, as well as fully utilized. In the normal course of business, new locations and facility upgrades occur as needed.

For additional information regarding the Company’s premises and equipment and lease obligations, see Note 4 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

The Company is involved in various claims, legal actions and complaints which arise in the ordinary course of business. In our opinion, all such matters are adequately covered by insurance, are without merit or are of such kind, or involve such amounts, that unfavorable disposition would not have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

Not Applicable

The Company’s stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol: GBCI. As of December 31, 2019,2020, there were approximately 1,5331,669 shareholders of record for the Company’s common stock. The market range of high and low salesmarket prices for the Company’s common stock for the periods indicated are shown below:

 

The following table summarizes the Company’s dividends declared during the periods indicated:

Future cash dividends will depend on a variety of factors, including net income,earnings, capital, asset quality, general economic conditions and regulatory considerations. Information regarding the regulation considerations is set forth under the heading “Supervision and Regulation” in “Item 1. Business.”

The Company made no stock repurchases during 2019.2020.

The following graph compares the yearly cumulative total return of the Company’s common stock over a five-year measurement period with the yearly cumulative total return on the stocks included in 1) the Russell 2000 Index; and 2) the KBW NASDAQ Regional Banking Index (“KBW Regional Banking Index”). Total return includes appreciation in market value of the stock as well as the actual cash and stock dividends paid to shareholders. The graph assumes that the value of the each investment was $100 on December 31, 20142015 and that all dividends were reinvested.

In addition to the results presented in accordance with GAAP, this Annual Report on Form 10-K contains certain non-GAAP financial measures. The Company believes that providing these non-GAAP financial measures provides investors with information useful in understanding and comparing the Company’s financial performance, performance trends, and financial position. While the Company uses these non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information should not be considered an alternative to measurements required by GAAP. The following table provides a reconciliation of certain GAAP financial measures to non-GAAP financial measures.

The reconciling item between the GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures was due to the one-time net tax expense of $19.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2017. The one-time net tax expense was driven by The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (“Tax Act”) and the change in the federal marginal corporate income tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent for 2018 and future years, which resulted in the revaluation of its deferred tax assets and deferred tax liabilities (“net deferred tax asset”). The Company believes the financial results are more comparable excluding the impact of the revaluation of the net deferred tax asset.

Basic earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income by average outstanding shares and diluted earnings per share is calculated by dividing net income by diluted average outstanding shares. The one-time net tax expense of $19.7 million was included in determining income for both the GAAP basic earnings per share and the GAAP diluted earnings per share. Conversely, the one-time net tax expense of $19.7 million was excluded in determining income for both the non-GAAP basic earnings per share and the non-GAAP diluted earnings per share. Average outstanding shares of 77,537,664 was used in the GAAP and non-GAAP basic earnings per share for the year ended December 31, 2017. Diluted average outstanding shares of 77,607,605 was used in the GAAP and non-GAAP diluted earnings per share for the year ended December 31, 2017.

The return on average assets ratio is calculated by dividing net income by average assets and the return on average equity ratio is calculated by dividing net income by average equity. The one-time net tax expense of $19.7 million was included in determining income for both the GAAP return on average assets and the GAAP return on average equity. Conversely, the one-time net tax expense of $19.7 million was excluded in determining income for both the non-GAAP return on average assets and the non-GAAP return on average equity. Average assets of $9.678 billion was used in the GAAP and non-GAAP return on average assets ratios for the year ended December 31, 2017. Average equity of $1.188 billion was used in the GAAP and non-GAAP return on average equity ratios for the year ended December 31, 2017.

The dividend payout ratio is calculated by dividing dividends declared per share by basic earnings per share. The non-GAAP dividend payout ratio uses the non-GAAP basic earnings per share for calculating the ratio.

The effective income tax rate is calculated by dividing federal and state income tax expense by income before income taxes. The non-GAAP effective income tax rate uses the non-GAAP federal and state income tax expense of $44.9 million for calculating the rate.

The following financial data of the Company is derived from the Company’s historical audited financial statements and related notes. The information set forth below should be read in conjunction with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” contained elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

The following discussion is intended to provide a more comprehensive review of the Company’s operating results and financial condition than can be obtained from reading the Consolidated Financial Statements alone. The discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”