2021 SB Financial Group, Inc. 10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

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

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 20172021

OR

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

For the transition period from ____________________ to _____________________

Commission File Number 001-36785

SB FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code:(419) 783-8950

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

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

Not Applicable

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

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate website, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes ☒   No ☐

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. Non-Accelerated Filer ☒ Smaller Reporting Company ☒

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

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. Yes ☐   No ☒

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

The aggregate market value of the common shares of the registrant held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common shares were last sold as of the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter was $78.0$130.0 million.

The number of common shares of the registrant outstanding at February 22, 20182022 was 6,459,312.7,211,549.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the Registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held on April 18, 201820, 2022 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

SB FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.

20172021 ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Signatures and Certifications

PART I

Certain statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K which are not statements of historical fact constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995.See “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Information” underItem 1A. Risk Factors on page 1512 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

General

SB Financial Group, Inc., an Ohio corporation (the “Company”), is a bankfinancial holding company registeredsubject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and is subject to regulationinspection, examination and supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve Board”). The Company was organized in 1983. The executive offices of the Company are located at 401 Clinton Street, Defiance, Ohio 43512.

Through its direct and indirect subsidiaries, the Company is engaged in a variety of financial activities, including commercial banking, item processing, and wealth management services, as explained in more detail below.

State Bank and Trust Company

The State Bank and Trust Company (“State Bank”) is an Ohio state-chartered bank and wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. State Bank offers a full range of commercial banking services, including checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts and time certificates of deposit; automatic teller machines; commercial, consumer, agricultural and residential mortgage loans; personal and corporate trust services; commercial leasing; bank credit card services; safe deposit box rentals; Internetinternet banking; private client group services; and other personalized banking services. The trust and financial services division of State Bank offers various trust and financial services, including asset management services for individuals and corporate employee benefit plans, as well as brokerage services through Cetera Investment Services, an unaffiliated company. State Bank presently operates nineteen22 banking centers, located within the Ohio counties of Allen, Defiance, Franklin, Fulton, Hancock, Lucas, Paulding, WoodWilliams and Williams,Wood, and one banking center located in Allen County, Indiana. State Bank also presently operates sevenfive loan production offices, located in Cuyahoga, Franklin Lucas and SenecaLucas Counties, Ohio, KosciuskoHamilton and Steuben County,Counties, Indiana, and Monroe County, Michigan. At December 31, 2017,2021, State Bank had 234260 full-time equivalent employees.

SBFG Title, LLC

SBFG Title, LLC dba Peak Title Agency (“SBFG Title”) was formed as an Ohio limited liability company in March 2019 and purchased all of the assets and real estate of an Ohio-based title agency effective March 15, 2019. SBFG Title provides title insurance and operates three locations located within the Ohio Counties of Franklin and Williams, and in Hamilton County, Indiana. At December 31, 2021, SBFG Title had eight full-time equivalent employees.

RFCBC

RFCBC, Inc. (“RFCBC”) is an Ohio corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of the Company that was incorporated in August 2004. RFCBC operates as a loan subsidiary in servicing and working out problem loans.loans and is presently inactive. At December 31, 2017,2021, RFCBC had no employees.

Rurbanc Data Services

Rurbanc Data Services, Inc. dba RDSI Banking Systems (“RDSI”) has beenwas formed in operation since 1964 and became an Ohio corporation in June 1976. In September 2006, RDSI acquired Diverse Computer Marketers, Inc. (“DCM”), which was merged into RDSI effective December 31, 2007. At December 31, 2017, RDSI/DCM had 6 full-time equivalent employees. Effective January 1, 2018, the Company completed the sale of the customer contracts and certain other assets of RDSI’s remaining check and statement processing business operated through the DCM division. As a result of the sale, RDSI is presently inactive and had no employees at December 31, 2021.

Rurban Mortgage Company

Rurban Mortgage Company (“RMC”) is an Ohio corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of State Bank. RMC is a mortgage company; however, itcompany and is presently inactive. At December 31, 2017,2021, RMC had no employees.

SBT Insurance

SBT Insurance, LLC (“SBI”) is an Ohio corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of State Bank. SBI is an insurance company that engages in the sale of insurance products to retail and commercial customers of State Bank. At December 31, 2017,2021, SBI had no employees.

SB Captive

SB Captive, Inc. (“SB Captive”) is a Nevada corporation and wholly owned subsidiary of SB Financial Group, Inc. SB Captive is a self-insurance company that provides coverage to State Bank and SB Financial Group. The purpose of the SB Captive is to mitigate insurance risk by participating in a pool with other banks. At December 31, 2021, SB Captive had no employees.

Rurban Statutory Trust II

Rurban Statutory Trust II (“RST II”) is a trust that was organized in August 2005. In September 2005, RST II closed a pooled private offering of 10,000 Capital Securities with a liquidation amount of $1,000 per security. The proceeds of the offering were loaned to the Company in exchange for junior subordinated debentures with terms similar to the Capital Securities. The sole assets of RST II are the junior subordinated debentures and the back-up obligations, which in the aggregate, constitute a full and unconditional guarantee by the Company of the obligations of RST II under the Capital Securities.

Competition

The Company experiences significant competition in attracting depositors and borrowers. Competition in lending activities comes principally from other commercial banks in the lending areas of State Bank, and to a lesser extent, from savings associations, insurance companies, governmental agencies, credit unions, securities brokerage firms and pension funds. The primary factors in competing for loans are interest rates charged and overall banking services.

State Bank’s competition for deposits comes from other commercial banks, savings associations, money market funds and credit unions as well as from insurance companies and securities brokerage firms. The primary factors in competing for deposits are interest rates paid on deposits and convenience of office location. State Bank operates in the highly competitive wealth management services field and its competition consists primarily of other bank wealth management departments.

Prior to January 1, 2018, RDSI operated in the check and statement processing service business, which consists primarily of item processing providers and commercial printers. The primary factors in competition are price and printing capability.

Supervision and Regulation

The following is a descriptionsummary discussion of the significant statutes and regulations applicable to the Company and its subsidiaries. The descriptionThis discussion is qualified in its entirety by reference to the full text of the statutes, regulations and policies that are described. Also, such statutes, regulations and policies are continually under review by the U.S. Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company or its subsidiaries could have a material effect on our business.

