UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20122013

OR

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

COMMISSION FILE NUMBER 000-50400

NEW CENTURY BANCORP, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s Telephone number, including area code:(910) 892-7080

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

NONE

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

COMMON STOCK, PAR VALUE $1.00 PER SHARE

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

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.¨Yesx No

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.

xYes¨ No

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).  xYes¨ 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¨x

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

Large accelerated filer¨    Accelerated filer¨   Non-accelerated filer¨    Smaller reporting companyx

(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).

¨Yesx No

State the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold, or the average bid and asked price of such common equity, as of the last business day of the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter $31,763,499.

Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the registrant’s classes of Common Stock as of the latest practicable date 6,916,506shares6,921,574 shares outstanding as ofMarch 18, 2013.of March 17, 2014.

Documents Incorporated by Reference.Reference:

Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2013 Annual Meeting of Shareholders as filed pursuant to Section 14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, incorporated into Part III of this Form 10-KNone.

FORM 10-K CROSS-REFERENCE INDEX

Part I

Item 1 –Business

General

New Century Bancorp, Inc. (the “Registrant”) was incorporated under the laws of the State of North Carolina on May 14, 2003, at the direction of the Board of Directors of New Century Bank, for the purpose of serving as the bank holding company for New Century Bank and became the holding company for New Century Bank on September 19, 2003. To become New Century Bank’s holding company, the Registrant received the approval of the Federal Reserve Board as well as New Century Bank’s shareholders. Upon receiving such approval, each share of $5.00 par value common stock of New Century Bank was exchanged on a one-for-one basis for one share of $1.00 par value common stock of the Registrant.

The Registrant operates for the primary purpose of serving as the holding company for its subsidiary depository institution, New Century Bank (the “Bank”). The Registrant’s headquarters is located at 700 West Cumberland Street, Dunn, North Carolina 28334.

New Century Bank was incorporated on May 19, 2000 as a North Carolina-chartered commercial bank, opened for business on May 24, 2000, and is located at 700 West Cumberland Street, Dunn, North Carolina.

The Bank operates for the primary purpose of serving the banking needs of individuals and small to medium-sized businesses in its market area. The Bank offers a range of banking services including checking and savings accounts, commercial, consumer, mortgage and personal loans, and other associated financial services.

Primary Market Area

The Registrant’s market area consists of southeastern North Carolina which includes Cumberland, Sampson, Robeson, Wayne, Wake, and Harnett. The Registrant’s market area has a population of over 767,0891.7 million with an average household income of over $45,000.$44,000.

Total deposits in the Registrant’s market area exceeded $6.7$28.1 billion at June 30, 2012.2013. The leading economic components of Harnett County are services,education, manufacturing, and retail trade. Cumberland County’s leading sector is federal government and military, followed by construction and agriculture. In Robeson County, leading sectors include education, health services, and retail trade.manufacturing. In Sampson County, leading sectors include manufacturing, services,agriculture, and statenatural resources and local government.mining. Wayne County’s leading sectors are federal government and military services and retail tradetrade. In Wake County, leading sectors include education, healthcare, and agriculture.technology. The largest employers in the Registrant’s market area include the State of North Carolina, Goodyear Tire Company, Cape Fear Valley Medical Center, Smithfield Foods, Inc., and the United States Military.

Competition

Commercial banking in North Carolina is extremely competitive in large part due to early adoption of laws permitting statewide branching. Registrant competes in its market areas with some of the largest banking organizations in the state and the country and other financial institutions, such as federally and state-chartered savings and loan institutions and credit unions, as well as consumer finance companies, mortgage companies and other lenders engaged in the business of extending credit. Many of Registrant’s competitors have broader geographic markets and higher lending limits than Registrant and are also able to provide more services and make greater use of media advertising. As of June 30, 2012,2013, data provided by the FDIC Deposit Market Share Report indicated that, within the Registrant’s market area, there were 179429 offices (27 (26 in Harnett County, 6968 in Cumberland County, 33 in Robeson County, 16 in Sampson County, 252 in Wake County and 34 in Wayne County).

The enactment of legislation authorizing interstate banking caused great increases in the size and financial resources of some of Registrant’s competitors. In addition, as a result of interstate banking and the recent economic recession, out-of-state commercial banks have acquired North Carolina banks and heightened the competition among banks in North Carolina.

Despite the competition in its market areas, Registrant believes that it has certain competitive advantages that distinguish it from its competition. Registrant believes that its primary competitive advantages are its strong local identity and affiliation with the community and its emphasis on providing specialized services to small and medium-sized business enterprises, as well as professional and upper-income individuals. Registrant offers customers modern, high-tech banking without forsaking community values such as prompt, personal service and friendliness. Registrant offers many personalized services and intends to attract customers by being responsive and sensitive to their individualized needs. Registrant also relies on goodwill and referrals from shareholders and satisfied customers, as well as traditional media to attract new customers. To enhance a positive image in the community, Registrant supports and participates in local events and its officers and directors serve on boards of local civic and charitable organizations.

Employees

As of December 31, 2012,2013, the Registrant employed 11197 full time equivalent employees. None of the Registrant’s employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement. The Registrant believes relations with its employees to be good.

Regulation

Regulation of the Bank

General. The Bank is a North Carolina chartered commercial bank and its deposit accounts are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The Bank is subject to supervision, examination and regulation by the North Carolina Office of the Commissioner of Banks (“Commissioner”) and the FDIC and to North Carolina and federal statutory and regulatory provisions governing such matters as capital standards, mergers, subsidiary investments and establishment of branch offices. The FDIC also has the authority to conduct special examinations. The Bank is required to file reports with the Commissioner and the FDIC concerning its activities and financial condition and will be required to obtain regulatory approval prior to entering into certain transactions, including mergers with, or acquisitions of, other depository institutions.

As a federally insured depository institution, the Bank is subject to various regulations promulgated by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve Board”) or (“FRB”), including Regulation B (Equal Credit Opportunity), Regulation D (Reserve Requirements), Regulation E (Electronic Fund Transfers), Regulation Z (Truth in Lending), Regulation CC (Availability of Funds and Collection of Checks) and Regulation DD (Truth in Savings).

The system of regulation and supervision applicable to the Bank establishes a comprehensive framework for the operations of the Bank, and is intended primarily for the protection of the FDIC and the depositors of the Bank, rather than shareholders. Changes in the regulatory framework could have a material effect on the Bank that in turn, could have a material effect on the Registrant. Certain of the legal and regulatory requirements are applicable to the Bank and the Registrant. This discussion does not purport to be a complete explanation of all such laws and regulations and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the statutes and regulations involved.