Regulation of Bank Holding Companies and Their Subsidiaries in General

The Company is a bankfinancial holding company and, as such, is subject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “Bank Holding Company Act”). The Bank Holding Company Act requires the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board (“FRB”) before a bank holding company may acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5 percent of the voting shares of any bank (unless the bank is already majority owned by the bank holding company), acquire all or substantially all of the assets of another bank or bank holding company, or merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. Subject to certain exceptions, the Bank Holding Company Act also prohibits a bank holding company from acquiring 5 percent or more of the voting shares of any company that is not a bank and from engaging in any business other than banking or managing or controlling banks. The primary exception to this prohibition allows a bank holding company to own shares in any company the activities of which the FRB had determined, as of November 19, 1999, to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto.

The Company is subject to the reporting requirements of, and examination and regulation by, the FRB.Federal Reserve Board (the “FRB”). The FRB has extensive enforcement authority over bank holding companies, including, without limitation, the ability to assess civil money penalties, issue cease and desist or removal orders, and require that a bank holding company divest subsidiaries, including its subsidiary banks. In general, the FRB may initiate enforcement actions for violations of laws and regulations and for unsafe or unsound practices. A bank holding company and its subsidiaries are prohibited from engaging in certain tying arrangements in connection with extensions of credit and/or the provision of other property or services to a customer by the bank holding company or its subsidiaries.

The Bank Holding Company Act requires the prior approval of the FRB before a financial or bank holding company may acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5 percent of the voting shares of any bank (unless the bank is already majority owned by the bank holding company), acquire all or substantially all of the assets of another bank or another financial or bank holding company, or merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. Subject to certain exceptions, the Bank Holding Company Act also prohibits a financial or bank holding company from acquiring 5 percent or more of the voting shares of any company that is not a bank and from engaging in any business other than banking or managing or controlling banks. The primary exception to this prohibition allows a bank holding company to own shares in any company the activities of which the FRB had determined, as of November 19, 1999, to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto.

In April 2020, the FRB adopted a final rule to revise its regulations related to determinations of whether a company has the ability to exercise a controlling influence over another company for purposes of the Bank Holding Company Act. The final rule expands and codifies the presumptions for use in such determinations. By codifying the presumptions, the final rule provides greater transparency on the types of relationships that the FRB generally views as supporting a facts-and-circumstances determination that one company controls another company. The FRB’s final rule applies to questions of control under the Bank Holding Company Act, but does not extend to the Change in Bank Control Act.

As a result of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999, also known as the Financial Services Modernization Act of 1999, which amended the Bank Holding Company Act, bank holding companies that are financial holding companies may engage in any activity, or acquire and retain the shares of a company engaged in any activity, that is either (1) financial in nature or incidental to such financial activity (as determined by the FRB in consultation with the Secretary of the Treasury), or (2) complementary to a financial activity, and that does not pose a substantial risk to the safety and soundness of depository institutions or the financial system generally. Activities that are financial in nature include securities underwriting dealing and market-making, insurance underwriting and agency, and merchant banking activities. On January 2, 2019, the Company elected, and received approval from the FRB, to become a financial holding company.

Various requirements and restrictions under the laws of the United States and the State of Ohio affect the operations of State Bank, including requirements to maintain reserves against deposits, restrictions on the nature and amount of loans that may be made and the interest that may be charged thereon, restrictions relating to investments and other activities, limitations on credit exposure to correspondent banks, limitations on activities based on capital and surplus, limitations on payment of dividends, and limitations on branching.

Various consumer laws and regulations also affect the operations of State Bank. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”), which regulates consumer financial products and services and certain financial services providers. The CFPB is authorized to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices and ensures consistent enforcement of laws so that consumers have access to fair, transparent and competitive markets for consumer financial products and services. Since it was established, the CFPB has exercised extensively its rulemaking and interpretative authority.

The Federal Home Loan Banks (“FHLBs”Bank (the “FHLB”) provide credit to their members in the form of advances. As a member of the FHLB of Cincinnati, State Bank must maintain certain minimum investments in the capital stock of the FHLB of Cincinnati. State Bank was in compliance with these requirements at December 31, 2017.2021.

Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act

On May 25, 2018, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act (the “Regulatory Relief Act”) was enacted, which repealed or modified certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and eased restrictions on all but the largest banks (those with consolidated assets in excess of $250 billion). Bank holding companies with consolidated assets of less than $100 billion, including the Company, are no longer subject to enhanced prudential standards. The Regulatory Relief Act also relieves bank holding companies and banks with consolidated assets of less than $100 billion, including the Company, from certain record-keeping, reporting and disclosure requirements. Certain other regulatory requirements applied only to banks with consolidated assets in excess of $50 billion and so did not apply to the Company even before the enactment of the Regulatory Relief Act.

Restrictions on Dividends

There can be no assurance as to the amount of dividends which may be declared in future periods with respect to the common shares or depository shares of the Company, since such dividends are subject to the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors, cash needs, and general business conditions, dividends from the Company’s subsidiaries and applicable governmental regulations and policies.

The ability of the Company to obtain funds for the payment of dividends and for other cash requirements is largely dependent on the amount of dividends that may be declared by State Bank and itsthe Company’s other subsidiaries. State Bank may not pay dividends to the Company if, after paying such dividends, it would fail to meet the required minimum levels under the risk-based capital guidelines and the minimum leverage ratio requirements. In addition, State Bank must obtain the approval of the FRB and the Ohio Division of Financial Institutions (“ODFI”(the “ODFI”) if a dividend in any year would cause the total dividends for that year to exceed the sum of the current year’s net profits and the retained net profits for the preceding two years, less required transfers to surplus. At December 31, 2017,2021, State Bank had $27.4 million of excess earnings over the preceding three years.

Payment of dividends by State Bank may be restricted at any time at the discretion of the regulatory authorities, if they deem such dividends to constitute an unsafe and/or unsound banking practice. Moreover, the FRB expects the Company to serve as a source of strength to its subsidiary banks, which may require it to retain capital for further investment in the subsidiary, rather than for dividends to shareholders of the Company.

Affiliate The Company’s ability to pay dividends on its shares is also conditioned upon the payment, on a current basis, of quarterly interest payments on the subordinated debentures underlying the Company’s trust preferred securities. In addition, under the terms of the Company’s fixed-to-floating rate subordinated debt, the Company’s ability to pay dividends on its shares is conditioned upon the Company continuing to make required principal and interest payments, and not incurring an event of default, with respect to the subordinated debt.

Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders

The Company and State Bank are separate and distinct legal entities. The Federal Reserve Board’sFRB’s Regulation W and various other legal limitations restrict State Bank from lending funds to, or engaging in other “covered transactions” with, the Company (or any other affiliate), generally limiting such covered transactions with any one affiliate to 10 percent of State Bank’s capital and surplus and limiting all such covered transactions with all affiliates to 20 percent of State Bank’s capital and surplus. Covered transactions, including extensions of credit, sales of securities or assets and provision of services, also must be on terms and conditions consistent with safe and sound banking practices, including credit standards, that are substantially the same or at least as favorable to State Bank as those prevailing at the time for transactions with unaffiliated companies.

A bank’s authority to extend credit to executive officers, directors and greater than 10 percent shareholders, as well as entities such persons control, is subject to Sections 22(g) and 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation O promulgated thereunder by the Federal Reserve Board.FRB. Among other things, these loans must be made on terms (including interest rates charged and collateral required) that are substantially the same as those offered to unaffiliated individuals or be made as part of a benefit or compensation program and on terms widely available to employees, and must not involve a greater than normal risk of repayment. In addition, the amount of loans a bank may make to these persons is based, in part, on the bank’s capital position, and certain approval procedures must be followed in making loans which exceed specified amounts.

Federally insured banks are subject, with certain exceptions, to certain additional restrictions (including collateralization) on extensions of credit to their parent holding companies or other affiliates, on investments in the stock or other securities of affiliates and on the taking of such stock or securities as collateral from any borrower. In addition, such banks are prohibited from engaging in certain tying arrangements in connection with any extension of credit or the providing of any property or service.

The FRB has adopted risk-based capital guidelines for bank holding companiesCOVID-19 Legislation and for state member banks,Initiatives

In response to the novel COVID-19 pandemic (“COVID-19”), the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act of 2020, as amended (the “CARES Act”), was signed into law on March 27, 2020, to provide national emergency economic relief measures. Many of the CARES Act’s programs are dependent upon the direct involvement of U.S. financial institutions, such as the Company and State Bank. The risk-based capital guidelines include both a definitionBank, and have been implemented through rules and guidance adopted by federal departments and agencies, including the U.S. Department of capital and a framework for calculating risk-weighted assets by assigning assets and off-balance-sheet items to broad risk categories.

In July 2013,Treasury, the FRB and theother federal banking agencies, published final rules that substantially amended the regulatory risk-based capital rules applicable toincluding those with direct supervisory jurisdiction over the Company and State Bank. Furthermore, as COVID-19 evolves, federal regulatory authorities continue to issue additional guidance with respect to the implementation, lifecycle, and eligibility requirements for the various CARES Act programs as well as industry-specific recovery procedures for COVID-19. In addition, it is possible that Congress will enact supplementary COVID-19 response legislation, including amendments to the CARES Act or new bills comparable in scope to the CARES Act. For example, on December 27, 2020, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (the “CAA”) was signed into law, which, among other things, allowed certain banks to temporarily postpone implementation of the current expected credit loss model (accounting standard), which is described below. The Company is continuing to assess the impact of the CARES Act and other statues, regulations and supervisory guidance related to COVID-19.

The CARES Act amended the loan program of the Small Business Administration (the “SBA”), in which State Bank participates, to create a guaranteed, unsecured loan program, the Paycheck Protection Program (“PPP”), to fund operational costs of eligible businesses, organizations and self-employed persons during COVID-19. These rules implementloans are eligible to be forgiven if certain conditions are satisfied and are fully guaranteed by the “Basel III”SBA. In June 2020, the Paycheck Protection Program Flexibility Act was enacted, which, among other things, gave borrowers additional time and flexibility to use PPP loan proceeds. After previously being extended by Congress, the application deadline for PPP loans expired on May 31, 2021. No collateral or personal guarantees were required for PPP loans. In addition, neither the government nor lenders have been permitted to charge the recipients of PPP loans any fees. On December 27, 2020, the President signed into law omnibus federal spending and economic stimulus legislation titled the “Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021” that included the Economic Aid to Hard-Hit Small Businesses, Nonprofits, and Venues Act (the “HHSB Act”). Among other things, the HHSB Act renewed the PPP, allocating $284.45 billion for both new first-time PPP loans under the existing PPP and the expansion of existing PPP loans for certain qualified, existing PPP borrowers. In addition to extending and amending the PPP, the HHSB Act also creates a new grant program for “shuttered venue operators”. As a participating lender in the PPP, State Bank continues to monitor legislative, regulatory, and supervisory developments related thereto.

On September 29, 2020, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a final rule that neutralizes the regulatory capital reforms and changes requiredliquidity coverage ratio effects of participating in certain COVID-19 liquidity facilities due to the fact there is no credit or market risk in association with exposures pledged to such facilities. As a result, the final rule supports the flow of credit to households and businesses affected by COVID-19.

On December 2, 2020, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued an interim final rule that provides temporary relief for specified community banking organizations related to certain regulations and reporting requirements as a result, in large part, of their growth in size from the response to COVID-19. Community banking organizations are subject to different rules and requirements based on their risk profile and asset size. Due to their involvement in federal COVID-19 response programs (such as the PPP) and other lending that supports the U.S. economy, many community banking organizations experienced rapid and unexpected increases in their sizes, which were generally expected to be temporary. The temporary increase in size could have subjected community banking organizations to new regulations or reporting requirements. However, community banking organizations, such as the Company and State Bank, under $10.0 billion in total assets as of December 31, 2019 were permitted to use asset data as of December 31, 2019, to determine the applicability of various regulatory asset thresholds during calendar years 2020 and 2021. As such, it was not until January 1, 2022 that asset growth again triggered new regulatory requirements for these community banking organizations.

Regulatory Capital

The risk-based capital guidelines adopted by the Dodd-Frank Act. “Basel III” refers to various documents releasedfederal banking agencies are based on the “International Convergence of Capital Measurement and Capital Standard” (Basel I), published by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision.

EffectiveSupervision (the “Basel Committee”). In July 2013, the United States banking regulators issued new capital rules applicable to smaller banking organizations which also implement certain of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act (the “Basel III Capital Rules”). Community banking organizations, including the Company and State Bank, began transitioning to the new rules on January 1, 2015. The new minimum capital requirements became effective on January 1, 2015, State Bank and the Company became subject to new capital regulations under Basel III (with some provisions transitioned into full effectiveness over two to four years). The new requirements createwhereas a new required ratio for common equity Tier 1 (“CET1”) capital, increases the leverage and Tier 1 capital ratios, changes the risk-weights of certain assets for purposes of the risk-based capital ratios, creates an additional capital conservation buffer over the requiredand deductions from common equity capital ratiosphased in from January 1, 2016 through January 1, 2019, and changes what qualifies asmost deductions from common equity tier 1 capital for purposes of meeting these various capital requirements. These new capital requirements are as follows: leverage ratio of 4 percent of adjusted total assets, totalphased in from January 1, 2015 through January 1, 2019.