State Law. The Bank is subject to extensive supervision and regulation by the Commissioner. The Commissioner oversees state laws that set specific requirements for bank capital and regulate deposits in, and loans and investments by, banks, including the amounts, types, and in some cases, rates. The Commissioner supervises and performs periodic examinations of North Carolina-chartered banks to assure compliance with state banking statutes and regulations, and the Bank is required to make regular reports to the Commissioner describing in detail its resources, assets, liabilities and financial condition. Among other things, the Commissioner regulates mergers and consolidations of state-chartered banks, the payment of dividends, loans to officers and directors, record keeping, types and amounts of loans and investments, and the establishment of branches.

North Carolina Banking Law Modernization Act.On October 1, 2012, as a result of the recommendations of the Joint Legislative Study Commission on the Modernization of North Carolina Banking Laws, legislation went into effect that comprehensively modernizes North Carolina’s banking laws for the first time since the Great Depression. As a result of the legislation, Articles 1 through 10, 12, and 13 of Chapter 53 of the North Carolina General Statutes were repealed, and new Chapter 53C, entitled “Regulation of Banks,” became law. Major changes enacted by the law include: a comprehensive list of definitions enhancing the clarity and meaning of the various sections of North Carolina’s banking law, a broader reliance on the North Carolina Business Corporations Act, and incorporation of modern concepts of capital adequacy and regulatory supervision. On March 4, 2013, a bill was filed for consideration by the North Carolina General Assembly to make certain technical corrections and clarifications to Chapter 53C.

Dodd–Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act.In2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) was signed into law.This law has significantly changed the current bank regulatory structure and is affecting the lending, deposit, investment, trading, and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations, and to prepare numerous studies and reports for Congress. The federal agencies have significant discretion in drafting rules and regulations, and consequently, many of the details and much of the impact of the Dodd-Frank Act may not be known for many years. The Dodd-Frank Act included, among other things:

The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits insured depository institutions and their holding companies from engaging in proprietary trading except in limited circumstances, and prohibits them from owning equity interests in excess of three percent (3%) of Tier 1 capital in private equity and hedge funds (known as the “Volcker Rule”). The Federal Reserve released a final rule in early 2011 which requires a “banking entity,” a term that is defined to include bank holding companies like the Registrant, to bring its proprietary trading activities and investments into compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act restrictions no later than two years after the earlier of: (1) July 21, 2012, or (2) 12 months after the date on which interagency final rules are adopted. Pursuant to the compliance date final rule, banking entities are permitted to request an extension of this timeframe from the Federal Reserve. In late 2011, the federal banking agencies released for comment proposed regulations implementing the Volcker Rule. The public comment period closedin early 2012. The proposed rules are highly complex and many aspects of their application remain uncertain. Due to the complexity of the new rules, the challenges of agency coordination, and the volume of public comments received, implementation of the Volcker Rule has been delayed. We do not currently anticipate that the Volcker Rule will have a material effect on our operations. However, until a final rule is adopted, the precise impact of the Volcker Rule on the Registrant cannot be determined.

A number of other provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act remain to be implemented through the rulemaking process at various regulatory agencies. We are unable to predict the extent to which the Dodd-Frank Act or the forthcoming rules and regulations will impact our business. However, we believe that certain aspects of the legislation, including, without limitation, the additional cost of higher deposit insurance coverage and the costs of compliance with disclosure and reporting requirements and examinations could have a significant impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Additionally, we cannot predict whether there will be additional proposed laws or reforms that would affect the U.S. financial system or financial institutions, whether or when such changes may be adopted, how such changes may be interpreted and enforced, or how such changes may affect us.

Deposit Insurance. The Bank’s deposits are insured up to limits set by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC. The DIF was formed on March 31, 2006, upon the merger of the Bank Insurance Fund and the Savings Insurance Fund in accordance with the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 (the “Reform Act”). The Reform Act established a range of 1.15% to 1.50% within which the FDIC may set the Designated Reserve Ratio (the “reserve ratio” or “DRR”). The Dodd-Frank Act gave the FDIC greater discretion to manage the DIF, raised the minimum DIF reserve ratio to 1.35%, and removed the upper limit of 1.50%. In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a restoration plan to ensure that the DIF reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by September 30, 2020, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The FDIC also proposed a comprehensive, long-range plan for management of the DIF. As part of this comprehensive plan, the FDIC has adopted a final rule to set the DRR at 2.0%.

On October 3, 2008, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 was enacted and temporarily raised the standard minimum deposit insurance amount (the “SMDIA”) from $100,000 to $250,000 per depositor. On May 20, 2009, the Helping Families Save Their Homes Act extended the temporary increase in the SMDIA to $250,000 per depositor through December 31, 2013. On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act permanently increased FDIC insurance coverage to $250,000 per depositor.

The FDIC imposes a risk-based deposit insurance premium assessment on member institutions in order to maintain the DIF. This assessment system was amended by the Reform Act and further amended by the Dodd-Frank Act. Under this system, as amended, the assessment rates for an insured depository institution vary according to the level of risk incurred in its activities. To arrive at an assessment rate for a banking institution, the FDIC places it in one of four risk categories determined by reference to its capital levels and supervisory ratings. In addition, in the case of those institutions in the lowest risk category, the FDIC further determines its assessment rate based on certain specified financial ratios or, if applicable, its long-term debt ratings. The assessment rate schedule can change from time to time, at the discretion of the FDIC, subject to certain limits. The Dodd-Frank Act changed the methodology for calculating deposit insurance assessments from the amount of an insured institution’s domestic deposits to its total assets minus tangible capital. On February 7, 2011, the FDIC issued a new regulation implementing these revisions to the assessment system. The regulation went into effect April 1, 2011.

On October 14, 2008, the FDIC announced the Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (the “TLGP”) to strengthen confidence and encourage liquidity in the banking system. The TLGP consists of two components: a temporary guarantee of newly-issued senior unsecured debt named the Debt Guarantee Program, and a temporary unlimited guarantee of funds in non-interest-bearing transaction accounts at FDIC insured institutions named the Transaction Account Guarantee Program (“TAG”). All newly-issued senior unsecured debt will be charged an annual assessment of up to 100 basis points (depending on term) multiplied by the amount of debt issued and calculated through the date of that debt or June 30, 2012, whichever is earlier. The Bank elected to opt out of the Debt Guarantee Program. The Bank elected to participate in the TAG Program and as a result, does not anticipate a material increase in its deposit insurance premiums. On August 26, 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule extending the TAG portion of the TLGP for six months through June 30, 2010. It was subsequently extended again through December 31, 2010. On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Act extended unlimited FDIC insurance coverage to noninterest-bearing transaction deposit accounts. It does not apply to accounts earning any level of interest with the exception of Interest on Lawyers’ Trust Accounts (“IOLTA”) accounts. This unlimited FDIC insurance coverage is applicable to all applicable deposits at any FDIC-insured financial institution. Therefore, there is no additional FDIC insurance surcharge related to this coverage after December 31, 2010. This change is expected to lower the Bank’s FDIC insurance expense.