The Basel III Capital Rules include (a) a minimum common equity tier 1 capital ratio of 8 percent of risk-weighted assets and4.5%, (b) a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5 percent of risk-weighted assets. In addition, the Company will have to meet the new6.0%, (c) a minimum CET1total capital ratio of 4.5 percent8.0%, and (d) a minimum leverage ratio of risk-weighted assets. CET1 consists4.0%.

Common equity for the common equity tier 1 capital ratio generally ofincludes common stock (plus related surplus), retained earnings, and accumulated other comprehensive income (AOCI)(unless an institution elects to exclude such income from regulatory capital), and limited amounts of minority interests in the form of common stock, subject to applicable regulatory adjustments and deductions.

Tier 1 capital generally includes common equity as defined for the common equity tier 1 capital ratio, plus certain adjustments. Thenon-cumulative preferred stock and related surplus, cumulative preferred stock and related surplus, trust preferred securities that have been grandfathered (but which are not permitted going forward), and limited amounts of minority interests in the form of additional Tier 1 capital conservation buffer is being phasedinstruments, less certain deductions.

Tier 2 capital, which can be included in starting in 2016,the total capital ratio, generally consists of other preferred stock and failure to maintain the required capital conservation buffer will limit the abilitysubordinated debt meeting certain conditions plus limited amounts of the Companyallowance for loan and lease losses, subject to pay dividends, repurchase shares or pay discretionary bonuses.specified eligibility criteria, less applicable deductions.

Mortgage servicing rights,The deductions from common equity tier 1 capital include goodwill and other intangibles, certain deferred tax assets, mortgage-servicing assets above certain levels, gains on sale in connection with a securitization, investments in a banking organization’s own capital instruments and investments in the capital of unconsolidated subsidiaries over designated percentagesfinancial institutions (above certain levels).

Under the guidelines, capital is compared to the relative risk related to the balance sheet. To derive the risk included in the balance sheet, one of common stockseveral risk weights is applied to different balance sheet and off-balance sheet assets, primarily based on the relative credit risk of the counterparty. The capital amounts and classification are deducted from capital,also subject to a two-year transition period. In addition, Tier 1 capital includes AOCI, which includes all unrealized gainsqualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings and losses on available for sale debt and equity securities, subject to a two-year transition period. State Bank decided in the first quarter of 2015 to permanently opt-out of the inclusion of AOCI in its capital calculations to reduce the impact of market volatility on its regulatory capital levels.other factors.

The new requirements under Basel III Capital Rules also include changes inplace restrictions on the risk-weightspayment of capital distributions, including dividends, and certain assetsdiscretionary bonus payments to better reflect credit risk and other risk exposures. These include a 150 percent risk weight (up from 100 percent) for certain high volatility commercial real estate acquisition, development and construction loans and for non-residential mortgage loans that are 90 days past due or otherwise in nonaccrual status; a 20 percent (up from 0 percent) credit conversion factor forexecutive officers if the unused portion of a commitment with an original maturity of one year or less; a 250 percent risk-weight (up from 100 percent) for mortgage servicing and deferred tax assets that arebanking organization does not deducted from capital; and increased risk-weights (0 percent to 600 percent) for equity exposures.

In addition to the minimum CET1, Tier 1 and total capital ratios, State Bank will have to maintainhold a capital conservation buffer consisting of additional CET1 capital equal togreater than 2.5 percent composed of risk-weighted assetscommon equity tier 1 capital above each of the requiredits minimum risk-based capital levelsrequirements, or if its eligible retained income is negative in order to avoid limitations on paying dividends, engaging in share repurchasesthat quarter and paying certain discretionary bonuses. This newits capital conservation buffer requirement beganratio was less than 2.5 percent at the beginning of the quarter.

In September 2019, the FRB, along with other federal bank regulatory agencies, issued a final rule, effective January 1, 2020, that gave community banks, including the Company, the option to phasecalculate a simple leverage ratio to measure capital adequacy if the community banks met certain requirements. Under the rule, a community bank was eligible to elect the Community Bank Leverage Ratio (“CBLR”) framework if it had less than $10 billion in beginning in January 2016 at 0.625 percenttotal consolidated assets, limited amounts of risk-weightedcertain assets and increasing each year until fully implemented in January 2019. The capital conservation buffer as of December 31, 2017 is 1.25 percent.

Under the new Basel III standards, in order to be considered well-capitalized, State Bank is required to have at least a CET1 ratio of 6.5 percent, a Tier 1 ratio of 8 percent, a total capital ratio of 10 percentoff-balance sheet exposures, and a leverage ratio greater than 9.0%. Qualifying institutions that elected to use the CBLR framework (each, a “CBLR Bank”) and that maintain a leverage ratio of 5 percentgreater than 9.0% will be considered to have satisfied the risk-based and leverage capital requirements in the regulatory agencies’ generally applicable capital rules and to have met the well-capitalized ratio requirements. No CBLR Bank was required to calculate or report risk-based capital, and each CBLR Bank could opt out of the framework at any time, without restriction, by reverting to the generally applicable risk-based capital rule. Pursuant to the CARES Act, on August 26, 2020, the federal banking agencies adopted a final rule that temporarily lowered the CBLR threshold and provided a gradual transition back to the prior level. Specifically, the CBLR threshold was reduced to 8.0% for the remainder of 2020, increased to 8.5% for 2021, and returned to 9.0% on January 1, 2022. This final rule became effective on October 1, 2020. The Company did not be subjectutilize the CBLR in assessing capital adequacy and continued to specifiedfollow existing capital rules.

In December 2018, the federal banking agencies issued a final rule to address regulatory capital treatment of credit loss allowances under the current expected credit loss (“CECL”) model (accounting standard). The rule revises the federal banking agencies’ regulatory capital rules to identify which credit loss allowances under the CECL model are eligible for inclusion in regulatory capital and to provide banking organizations the option to phase in over three years the day-one adverse effects on regulatory capital that may result from the adoption of the CECL model. The Company currently anticipates recording a one-time cumulative effect adjustment upon adoption, and does not anticipate utilizing the three year phase in. The Company expects to maintain risk-based capital ratios in excess of “well-capitalized” after the impact of the one-time cumulative effect adjustment.

At December 31, 2021, State Bank was in compliance with all of the regulatory capital requirements to meet and maintain a specificwhich it was subject. For State Bank’s capital ratio for a capital measure.

State Bank conducted an analysis of the application of these new capital requirements as of December 31, 2017. Based on that analysis, State Bank determined that it met all of these requirements, including the full 2.5 percent capital conservation buffer, and would remain well capitalized if all of these new requirements had fully phased in as of that date. Seeratios, see Note 1318 to the Consolidated Financial Statements under Item of 8 of this report (the “Consolidated Financial Statements”).

The FRB has adopted regulations governing prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of capital deficient and otherwise troubled state-chartered member banks. At each successively lower defined capital category, a bank is subject to more restrictive and numerous mandatory or discretionary regulatory actions or limits, and the FRB has less flexibility in determining how to resolve the problems of the institution. In addition, as noted above, if State Bank does not have the required capital conservation buffer, its ability to pay dividends to the Company would be limited.

In September 2017, the FRB along with othergenerally can downgrade a bank’s capital category, notwithstanding its capital level, if, after notice and opportunity for hearings, the bank regulatory agencies, proposed amendmentsis deemed to their capital requirements to simplify certain aspects of the capital rules for community banks, including State Bank,be engaged in an attemptunsafe or unsound practice, because it has not corrected deficiencies that resulted in it receiving a less than satisfactory examination rating on matters other than capital or it is deemed to reducebe in an unsafe or unsound condition. State Bank’s capital at December 31, 2021, met the regulatory burdenstandards for smaller financial institutions. Because the amendments were proposed withhighest capital category, a request for comments and have not been finalized, we do not yet know what effect the final rules will have on State Bank and its regulatory capital calculations. In November 2017, the federal bank regulatory agencies extended for community banks the existing capital requirements for certain items that were scheduled to changed effective January 1, 2018, in light of the simplification amendments being considered.“well-capitalized” bank.

In April 2015, the Federal Reserve BoardFRB issued a final rule which increased the size limitation for qualifying bank holding companies under the Federal Reserve Board’sFRB’s Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement from $500 million to $1 billion of total consolidated assets. As a result,In August 2018, the FRB issued an interim final rule, as required by the Regulatory Relief Act, to further increase size limitations under the Small Bank Holding Company now qualifiesPolicy Statement to $3 billion of total consolidated assets. The Company continues to qualify under the Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement for exemption from the Federal Reserve Board’sFRB’s consolidated risk-based capital and leverage rules at the holding company level.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”(the “FDIC”)

The FDIC is an independent federal agency, which insures the deposits of federally insured banks and savings associations up to certain prescribed limits and safeguards the safety and soundness of financial institutions. The general insurance limit is $250,000 per separately insured depositor. This insurance is backed by the full faith and credit of the United States Government.

As insurer, the FDIC is authorized to conduct examinations of and to require reporting by insured institutions, including State Bank, to prohibit any insured institution from engaging in any activity the FDIC determines to pose a threat to the deposit insurance fund,Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”), and to take enforcement actions against insured institutions. The FDIC may terminate insurance of deposits of any institution if the FDIC finds that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC or other regulatory agency.

The FDIC assesses a quarterly deposit insurance premium on each insured institution based on risk characteristics of the institution and may also impose special assessments in emergency situations. The premiumssituations, which fund the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”).DIF. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC has established 2.02 percent as the Designated Reserve Ratio (“DRR”), which is the amount in the DIF as a percentage of all DIF insured deposits. In March 2016, the FDIC adopted final rules designed to meet the statutory minimum DRR of 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020, the deadline imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the FDIC to offset the effect on insured institutions with assets of less than $10 billion of the increase in the statutory minimum DRR to 1.35 percent1.35% from the former statutory minimum of 1.15 percent.1.15%. Although the FDIC’s new rules reduced assessment rates on all banks, they imposed a surcharge on banks with assets of $10 billion or more to be paid until the DRR reaches 1.35 percent. The rules also providereached 1.35%.The DRR met the statutory minimum of 1.35% on September 30, 2018. As a result, the previous surcharge imposed on banks with assets of $10 billion or more was lifted. In addition, preliminary assessment credits tohave been determined by the FDIC for banks with assets of less than $1$10 billion, for the portion of their assessments that contributewhich had previously contributed to the increase of the DRR to 1.35 percent.1.35%. On June 30, 2019, the DRR reached 1.40%, and the FDIC applied credits for banks with assets of less than $10 billion (“small bank credits”) beginning September 30, 2019. As of June 30, 2020, the DRR fell below the minimum DRR to 1.30%. As a result, the FDIC adopted a restoration plan requiring the restoration of the DRR to 1.35% within eight years (September 30, 2028). This restoration plan maintained the scheduled assessment rates for all insured institutions. As of September 30, 2021, the DRR was 1.27%. The FDIC rules further changed the method of determining risk-based assessment rates for established banks with less than $10 billion in assets to better ensure that banks taking on greater risks pay more for deposit insurance than banks that take on less risk.

In addition, all FDIC-insured institutions are requiredThe FDIC is authorized to pay assessmentsprohibit any insured institution from engaging in any activity that poses a serious threat to the insurance fund interest payments on bonds issuedand may initiate enforcement actions against a bank, after first giving the institution’s primary regulatory authority an opportunity to take such action. The FDIC may also terminate the deposit insurance of any institution that has engaged in or is engaging in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, order or condition imposed by the Financing Corporation, which was established by the government to recapitalize a predecessor to the DIF. These assessments will continue until the Financing Corporation bonds mature in 2019.FDIC.

Community Reinvestment Act

The Community Reinvestment Act (CRA)(the “CRA”) requires State Bank’s primary federal regulatory agency, the FRB, to assess State Bank’s record in meeting the credit needs of the communities served by State Bank. The FRB assigns one of four ratings: outstanding, satisfactory; needs to improve or substantial noncompliance. The rating assigned to a financial institution is considered in connection with various applications submitted by the financial institution or its holding company to its banking regulators, including applications to acquire another financial institution or to open or close a branch office. In addition, all subsidiary banks of a financial holding company must maintain a satisfactory or outstanding rating in order for the financial holding company to avoid limitations on its activities. State Bank received a satisfactory rating in its most recent CRA examination.