On November 12, 2009, the FDIC voted to require all FDIC insured depository institutions to prepay risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and 2012. The prepaid assessments are designed to provide the FDIC with additional liquid assets for the Deposit Insurance Fund, which have been used to protect depositors of failed institutions and have been exchanged for less liquid claims against the assets of failed institutions.

On December 30, 2009, the Bank paid a $3.1 million prepaid assessment, creating a prepaid expense with a zero risk-weighting for risk-based regulatory capital purposes. On a quarterly basis after December 31, 2009, the Bank will expenseexpensed its regular quarterly assessment and recordrecorded an offsetting credit to the prepaid assessment asset until the asset is exhausted. If the prepaid assessment is not exhausted by June 30, 2013 anywhen the remaining amount will beassessment was returned to the Bank.

The FDIC has authority to further increase deposit insurance assessments. A significant increase in insurance premiums would likely have an adverse effect on the operating expenses and results of operations of the Registrant and the Bank. Management cannot predict what insurance assessment rates will be in the future.

Insurance of deposits may be terminated by the FDIC upon a finding that an insured institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC. Management of the Bank is not aware of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of its FDIC deposit insurance.

Capital Requirements. The federal banking regulators have adopted certain risk-based capital guidelines to assist in the assessment of the capital adequacy of a banking organization’s operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets and transactions, such as letters of credit, and recourse arrangements, which are recorded as off balance sheet items. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off-balance sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages which range from 0% for assets with low credit risk, such as certain U.S. Treasury securities, to 100% for assets with relatively high credit risk, such as business loans.

A banking organization’s risk-based capital ratios are obtained by dividing its qualifying capital by its total risk adjusted assets. The regulators measure risk-adjusted assets, which include off balance sheet items, against both total qualifying capital (the sum of Tier 1 capital and limited amounts of Tier 2 capital) and Tier 1 capital. “Tier 1,” or core capital, includes common equity, qualifying noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, less goodwill and other intangibles, subject to certain exceptions. “Tier 2,” or supplementary capital, includes among other things, limited-life preferred stock, hybrid capital instruments, mandatory convertible securities, qualifying subordinated debt, and the allowance for loan and lease losses, subject to certain limitations and less required deductions. The inclusion of elements of Tier 2 capital is subject to certain other requirements and limitations of the federal banking agencies. Banks and bank holding companies subject to the risk-based capital guidelines are required to maintain a ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 4% and a ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8%. The appropriate regulatory authority may set higher capital requirements when particular circumstances warrant.

Effective June 10, 2011, the Board of Directors of New Century Bank entered into aMemorandum of Understanding(“MOU”) with theFederal Deposit Insurance Corporation(“FDIC”) and the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks. The MOU represents an informal agreement between the Board of Directors of New Century Bank, the Regional Director of the FDIC’s Atlanta Regional Office and the North Carolina Commissioner of Banks and requires that New Century Bank’s management take certain actions to improve the bank’s lending function. The Memorandum also requires the Bank to maintain minimum Tier 1 Leverage and Total Risk Based Capital Ratios of 8.0% and 11.5%, respectively, during the life of the Memorandum.  The Memorandum also restricts the ability of the Bank to grow its total assets at a rate in excess of 10% per year or to declare cash dividends without the prior approval of the Commissioner and the FDIC. As of December 31, 2012, the Registrant was classified as well capitalized with Leverage Ratio, Tier 1, and Total Risk-Based Capital of 10.78%, 15.34%, and 16.60%, respectively. Also, as of December 31, 2012, the Bank was classified as well capitalized with Leverage Ratio, Tier 1, and Total Risk-Based Capital of 10.52%, 14.98%, and 16.24%, respectively.

On January 29, 2013, the MOU was resolved and terminated upon agreement of all parties.

The federal banking agencies have adopted regulations specifying that they will include, in their evaluations of a bank’s capital adequacy, an assessment of the bank’s interest rate risk exposure. The standards for measuring the adequacy and effectiveness of a banking organization’s interest rate risk management include a measurement of board of director and senior management oversight, and a determination of whether a banking organization’s procedures for comprehensive risk management are appropriate for the circumstances of the specific banking organization.

Failure to meet applicable capital guidelines could subject a banking organization to a variety of enforcement actions, including limitations on its ability to pay dividends, the issuance by the applicable regulatory authority of a capital directive to increase capital and, in the case of depository institutions, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, as well as the measures described under the “Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991” below, as applicable to undercapitalized institutions. In addition, future changes in regulations or practices could further reduce the amount of capital recognized for purposes of capital adequacy. Such a change could affect the ability of the BanksBank to grow and could restrict the amount of profits, if any, available for the payment of dividends to the Registrant and its shareholders.

In June 2012,On July 2, 2013, the federal bankFederal Reserve approved a final rule that establishes an integrated regulatory agencies jointly issued three proposed rulescapital framework that would reviseaddresses shortcomings in certain capital requirements. The rule implements in the general risk-basedUnited States the Basel III regulatory capital rules to incorporate certain revisions byreforms from the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision toand certain changes required by the Basel capital framework (Basel III). While the regulatory agencies had initially proposed an effective dateDodd-Frank Act.

The major provisions of January 1, 2013 for the new rules, the agencies have since confirmed that the implementation will be delayed as a result of the many industry participants, including community banks, that expressed concern over the impact of the proposed rules. When and if the proposed rules become effective, they would, among other things: revise the definition of regulatory capital components and related calculations, add a new common equity Tier 1 capital ratio, and increase the minimum Tier 1 Capital Ratio requirement from 4%rule applicable to 6% percent. If the proposed rules are implemented as written, the amount of capital that the Bank would be required to hold would likely increase.us are:

On July 9, 2013, the FDIC confirmed that it would join in the Basel III standards and, on September 10, 2013, issued an “interim final rule” applicable to the Bank that is identical in substance to the final rules issued by the Federal Reserve described above. The Bank is required to comply with the interim final rule beginning on January 1, 2015.