SEC and NASDAQ Regulation

The Company is subject to the jurisdiction of the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”) and certain state securities authorities relating to the offering and sale of its securities. The Company is subject to the registration, reporting and other regulatory requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and the rules adopted by the SEC under those acts. The Company’s common shares are listed on The NASDAQ Capital Market (“NASDAQ”) under the symbol “SBFG”, and the Company’s depository shares, each representing a 1/100^th interest in the Company’s Series A Preferred Shares, are listed on the NASDAQ Capital Market under the symbol “SBFGP”. As a result, the Company is subject to theNASDAQ rules and regulations of The NASDAQ Stock Market, Inc. (“NASDAQ”) applicable to listed companies.

The SEC has adopted rules and regulations governing, among other matters, corporate governance, auditing and accounting, executive compensation, and enhanced and timely disclosure of corporate information. The SEC has also approved corporate governance rules promulgated by NASDAQ. The Company has adopted and implemented a Code of Conduct and Ethics and a copy of that policy can be found on the Company’s website at www.YourSBFinancial.com by first clicking “Corporate Governance” and then “Code of Conduct”. The Company has also adopted charters of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee and the Governance and Nominating Committee, which charters are available on the Company’s website at www.YourSBFinancial.com by first clicking “Corporate Governance” and then “Supplementary Info”.

USA Patriot Act and Anti-Money Laundering Act

The Uniting and Strengthening of America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) gives the United States Government greatergovernment powers over financial institutions to combat moneyaddress terrorist threats through enhanced domestic security measures, expanded surveillance powers, increased information sharing and broadened anti-money laundering and terrorist access torequirements. Title III of the financial system in our country. The Patriot Act requiresencourages information sharing among bank regulatory agencies and law enforcement bodies. Further, certain provisions of Title III impose affirmative obligations on a broad range of financial institutions. Among other requirements, Title III and related regulations require regulated financial institutions to establish programsa program specifying procedures for obtaining identifying information from customers seeking to open new accounts and establish enhanced due diligence policies, procedures and controls designed to detect and report suspicious activity. State Bank has established policies and procedures that State Bank believes comply with the requirements of the Patriot Act.

The Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2020 (the “AMLA”), which amends the Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (the “BSA”), was enacted in January 2021. The AMLA is intended to be a comprehensive reform and modernization to U.S. bank secrecy and anti-money laundering laws. Among other things, it codifies a risk-based approach to anti-money laundering compliance for financial institutions; requires the development of standards for evaluating technology and internal processes for BSA compliance; expands enforcement-related and investigation-related authority, including increasing available sanctions for certain BSA violations and instituting BSA whistleblower initiatives and protections.

Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation

The U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries and regimes, under authority of various laws, including designated foreign countries, nationals and others. OFAC publishes lists of specially designated targets and countries. State Bank is responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of, and transactions with, such targets and countries, prohibiting unlicensed trade and financial transactions with them and reporting blocked transactions after their occurrence. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious financial, legal and reputational consequences, including causing applicable bank regulatory authorities not to approve merger or acquisition transactions when regulatory approval is required or to prohibit such transactions even if approval is not required. Regulatory authorities have imposed cease and desist orders and civil money penalties against institutions found to be violating these obligations.

Executive and Incentive Compensation

The Dodd-Frank Act requires that the federal banking agencies, including the FRB and the FDIC, issue a rule related to incentive-based compensation. No final rule implementing this provision of the Dodd-Frank Act has, as of the date of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, been adopted, but a proposed rule was published in 2016 that expanded upon a prior proposed rule published in 2011. The proposed rule is intended to: (i) prohibit incentive-based payment arrangements that the banking agencies determine could encourage certain financial institutions to take inappropriate risks by providing excessive compensation or that could lead to material financial loss; (ii) require the board of directors of those financial institutions to take certain oversight actions related to incentive-based compensation; and (iii) require those financial institutions to disclose information concerning incentive-based compensation arrangements to the appropriate federal regulator. Although a final rule has not been issued, the Company has undertaken efforts to ensure that the Company’s incentive compensation plans do not encourage inappropriate risks, consistent with the principles identified above.

In June 2010, the Federal Reserve Board,FRB, the OCCOffice of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) and the FDIC issued joint interagencycomprehensive final guidance on incentive compensation policies (the “Joint Guidance”) intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. This principles-basedThe guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should (a)(i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (b)(ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management and (c)(iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors.

In 2011, federal banking regulatory agencies jointly issued These three principles are incorporated into the proposed rules on incentive-basedjoint compensation arrangementsregulations under applicable provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, (the “First Proposed Rules”). described above.

The First Proposed Rules generally would have applied to financial institutions with $1.0 billion or more in assets that maintain incentive-basedFRB and the OCC review, as part of their respective regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements for certain covered employees. In May 2016,of banking organizations, such as the federal bank regulatory agencies approved a second joint notice of proposed rules (the “Second Proposed Joint Rules”) designedCompany and State Bank, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews are tailored to prohibit incentive-based compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risks at financial institutions. The Second Proposed Joint Rules would apply to covered financial institutions with total assets of $1 billion or more. The requirementseach organization based on the scope and complexity of the Second Proposed Joint Rules would differ for each of three categories of financial institutions:

Some of the requirements would apply only to Level 1 and level 2 institutions. For all covered institutions, including level 3 institutions like us, the Second Proposed Rules would:

Level 1 and Level 2 institutions would have additional requirements, including deferrals of awards to certain covered persons; potential downward adjustments, forfeitures or clawbacks; and additional risk-management and control standards, policies and procedures. In addition, certain practices and typesprevalence of incentive compensation wouldarrangements. Deficiencies will be prohibited.incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

Public company compensation committee members must meet heightened independence requirements and consider the independence of compensation consultants, legal counsel and other advisors to the compensation committee. A compensation committee must have the authority to hire advisors and to have the public company fund reasonable compensation of such advisors.

SEC regulations require public companies to provide various disclosures about executive compensation in annual reports and proxy statements and to present to their shareholders a non-binding vote on the approval of executive compensation.

Public companies will be required, once stock exchanges impose additional listing requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act, to implement “clawback” procedures for incentive compensation payments and to disclose the details of the procedures which allow recovery of incentive compensation that was paid on the basis of erroneous financial information necessitating a restatement due to material noncompliance with financial reporting requirements. This clawback policy is intended to apply to compensation paid within a three-year look-back window of the restatement and would cover all executives who received incentive awards.