Compliance by the Registrant and the Bank with these new capital requirements will likely affect their respective operations. However, the extent of that impact cannot be known until there is greater clarity regarding the specific requirements applicable to them. While the Dodd-Frank Act was enacted in 2010, many of its provisions will require additional implementing rules before becoming effective, and the proposed federal banking agency regulations implementing the Basel III standards, while recently promulgated, have not been implemented.

Prompt Corrective Regulatory Action.Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), the federal banking regulators are required to take prompt corrective action if an insured depository institution fails to satisfy the minimum capital requirements discussed above, including a leverage limit, a risk-based capital requirement, and any other measure deemed appropriate by the federal banking regulators for measuring the capital adequacy of an insured depository institution. All institutions, regardless of their capital levels, are restricted from making any capital distribution or paying any management fees if the institution would thereafter fail to satisfy the minimum levels for any of its capital requirements. An institution that fails to meet the minimum level for any relevant capital measure (an “undercapitalized institution”) may be: (i) subject to increased monitoring by the appropriate federal banking regulator; (ii) required to submit an acceptable capital restoration plan within 45 days; (iii) subject to asset growth limits; and (iv) required to obtain prior regulatory approval for acquisitions, branching and new lines of businesses. The capital restoration plan must include a guarantee by the institution’s holding company that the institution will comply with the plan until it has been adequately capitalized on average for four consecutive quarters, under which the holding company would be liable up to the lesser of 5% of the institution’s total assets or the amount necessary to bring the institution into capital compliance as of the date it failed to comply with its capital restoration plan. A “significantly undercapitalized” institution, as well as any undercapitalized institution that does not submit an acceptable capital restoration plan, may be subject to regulatory demands for recapitalization, broader application of restrictions on transactions with affiliates, limitations on interest rates paid on deposits, asset growth and other activities, possible replacement of directors and officers, and restrictions on capital distributions by any bank holding company controlling the institution. Any company controlling the institution may also be required to divest the institution or the institution could be required to divest subsidiaries. The senior executive officers of a significantly undercapitalized institution may not receive bonuses or increases in compensation without prior approval and the institution is prohibited from making payments of principal or interest on its subordinated debt. In their discretion, the federal banking regulators may also impose the foregoing sanctions on an undercapitalized institution if the regulators determine that such actions are necessary to carry out the purposes of the prompt corrective action provisions. If an institution’s ratio of tangible capital to total assets falls below the “critical capital level” established by the appropriate federal banking regulator, the institution will be subject to conservatorship or receivership within specified time periods.

Under the implementing regulations, the federal banking regulators, including the FDIC, generally measure an institution’s capital adequacy on the basis of its total risk-based capital ratio (the ratio of its total capital to risk-weighted assets), Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio (the ratio of its core capital to risk-weighted assets) and leverage ratio (the ratio of its core capital to adjusted total assets).

The following table shows the Bank’s actual capital ratios and the required capital ratios for the various prompt corrective action categories as of December 31, 2012.2013.

* 3.0% if institution has the highest regulatory rating and meets certain other criteria.

A “critically undercapitalized” institution is defined as an institution that has a ratio of “tangible equity” to total assets of less than 2.0%. Tangible equity is defined as core capital plus cumulative perpetual preferred stock (and related surplus) less all intangibles other than qualifying supervisory goodwill and certain purchased mortgage servicing rights. The FDIC may reclassify a well capitalizedwell-capitalized institution as adequately capitalized and may require an adequately capitalized or undercapitalized institution to comply with the supervisory actions applicable to institutions in the next lower capital category (but may not reclassify a significantly undercapitalized institution as critically undercapitalized) if the FDIC determines, after notice and an opportunity for a hearing, that the institution is in an unsafe or unsound condition or that the institution has received and not corrected a less-than-satisfactory rating for any CAMELS rating category. SeeNote IJ of the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements included under Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Safety and Soundness Guidelines.Under FDICIA, as amended by the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994 (the “CDRI Act”), each federal banking agency was required to establish safety and soundness standards for institutions under its authority. The interagency guidelines require depository institutions to maintain internal controls and information systems and internal audit systems that are appropriate for the size, nature and scope of the institution’s business. The guidelines also establish certain basic standards for the documentation of loans, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure, asset growth, and information security. The guidelines further provide that depository institutions should maintain safeguards to prevent the payment of compensation, fees and benefits that are excessive or that could lead to material financial loss, and should take into account factors such as comparable compensation practices at comparable institutions. If the appropriate federal banking agency determines that a depository institution is not in compliance with the safety and soundness guidelines, it may require the institution to submit an acceptable plan to achieve compliance with the guidelines. A depository institution must submit an acceptable compliance plan to its primary federal regulator within 30 days of receipt of a request for such a plan. Failure to submit or implement a compliance plan may subject the institution to regulatory sanctions. Management believes that the Bank substantially meets all the standards adopted in the interagency guidelines.

International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001. On October 26, 2001, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 was enacted. This act contains the International Money Laundering Abatement and Financial Anti-Terrorism Act of 2001, which sets forth anti-money laundering measures affecting insured depository institutions, broker-dealers and other financial institutions. The Act requires U.S. financial institutions to adopt new policies and procedures to combat money laundering and grants the Secretary of the Treasury broad authority to establish regulations and to impose requirements and restrictions on the operations of financial institutions.

Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation. The United States has imposed economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others. These are typically known as the “OFAC” rules based on their administration by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC). The OFAC-administered sanctions targeting countries take many different forms. Generally, however, they contain one or more of the following elements: (i) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on “U.S. persons” engaging in financial transactions relating to making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and (ii) a blocking of assets in which the government or specially designated nationals of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons). Blocked assets (e.g., property and bank deposits) cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure of a financial institution to comply with these sanctions could result in legal consequences for the institution.

Community Reinvestment Act.The Bank, like other financial institutions, is subject to the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”). The purpose of the CRA is to encourage financial institutions to help meet the credit needs of their entire communities, including the needs of low-and moderate-income neighborhoods.

The federal banking agencies have implemented an evaluation system that rates an institution based on its asset size and actual performance in meeting community credit needs. Under these regulations, the institution is first evaluated and rated under two categories: a lending test and a community development test. For each of these tests, the institution is given a rating of either “outstanding,” “high satisfactory,” “low satisfactory,” “needs to improve,” or “substantial non-compliance.” A set of criteria for each rating has been developed and is included in the regulation. If an institution disagrees with a particular rating, the institution has the burden of rebutting the presumption by clearly establishing that the quantitative measures do not accurately present its actual performance, or that demographics, competitive conditions or economic or legal limitations peculiar to its service area should be considered. The ratings received under the three tests will be used to determine the overall composite CRA rating. The composite ratings currently given are: “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve” or “substantial non-compliance.”

The Bank’s CRA rating would be a factor to be considered by the FRB and the FDIC in considering applications submitted by the Bank to acquire branches or to acquire or combine with other financial institutions and take other actions and, if such rating was less than “satisfactory,” could result in the denial of such applications. During the Bank’s last compliance examination, the Bank received a satisfactory rating with respect to CRA compliance.

Federal Home Loan Bank System.The FHLB System consists of 12 district FHLBs subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”). The FHLBs provide a central credit facility primarily for member institutions. As a member of the FHLB of Atlanta, the Bank is required to acquire and hold shares of capital stock in the FHLB of Atlanta. The Bank was in compliance with this requirement with investment in FHLB of Atlanta stock of $973,000$796,000 at December 31, 2012.2013. The FHLB of Atlanta serves as a reserve or central bank for its member institutions within its assigned district. It is funded primarily from proceeds derived from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB System. It offers advances to members in accordance with policies and procedures established by the FHFA and the Board of Directors of the FHLB of Atlanta. Long-term advances may only be made for the purpose of providing funds for residential housing finance, small businesses, small farms and small agribusinesses.

Reserves.Pursuant to regulations of the FRB, the Bank must maintain average daily reserves equal to 3% on transaction accounts of $25.0 million up to $55.2 million, plus 10% on the remainder. This percentage is subject to adjustment by the FRB. Because required reserves must be maintained in the form of vault cash or in a noninterest bearing account at a Federal Reserve Bank, the effect of the reserve requirement is to reduce the amount of the institution’s interest-earning assets. As of December 31, 2012,2013, the Bank met its reserve requirements.

The Bank is also subject to the reserve requirements of North Carolina commercial banks. North Carolina law requires state nonmember banks to maintain, at all times, a reserve fund in an amount set by the Commissioner.

Liquidity Requirements. FDIC policy requires that banks maintain an average daily balance of liquid assets (cash, certain time deposits, mortgage-backed securities, loans available for sale and specified United States government, state, or federal agency obligations) in an amount which it deems adequate to protect the safety and soundness of the bank. The FDIC currently has no specific level which it requires. The Bank maintains its liquidity position under policy guidelines based on liquid assets in relationship to deposits and short-term borrowings. Based on its policy calculation guidelines, the Bank’s calculated liquidity ratio was 26.7%29.1% of total deposits and short-term borrowings at December 31, 2012,2013, which management believes is adequate.

Dividend Restrictions. Under FDIC regulations, the Bank is prohibited from making any capital distributions if after making the distribution, the Bank would have: (i) a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 8.0%; (ii) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4.0%; or (iii) a leverage ratio of less than 4.0%. The FDIC and the Commissioner have the power to further restrict the payment of dividends by the Bank.

Limits on Loans to One Borrower.The Bank generally is subject to both FDIC regulations and North Carolina law regarding loans to any one borrower, including related entities. Under applicable law, with certain limited exceptions, loans and extensions of credit by a state chartered nonmember bank to a person outstanding at one time and not fully secured by collateral having a market value at least equal to the amount of the loan or extension of credit shall not exceed 15% of the unimpaired capital of the Bank. In addition, the Bank has an internal policy that loans and extensions of credit fully secured by readily marketable collateral having a market value at least equal to the amount of the loan or extension of credit shall not exceed 10% of the unimpaired capital fund of the Bank. Under the internal policy, the Bank’s loans to one borrower were limited to $8.5 million at December 31, 2012.2013.

Transactions with Related Parties.Transactions between a state nonmember bank and any affiliate are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act. An affiliate of a state nonmember bank is any company or entity which controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the state nonmember bank. In a holding company context, the parent holding company of a state nonmember bank (such as the Registrant) and any companies which are controlled by such parent holding company are affiliates of the savings institution or state nonmember bank. Generally, Sections 23A and 23B (i) limit the extent to which an institution or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10% of such institution’s capital stock and surplus, and contain an aggregate limit on all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20% of such capital stock and surplus and (ii) require that all such transactions be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable, to the institution or subsidiary as those provided to a non-affiliate. The term “covered transaction” includes the making of loans, purchase of assets, issuance of a guarantee and similar other types of transactions.

Loans to Directors, Executive Officers and Principal Stockholders.State nonmember banks also are subject to the restrictions contained in Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and the applicable regulations there under on loans to executive officers, directors and principal stockholders. Under Section 22(h), loans to a director, executive officer and to a greater than 10% stockholder of a state nonmember bank and certain affiliated interests of such persons, may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such person and affiliated interests, the institution’s loans-to-one-borrower limit and all loans to such persons may not exceed the institution’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. Section 22(h) also prohibits loans above amounts prescribed by the appropriate federal banking agency to directors, executive officers and greater than 10% stockholders of a depository institution, and their respective affiliates, unless such loan is approved in advance by a majority of the board of directors of the institution with any “interested” director not participating in the voting. Regulation O prescribes the loan amount (which includes all other outstanding loans to such person) as to which such prior board of director approval is required as being the greater of $25,000 or 5% of capital and surplus (or any loans aggregating $500,000 or more). Further, Section 22(h) requires that loans to directors, executive officers and principal stockholders generally be made on terms substantially the same as offered in comparable transactions to other persons. Section 22(h) also generally prohibits a depository institution from paying the overdrafts of any of its executive officers or directors.

State nonmember banks also are subject to the requirements and restrictions of Section 22(g) of the Federal Reserve Act on loans to executive officers. Section 22(g) of the Federal Reserve Act requires approval by the board of directors of a depository institution for such extensions of credit and imposes reporting requirements for and additional restrictions on the type, amount and terms of credits to such officers. In addition, Section 106 of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHCA”) prohibits extensions of credit to executive officers, directors, and greater than 10% stockholders of a depository institution by any other institution which has a correspondent banking relationship with the institution, unless such extension of credit is on substantially the same terms as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.

The Volcker Rule. Under provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act referred to as the “Volcker Rule,” certain limitations are placed on the ability of bank holding companies and their affiliates to engage in sponsoring, investing in and transacting with certain investment funds, including hedge funds and private equity funds. The Volcker Rule also places restrictions on proprietary trading, which could impact certain hedging activities. The Volcker Rule becomes fully effective in July 2015. The Volcker Rule is not expected to have a material impact on the Bank or the Registrant.