Consumer Protection Laws and Regulations

Banks are subject to regular examination to ensure compliance with federal consumer protection statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to, the following:

The banking regulators also use their authority under the Federal Trade Commission Act to take supervisory or enforcement action with respect to unfair or deceptive acts or practices by banks that may not necessarily fall within the scope of a specific banking or consumer finance law.

Financial Privacy Provisions

Federal and state regulations limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. These limitations require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to a non-affiliated third party. These regulations affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial companies and conveyed to outside vendors.

State Bank is also subject to regulatory guidelines establishing standards for safeguarding customer information. These guidelines describe the federal bank regulatory agencies’ expectations for the creation, implementation and maintenance of an information security program, which would include administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the size and complexity of the institution and the nature and scope of its activities. The standards set forth in the guidelines are intended to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records and protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer.

Cybersecurity

In March 2015, federal regulators issued two related statements regarding cybersecurity. One statement indicates that financial institutions should design multiple layers of security controls to establish several lines of defense and to ensure that their risk management processes also address the risk posed by compromised customer credentials, including security measures to reliably authenticate customers accessing Internet-based services of the financial institution. The other statement indicates that a financial institution’s management is expected to maintain sufficient business continuity planning processes to ensure the rapid recovery, resumption and maintenance of the financial institution’s operations after a cyber-attack involving destructive malware. A financial institution is also expected to develop appropriate processes to enable recovery of data and business operations and address rebuilding network capabilities and restoring data if the financial institution or its critical service providers fall victim to this type of cyber-attack. If State Bank fails to observe the regulatory guidance, it could be subject to various regulatory sanctions, including financial penalties.

In February 2018, the SEC published interpretive guidance to assist public companies in preparing disclosures about cybersecurity risks and incidents. These SEC guidelines, and any other regulatory guidance, are in addition to notification and disclosure requirements under state and federal banking law and regulations.

In November 2021, the OCC, the FRB and the FDIC issued a final rule requiring banking organizations that experience a computer-security incident to notify certain entities. A computer-security incident occurs when actual or potential harm to the confidentiality, integrity, or availability of an information system or the information occurs, or there is a violation or imminent threat of a violation to banking security policies and procedures. The affected bank must notify its respective federal regulator of the computer-security incident as soon as possible and no later than 36 hours after the bank determines a computer-security incident has occurred. These notifications are intended to promote early awareness of threats to banking organizations and will help banks react to those threats before they manifest into bigger incidents. This rule also requires bank service providers to notify its customers of a computer-security incident.

State regulators have also been increasingly active in implementing privacy and cybersecurity standards and regulations. Recently, several states have adopted regulations requiring certain financial institutions to implement cybersecurity programs and providing detailed requirements with respect to these programs, including data encryption requirements. Many states have also recently implemented or modified their data breach notification and data privacy requirements. The Company expects this trend of state-level activity in those areas to continue, and is continually monitoring developments in the states in which our customers are located.

In the ordinary course of business, the Company relies on electronic communications and information systems to conduct its operations and to store sensitive data. The Company employs an in-depth, layered, defensive approach that leverages people, processes and technology to manage and maintain cybersecurity controls. The Company employs a variety of preventative and detective tools to monitor, block, and provide alerts regarding suspicious activity, as well as to report on any suspected advanced persistent threats. The Company has also invested over the last eighteen months to further enhance these tools and mechanisms. Notwithstanding the strength of the Company’s defensive measures, the threat from cyber-attacks is severe, attacks are sophisticated and increasing in volume, and attackers respond rapidly to changes in defensive measures. While to date, the Company has not detected a significant compromise, significant data loss or any material financial losses related to cybersecurity attacks, Company’s systems and those of its customers and third-party service providers are under constant threat and it is possible that the Company could experience a significant event in the future. Risks and exposures related to cybersecurity attacks are expected to remain high for the foreseeable future due to the rapidly evolving nature and sophistication of these threats, as well as due to the expanding use of Internet banking, mobile banking and other technology-based products and services by us and our customers.

Effect of Environmental Regulation

Compliance with federal, state and local provisions regulating the discharge of materials into the environment, or otherwise relating to the protection of the environment, has not had a material effect upon the capital expenditures, earnings or competitive position of the Company and its subsidiaries. The Company believes that the nature of the operations of its subsidiaries has little, if any, environmental impact. The Company, therefore, anticipates no material capital expenditures for environmental control facilities for its current fiscal year or for the near future. The Company’s subsidiaries may be required to make capital expenditures for environmental control facilities related to properties which they may acquire through foreclosure proceedings in the future; however, the amount of such capital expenditures, if any, is not currently determinable.

Effects of Government Monetary Policy

The following are the condensed average balance sheetsearnings of the Company forare affected by general and local economic conditions and by the years ending December 31policies of various governmental regulatory authorities. In particular, the FRB regulates money and includescredit conditions and interest rates to influence general economic conditions, primarily through open market acquisitions or dispositions of United States Government securities, varying the interest earned or paid, and the average interestdiscount rate on each assetmember bank borrowings and liability:

We may be unable to manage interest rate risks, which could reduce our net interest income.

Our results of operations are affected principally by net interest income, which is the difference between interest earned on loans and investments and interest expense paid on deposits and other borrowings. The spread between the yield on our interest-earning assets and our overall cost of funds has beenmay be compressed, in the recent low interest rate environment, and our net interest income may continue to be adversely impacted by an extended period of continued lowchanging rates. We cannot predict or control changes in interest rates. National, regional and local economic conditions and the policies of regulatory authorities, including monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board,FRB, affect the movement of interest rates and our interest income and interest expense. If the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowed funds increase at a faster rate than the interest rates received on loans and other investments, our net interest income, and therefore earnings, could be adversely affected. Earnings could also be adversely affected if the interest ratespaid for deposits rises more quickly than the interest received on loans and other investments fall more quickly than the interest rates paid on deposits and other borrowed funds.investments.

In addition, certain assets and liabilities may react in different degrees to changes in market interest rates. For example, interest rates on some types of assets and liabilities may fluctuate prior to changes in broader market interest rates, while interest rates on other types may lag behind. SomeWhile the bulk of our variable rate commercial assets have interest rate floors, some of our assets, such as adjustable rate mortgages, have features that restrict changes in their interest rates, including rate caps.

Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control. Some of these factors include: inflation; recession; unemployment;inflation, recession, unemployment, money supply;supply, international disorders;disorders, and instability in domestic and foreign financial markets. Changes in interest rates may affect the level of voluntary prepayments on our loans and may also affect the level of financing or refinancing by customers. We believe that the impact on our cost of funds from a rise in interest rates will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to, the competitive environment in the banking sector for deposit pricing, opportunities for clients to invest in other markets such as fixed income and equity markets, and the propensity of customers to invest in their businesses. The effect on our net interest income from an increasea change in interest rates will ultimately depend on the extent to which the aggregate impact of loan re-pricings exceeds the impact of increases in our cost of funds.

A transition away from London Inter-Bank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) as a reference rate for financial contracts could negatively affect our income and expenses and the value of various financial contracts.

LIBOR is used extensively in the U.S. and globally as a benchmark for various commercial and financial contracts, including adjustable rate mortgages, corporate debt, interest rate swaps and other derivatives. LIBOR is set based on interest rate information reported by certain banks, which may stop reporting such information after 2021. On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. On November 30, 2020, to facilitate an orderly LIBOR transition, the OCC, the FDIC, and the FRB jointly announced that entering into new contracts using LIBOR as a reference rate after December 31, 2021, would create a safety and soundness risk. On March 5, 2021, the FCA announced that all LIBOR settings will either cease to be provided by any administrator or no longer be representative immediately after December 31, 2021, in the case of 1-week and 2-month LIBOR, and immediately after June 30, 2023, in the case of the remaining LIBOR settings. In the U.S., efforts to identify a set of alternative U.S. dollar reference interest rates are ongoing, and the Alternative Reference Rate Committee (the “ARRC”) has recommended the use of a Secured Overnight Funding Rate (“SOFR”). SOFR is different from LIBOR in that it is a backward looking secured rate rather than a forward looking unsecured rate.

These differences could lead to a greater disconnect between our costs to raise funds for SOFR as compared to LIBOR. For cash products and loans, ARRC has also recommended Term SOFR, which is a forward looking SOFR based on SOFR futures and may in part reduce differences between SOFR and LIBOR. There are operational issues which may create a delay in the transition to SOFR or other substitute indices, leading to uncertainty across the industry. These consequences cannot be entirely predicted and could have an adverse impact on the market value for or value of LIBOR-linked securities, loans, and other financial obligations or extensions of credit.

The Company’s primary exposure to LIBOR relates to its promissory notes with borrowers, swap contracts with clients, offsetting swap contracts with third parties related to the swap contracts with clients, and the Company’s LIBOR-based borrowings (if any). The Company’s contracts generally include a LIBOR term (for example, one month, three month, or one year) plus an incremental margin rate. The Company is working through this transition via a multi-disciplinary project team.

The Company has $10.3 million in Trust Preferred Securities that were originated in 2005. These securities are part of a large pool issued to Community Banks and have interest tied to LIBOR (see Note 15 to the Consolidated Financial Statements). The issuers of the Trust Preferred Securities have not yet determined a replacement for the LIBOR-based interest rate.

We do not believe the change to a benchmark like SOFR will have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations:

If our actual loan losses exceed our allowance for loan losses, our net income will decrease.

Our loan customers may not repay their loans according to their terms, and the collateral securing the payment of these loans may be insufficient to pay any remaining loan balance. We may experience significant loan losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. In accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States, we maintain an allowance for loan losses to provide for loan defaults and non-performance, which when combined, we refer to as the allowance for loan losses. Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual credit losses, and future provisions for credit losses could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. Our allowance for loan losses is based on prior experience, as well as an evaluation of the risks in the current portfolio. The amount of future losses is susceptible to changes in economic, operating and other conditions, including changes in interest rates that may be beyond our control, and these losses may exceed current estimates. Federal regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, review our loans and allowance for loan losses. We cannot assure youguarantee that we will not further increase the allowance for loan losses or that regulators will not require us to increase this allowance. Either of these occurrences could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

FDIC insurance premiums may increase materially, which could negatively affect our profitability.

The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC insured financial institutions, including State Bank. The FDIC chargesMoreover, the insured financial institutions premiums to maintainFinancial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) has changed its requirements for establishing the Deposit Insurance Fund at a certain level. During 2008 and 2009, there were higher levels of bank failures which dramatically increased resolution costs of the FDIC and depleted the deposit insurance fund. The FDIC collected a special assessment in 2009 to replenish the Deposit Insurance Fund and also required a prepayment of an estimated amount of future deposit insurance premiums. If the costs of future bank failures increase, deposit insurance premiums may also increase. The FDIC recently adopted rules revising the assessments in a manner benefiting banks with assets totaling less than $10 billion. There can be no assurance, however, that assessments will not be changed in the future.

Legislative or regulatory changes or actions could adversely impact our business.

The financial services industry is extensively regulated. We are subject to extensive state and federal regulation, supervision and legislation that govern almost all aspects of our operations. These laws and regulations are primarily intended for the protection of consumers, depositors, borrowers and the deposit insurance fund, not to benefit our shareholders. Changes to laws and regulations or other actions by regulatory agencies may negatively impact us, possibly limiting the services we provide, increasing the ability of non-banks to compete with us or requiring us to change the way we operate. Regulatory authorities have extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities, including the ability to impose restrictions on the operation of an institution and the ability to determine the adequacy of an institution’s allowance for loan losses. Failure

On June 16, 2016, the FASB issued Accounting Standard Update (“ASU”) 2016-13 “Financial Instruments - Credit Losses”, which replaces the incurred loss model with an expected loss model, and is referred to complyas the CECL model. Under the incurred loss model, loans are recognized as impaired when there is no longer an assumption that future cash flows will be collected in full under the originally contracted terms. The new accounting guidance is effective for annual reporting periods and interim reporting periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2019. However, the FASB has deferred the effective date for this ASU for smaller reporting companies, such as the Company, to annual reporting periods and interim reporting periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2022. Under the CECL model, financial institutions will be required to use historical information, current conditions and reasonable forecasts to estimate the expected loss over the life of the loan. The transition to the CECL model will bring with applicable laws, regulationsit significantly greater data requirements and policies could resultchanges to methodologies to accurately account for expected losses under the new parameters. If the methodologies and assumptions that we use in sanctions being imposed by the regulatory agencies, includingCECL model are proven to be incorrect or inadequate, the imposition of civil money penalties,allowance for credit losses may not be sufficient, resulting in the need for additional allowance for credit losses to be established, which could have a material adverse effect on our operations and financial condition. Even the reduction of regulatory restrictions could have an adverse impact on us if such lessening of restrictions increases competition within our industry or market areas.