Restrictions on Certain Activities. State chartered nonmember banks with deposits insured by the FDIC are generally prohibited from engaging in equity investments that are not permissible for a national bank. The foregoing limitation, however, does not prohibit FDIC-insured state banks from acquiring or retaining an equity investment in a subsidiary in which the bank is a majority owner. State chartered banks are also prohibited from engaging as a principal in any type of activity that is not permissible for a national bank and, subject to certain exceptions, subsidiaries of state chartered FDIC-insured banks may not engage as a principal in any type of activity that is not permissible for a subsidiary of a national bank, unless in either case, the FDIC determines that the activity would pose no significant risk to the DIF and the bank is, and continues to be, in compliance with applicable capital standards.

The Registrant cannot predict what legislation might be enacted or what regulations might be adopted, or if enacted or adopted, the effect thereof on the Bank’s operations.

Regulation of the Registrant

Federal Regulation. The Registrant is subject to examination, regulation and periodic reporting under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as administered by the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has adopted capital adequacy guidelines for bank holding companies on a consolidated basis.

The status of the Registrant as a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act does not exempt it from certain federal and state laws and regulations applicable to corporations generally, including, without limitation, certain provisions of the federal securities laws.

The Registrant is required to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board to acquire all, or substantially all, of the assets of any bank or bank holding company. Prior Federal Reserve Board approval is required for the Registrant to acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting securities of any bank or bank holding company if, after giving effect to such acquisition, it would, directly or indirectly, own or control more than five percent of any class of voting shares of such bank or bank holding company.

The merger or consolidation of the Registrant with another bank, or the acquisition by the Registrant of assets of another bank, or the assumption of liability by the Registrant to pay any deposits in another bank, will require the prior written approval of the primary federal bank regulatory agency of the acquiring or surviving bank under the federal Bank Merger Act. The decision is based upon a consideration of statutory factors similar to those outlined above with respect to the Bank Holding Company Act. In addition, in certain such cases, an application to, and the prior approval of, the Federal Reserve Board under the Bank Holding Company Act and/or the North Carolina Banking Commission may be required.

The Registrant is required to give the Federal Reserve Board prior written notice of any purchase or redemption of its outstanding equity securities if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when combined with the net consideration paid for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding 12 months, is equal to 10% or more of the Registrant’s consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve Board may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe and unsound practice, or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve Board order or directive, or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve Board. Such notice and approval is not required for a bank holding company that would be treated as “well capitalized”“well-capitalized” and well-managed under applicable regulations of the Federal Reserve Board, that has received a composite “1” or “2” rating at its most recent bank holding company inspection by the Federal Reserve Board, and that is not the subject of any unresolved supervisory issues.

In addition, a bank holding company is prohibited generally from engaging in, or acquiring five percent or more of any class of voting securities of any company engaged in, non-banking activities. One of the principal exceptions to this prohibition is for activities found by the Federal Reserve Board to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Some of the principal activities that the Federal Reserve Board has determined by regulation to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto are:

- making or servicing loans;

- performing certain data processing services;

- providing discount brokerage services;

- acting as fiduciary, investment or financial advisor;

- leasing personal or real property;

- making investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare; and

- acquiring a savings and loan association.

In evaluating a written notice of such an acquisition, the Federal Reserve Board will consider various factors, including among others the financial and managerial resources of the notifying bank holding company and the relative public benefits and adverse effects which may be expected to result from the performance of the activity by an affiliate of such company. The Federal Reserve Board may apply different standards to activities proposed to be commenced de novo and activities commenced by acquisition, in whole or in part, of a going concern. The required notice period may be extended by the Federal Reserve Board under certain circumstances, including a notice for acquisition of a company engaged in activities not previously approved by regulation of the Federal Reserve Board. If such a proposed acquisition is not disapproved or subjected to conditions by the Federal Reserve Board within the applicable notice period, it is deemed approved by the Federal Reserve Board.

However, with the passage of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which became effective on March 11, 2000, the types of activities in which a bank holding company may engage were significantly expanded. Subject to various limitations, the Modernization Act generally permits a bank holding company to elect to become a “financial holding company.” A financial holding company may affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are “financial in nature.” Among the activities that are deemed “financial in nature” are, in addition to traditional lending activities, securities underwriting, dealing in or making a market in securities, sponsoring mutual funds and investment companies, insurance underwriting and agency activities, certain merchant banking activities and activities that the Federal Reserve Board considers to be closely related to banking.

A bank holding company may become a financial holding company under the Modernization Act if each of its subsidiary banks is “well capitalized”“well-capitalized” under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act prompt corrective action provisions, is well managed and has at least a satisfactory rating under the Community Reinvestment Act. In addition, the bank holding company must file a declaration with the Federal Reserve Board that the bank holding company wishes to become a financial holding company. A bank holding company that falls out of compliance with these requirements may be required to cease engaging in some of its activities. The Registrant has not yet elected to become a financial holding company.

Under the Modernization Act, the Federal Reserve Board serves as the primary “umbrella” regulator of financial holding companies, with supervisory authority over each parent company and limited authority over its subsidiaries. Expanded financial activities of financial holding companies generally will be regulated according to the type of such financial activity: banking activities by banking regulators, securities activities by securities regulators and insurance activities by insurance regulators. The Modernization Act also imposes additional restrictions and heightened disclosure requirements regarding private information collected by financial institutions.

Capital Requirements. The Federal Reserve Board uses capital adequacy guidelines in its examination and regulation of bank holding companies. If capital falls below minimum guidelines, a bank holding company may, among other things, be denied approval to acquire or establish additional banks or non-bank businesses.

The Federal Reserve Board’s capital guidelines establish the following minimum regulatory capital requirements for bank holding companies:

The leverage capital requirement consists of a minimum ratio of total capital to total assets of 4%4.0%, with an expressed expectation that banking organizations generally should operate above such minimum level. The risk-based requirement consists of a minimum ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8%8.0%, of which at least one-half must be Tier 1 capital (which consists principally of shareholders’ equity). The Tier 1 leverage requirement consists of a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3%3.0% for the most highly-rated companies, with minimum requirements of 4%4.0% to 5%5.0% for all others.

The risk-based and leverage standards presently used by the Federal Reserve Board are minimum requirements, and higher capital levels will be required if warranted by the particular circumstances or risk profiles of individual banking organizations. 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.

Source of Strength for Subsidiaries. Bank holding companies are required to serve as a source of financial strength for their depository institution subsidiaries, and, if their depository institution subsidiaries become undercapitalized, bank holding companies may be required to guarantee the subsidiaries’ compliance with capital restoration plans filed with their bank regulators, subject to certain limits.

Dividends. As a bank holding company that does not, as an entity, currently engage in separate business activities of a material nature, the Registrant’s ability to pay cash dividends depends upon the cash dividends the Registrant receives from the Bank. At present, the Registrant’s only source of income is dividends paid by the Bank and interest earned on any investment securities the Registrant holds. The Registrant must pay all of its operating expenses from funds it receives from the Bank. Therefore, shareholders may receive dividends from the Registrant only to the extent that funds are available after payment of our operating expenses and the board decides to declare a dividend. In addition, the Federal Reserve Board generally prohibits bank holding companies from paying dividends except out of operating earnings where the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the bank holding company’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition.

The FDIC Improvement Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies biennially to review risk-based capital standards to ensure that they adequately address interest rate risk, concentration of credit risk and risks from non-traditional activities and, since adoption of the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, to do so taking into account the size and activities of depository institutions and the avoidance of undue reporting burdens. In 1995, the agencies adopted regulations requiring as part of the assessment of an institution’s capital adequacy the consideration of (a) identified concentrations of credit risks, (b) the exposure of the institution to a decline in the value of its capital due to changes in interest rates and (c) the application of revised conversion factors and netting rules on the institution’s potential future exposure from derivative transactions.

In addition, the agencies in September 1996 adopted amendments to their respective risk-based capital standards to require banks and bank holding companies having significant exposure to market risk arising from, among other things, trading of debt instruments, (1) to measure that risk using an internal value-at-risk model conforming to the parameters established in the agencies’ standards and (2) to maintain a commensurate amount of additional capital to reflect such risk. The new rules were adopted effective January 1, 1997, with compliance mandatory from and after January 1, 1998.

Under the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989 (“FIRREA”), depository institutions are liable to the FDIC for losses suffered or anticipated by the FDIC in connection with the default of a commonly controlled depository institution or any assistance provided by the FDIC to such an institution in danger of default.

Subsidiary banks of a bank holding company are subject to certain quantitative and qualitative restrictions imposed by the Federal Reserve Act on any extension of credit to, or purchase of assets from, or letter of credit on behalf of, the bank holding company or its subsidiaries, and on the investment in or acceptance of stocks or securities of such holding company or its subsidiaries as collateral for loans. In addition, provisions of the Federal Reserve Act and Federal Reserve Board regulations limit the amounts of, and establish required procedures and credit standards with respect to, loans and other extensions of credit to officers, directors and principal shareholders of the Bank, the Registrant, any subsidiary of the Registrant and related interests of such persons. Moreover, subsidiaries of bank holding companies are prohibited from engaging in certain tying arrangements (with the holding company or any of its subsidiaries) in connection with any extension of credit, lease or sale of property or furnishing of services.

Any loans by a bank holding company to a subsidiary bank are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of the subsidiary bank. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary bank would be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment. This priority would also apply to guarantees of capital plans under the FDIC Improvement Act.

Incentive Compensation Policies and Restrictions.In July 2010, the federal banking agencies issued guidance which applies to all banking organizations supervised by the agencies. Pursuant to the guidance, to be consistent with safety and soundness principles, a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should: (1) provide employees with incentives that appropriately balance risk and reward; (2) be compatible with effective controls and risk management; and (3) be supported by strong corporate governance including active and effective oversight by the banking organization’s board of directors. Monitoring methods and processes used by a banking organization should be commensurate with the size and complexity of the organization and its use of incentive compensation.

In addition, in March 2011, the federal banking agencies, along with the Federal Housing Finance Agency, and the Securities and Exchange Commission, released a proposed rule intended to ensure that regulated financial institutions design their incentive compensation arrangements to account for risk. Specifically, the proposed rule would require compensation practices of the Registrant and the Bank to be consistent with the following principles: (1) compensation arrangements appropriately balance risk and financial reward; (2) such arrangements are compatible with effective controls and risk management; and (3) such arrangements are supported by strong corporate governance. In addition, financial institutions with $1 billion or more in assets would be required to have policies and procedures to ensure compliance with the rule and would be required to submit annual reports to their primary federal regulator. The comment period has closed and a final rule has not yet been published.

Future Legislation

Registrant cannot predict what legislation might be enacted or what regulations might be adopted, or if enacted or adopted, the effect thereof on Registrant’s operations.

Item 1A – RISK FACTORS

Not required for smaller reporting companies.

Item 1B – UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

Not required for smaller reporting companies.

Item 2 - Properties

The following table sets forth the location of the main office, branch offices, and operation centers of the Registrant’s subsidiary depository institution, New Century Bank, as well as certain information relating to these offices.

Item 3 - Legal Proceedings

As of December 31, 20122013 there are no material pending legal proceedings to which the Registrant, or any of its subsidiaries, is a party, or of which any of their property is the subject.

Item 4 – mine safety disclosureS

None.

Part II

Item 5 - Market for registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

OurThe Registrant’s common stock is quoted on the NASDAQ Global Market under the trading symbol “NCBC.” Raymond James & Associates, Inc., Morgan Keegan & Company, McKinnon & Company, Automated Trading Desk Financial Services, B-Trade Services, Citadel Securities, Domestic Securities, Hill Thompson Magid & Company, Hudson Securities, J. P. Morgan Securities, Knight Capital Americas, L.P., Monroe Securities,Financial Partners, UBS Securities, Sandler O’Neill & Partners, L.P., and Scott & Stringfellow provide bid and ask quotes for our common stock. At December 31, 2012,2013, there were 6,913,6366,921,352 shares of common stock outstanding, which were held by 1,3621,329 shareholders of record.

The Registrant did not declare or pay cash dividends during 20122013 and 20112012 and it is not currently anticipated that cash dividends will be declared and paid to shareholders at any time in the foreseeable future. See Item 12 of this report for disclosure regarding securities authorized for issuance under equity compensation plans required by Item 201(d) of Regulation S-K.

ITEM 6 – SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

Item 7 - ManageMent’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation

The following presents management’s discussion and analysis of our financial condition and results of operations and should be read in conjunction with the financial statements and related notes contained elsewhere in this annual report. This discussion contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ significantly from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, many of which are beyond our control. The following discussion is intended to assist in understanding the financial condition and results of operations of New Century Bancorp, Inc. Because New Century Bancorp, Inc. has no material operations and conducts no business on its own other than owning its consolidated subsidiary, New Century Bank, and its unconsolidated subsidiary, New Century Statutory Trust I, the discussion contained in this Management's Discussion and Analysis concerns primarily the business of the bank subsidiary. However, for ease of reading and because the financial statements are presented on a consolidated basis, New Century Bancorp, Inc and New Century Bank are collectively referred to herein as the Company unless otherwise noted.

DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

The Company is a commercial bank holding company that was incorporated on September 19, 2003 and has one wholly-owned banking subsidiary, New Century Bank (referred to as the “Bank”), which became a subsidiary of the Company as part of a holding company reorganization. In September 2004, the Company formed New Century Statutory Trust I, which issued trust preferred securities to provide additional capital for general corporate purposes, including the current and future expansion of the Bank. New Century Statutory Trust I is not a consolidated subsidiary of the Company. The Company’s only business activity is the ownership of the Bank. Accordingly, this discussion focuses primarily on the financial condition and operating results of the Bank.

The Bank’s lending activities are oriented to the consumer/retail customer as well as to the small-to-medium sized businesses located in southeastern North Carolina. The Bank offers the standard complement of commercial, consumer, and mortgage lending products, as well as the ability to structure products to fit specialized needs. The deposit services offered by the Bank include small business and personal checking, savings accounts and certificates of deposit. The Bank concentrates on customer relationships in building its customer deposit base and competes aggressively in the area of transaction accounts.

FINANCIAL CONDITION

DECEMBER 31, 20122013 AND 20112012

Overview

Total assets at December 31, 20122013 were $585.5$525.6 million, which represents a decrease of $4.2$59.8 million or (0.7)(10.2)% from December 31, 2011.2012. Interest earning assets at December 31, 20122013 totaled $549.5$475.9 million and consisted of $367.9$339.4 million in net loans, $81.5$83.8 million in investment securities, $97.1$49.7 million in overnight investments and interest-bearing deposits in other banks and $3.0 million in federal funds sold. Total deposits and shareholders’ equity at December 31, 20122013 were $498.6$448.5 million and $54.2$56.0 million, respectively.

Investment Securities

Investment securities increased to $81.5$83.8 million at December 31, 2013 from $67.9$81.5 million at December 31, 2012. The Company’s investment portfolio at December 31, 2012,2013, which consisted of U.S. government agency securities, U.S. government sponsored entities agency securities (GSE’s), mortgage-backed securities and bank-qualified municipal securities, aggregated $81.5$83.8 million with a weighted average taxable equivalent yield of 2.25%2.18%. The Company also holds an investment of $973,000$796,000 in Federal Home Loan Bank Stock with a weighted average yield of 1.66%2.58%. The investment portfolio increased $13.6$2.3 million in 2012,2013, the result of $42.1$25.9 million in purchases, $26.9$20.8 million of maturities and prepayments and a decrease of $1.1$2.8 million in the market value of securities held available for sale and net accretion of investment discounts. There was a sale of $500,000 to fund a Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) investment.

The following table summarizes the securities portfolio by major classification:

Securities Portfolio Composition

(dollars in thousands)

Loans Receivable

The loan portfolio at December 31, 20122013 totaled $367.9$346.5 million and was comprisedcomposed of $330.3$309.1 million in real estate loans, $29.3$29.1 million in commercial and industrial loans, and $8.7$8.8 million in loans to individuals. Also included in loans outstanding is $452,000$550,000 in net deferred loan fees.

The following table describes the Company’s loan portfolio composition by category:

During 2012,2013, loans receivable decreased by $47.6$20.5 million, or 11.7%5.7%, to $360.0$339.4 million as of December 31, 2012.2013. The decline in loans during the year is attributable to reduced loan demand in the Company’s markets.

The majority of the Company’s loan portfolio is comprised of real estate loans. This category, which includes both commercial and consumer loan balances, decreased from 90.3%89.7% of the portfolio at December 31, 20112012 to 89.7%89.2% at December 31, 2012.2013. The decrease in the real estate loan category decreased by $46.8 million duringwas the year as result of a $22.6$17.8 million decrease in constructioncommercial real estate loans, an $11.1a $6.0 million decrease in 1 to 4 family residential loans, and a $5.1 decrease in commercial real estate loans, a $4.1$2.7 million decrease in HELOC loans. These decreases were partially offset by increases in construction loans of $5.1 million and a $3.9 million decrease$215,000 increase in multi-family residential loans. The most significant shift in the overall portfolio was that of the construction loan category which was primarily the result of loan repayments that exceeded the loan demand from borrowers.

Management monitors trends in the loan portfolio that may indicate more than normal risk. A discussion of other risk factors follows. Some loans or groups of loans may contain one or more of these individual loan risk factors. Therefore, an accumulation of the amounts or percentages of the individual loan risk factors may not necessarily be an indication of the cumulative risk in the total loan portfolio.

Acquisition, Development and Construction Loans

The Company originates construction loans for the purpose of acquisition, development, and construction of both residential and commercial properties (“ADC” loans).

Acquisition, Development and Construction Loans

As of December 31, 20122013

(dollars in thousands)

Management closely monitors the ADC portfolio as to collateral value, funding based on project completeness, and the performance of similar loans in the Company’s market area.

Included in ADC loans and residential real estate loans as of December 31, 2013 were certain loans that exceeded regulatory loan to value (“LTV”) guidelines. The Company had $3.7 million in non 1-4 residential loans that exceeded the regulatory LTV limits and $6.1 million of 1-4 residential loans that exceeded the regulatory LTV limits. The total amount of these loans represented 13.8% of total risk-based capital as of December 31, 2013, which is less than the 100% maximum allowed. These loans may provide more than ordinary risk to the Company if the real estate market continues to soften for both market activity and collateral valuations.

Acquisition, Development and Construction Loans

As of December 31, 2012

(dollars in thousands)

Included in ADC loans and residential real estate loans as of December 31, 2012 were certain loans that exceeded regulatory loan to value (“LTV”) guidelines. The Company had $8.3 million in non 1-4 family residential loans that exceeded the regulatory LTV limits and $8.6 million of 1-4 family residential loans that exceeded the regulatory LTV limits. The total amount of these loans represented 25.7% of total risk-based capital as of December 31, 2012, which is less than the 100% maximum allowed. These loans may provide more than ordinary risk to the Company if the real estate market continues to soften for both market activity and collateral valuations.

Acquisition, Development and Construction Loans

As of December 31, 2011

(dollars in thousands)