INDEX

​

​

​

​

Cautionary note regarding forward-looking statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K of Shore Bancshares, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company” or “Shore” and “we,” “our” or “us” on a consolidated basis) contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward looking statements represent plans, estimates, objectives, goals, guidelines, expectations, intentions, projections and statements of our beliefs concerning future events, business plans, expected operating results and the assumptions upon which those statements are based. In some cases, you can identify these forward-looking statements by words like “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential,” or “continue” or the negative of those words and other comparable terminology, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. Forward-looking statements are not a guarantee of future performance or results, and will not necessarily be accurate indications of the times at, or by, which such performance or results will be achieved. We caution that the forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations and information available at the time the statements are made and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors which are in many instances, beyond our control. Actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed, or implied by the forward-looking statements. You should bear this in mind when reading this annual report and not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements.

The following factors, among others, could cause our financial performance to differ materially from that expressed in such forward-looking statements:

​

​

​

​

You should also consider carefully the Risk Factors contained in Item 1A of Part I of this annual report, which address additional factors that could cause our actual results to differ from those set forth in the forward-looking statements and could materially and adversely affect our business, operating results and financial condition. The risks discussed in this annual report are factors that, individually or in the aggregate, management believes could cause our actual results to differ materially from expected and historical results. You should understand that it is not possible to predict or identify all such factors. Consequently, you should not consider such disclosures to be a complete discussion of all potential risks or uncertainties.

The forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made, and, except to the extent required by federal securities laws, we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date on which the statement is made or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. In addition, we cannot assess the impact of each factor on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements.

​

PART I

Item 1.      Business.

BUSINESS

General

The Company was incorporated under the laws of Maryland on March 15, 1996 and is a financial holding company registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”). The Company is the largest independent financial holding company located on the Eastern Shore of Maryland. The Company conducts business primarily through two wholly owned subsidiaries, Shore United Bank, N.A. (the “Bank”) and Mid-Maryland Title Company, Inc. (the “Title Company”). The Bank provides consumer and commercial banking products and services, including secondary mortgage lending, trust, wealth management and financial planning services. The Title Company engages in title work related to real estate transactions. The Company, Bank and Title Company are Affirmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employers.

Pending Merger

On December 14, 2022, the Company and TCFC entered into a definitive agreement pursuant to which TCFC will be merged with and into the Company, with the Company as the surviving corporation (the "Merger"). Promptly following the Merger, TCFC’s wholly-owned bank subsidiary, the Community Bank of the Chesapeake, will be merged with and into the Bank, with the Bank as the surviving bank.

​

Under the terms of the agreement, TCFC shareholders will have the right to receive 2.3287 shares of Shore common stock and cash in lieu of any fractional shares of Shore common stock. Upon closing, shareholders of Shore will own approximately 60% of the combined company and shareholders of TCFC will own approximately 40% of the combined company. The transaction is subject to satisfaction of customary closing conditions, including approval from Shore and TCFC shareholders. Shore and TCFC have received all required regulatory approvals and waivers. The transaction is expected to close late in the second quarter or early in the third quarter of 2023.

​

As of December 31, 2022, TCFC had more than $2.4 billion in assets and operated ten full-service offices in Maryland and two full-service offices in Virginia.

​

Banking Products and Services

The Bank is a national banking association chartered under the laws of the United States with trust powers that can trace its origin to 1876. The Bank currently operates 31 full-service branches, 33 ATMs, 6 loan production offices, and provides a full range of commercial and consumer banking products and services to individuals, businesses, and other organizations in Baltimore City, Baltimore County, Howard County, Kent County, Queen Anne’s County, Caroline County, Talbot County, Dorchester County, Anne Arundel County and Worcester County in Maryland, Kent County and Sussex County in Delaware and in Accomack County, Virginia. The Bank’s deposits are insured up to applicable legal limits by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”).

The Bank is an independent community bank that serves businesses and individuals in their respective market areas. Services offered are essentially the same as those offered by larger regional institutions that compete with the Bank. Services provided to businesses include commercial checking, savings, certificates of deposit and overnight investment sweep accounts. The Bank offers all forms of commercial lending, including secured and unsecured loans, working capital loans, lines of credit, term loans, accounts receivable financing, real estate acquisition and development, construction loans and letters of credit. Merchant credit card clearing services are available as well as direct deposit of payroll, internet banking and telephone banking services.

Services to individuals include checking accounts, various savings programs, mortgage loans, home improvement loans, installment and other personal loans, credit cards, personal lines of credit, automobile and other consumer financing, safe deposit boxes, debit cards, 24-hour telephone banking, internet banking, mobile banking, and 24-hour automatic teller

machine services. The Bank also offers non-deposit products, such as mutual funds and annuities, and discount brokerage services to their customers. Additionally, the Bank has Saturday hours and extended hours on certain evenings during the week for added customer convenience.

Cannabis Related Business

The Bank provides banking services to customers that are licensed by various states to do business in the cannabis industry as growers, processors and dispensaries. The Bank maintains stringent written policies and procedures related to the on-boarding of such businesses and to the monitoring and maintenance of such business accounts.

In accordance with Federal regulatory guidance, and industry best practices, the Bank performs a multilayered due diligence review of a cannabis business before the business is on-boarded, including site visits and confirmation that the business is properly licensed by the state in which it is conducting business. Throughout the relationship, the Bank continues to monitor the business, including site visits, to ensure that the cannabis business continues to meet stringent requirements, including maintenance of required licenses. The Bank performs periodic financial reviews of  the business and monitors the business in accordance with the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) and Maryland Medical Cannabis Commission requirements.

See Note 23 to the Consolidated Financial Statements for a summary of the level of business activities with the Bank’s  cannabis customers.

Lending Activities

The Bank originates loans of all types, including commercial, commercial mortgage, commercial construction, residential construction, residential mortgage and consumer loans.

The Bank originates secured and unsecured loans for business purposes. Commercial loans are typically secured by real estate, accounts receivable, inventory, equipment and/or other assets of the business. Commercial loans generally involve a greater degree of credit risk than one to four family residential mortgage loans. Repayment is often dependent upon the successful operation of the business and may be affected by adverse conditions in the local economy or real estate market. The financial condition and cash flow of commercial borrowers is therefore carefully analyzed during the loan approval process, and continues to be monitored by obtaining business financial statements, personal financial statements and income tax returns. The frequency of this ongoing analysis depends upon the size and complexity of the credit and collateral that secures the loan. It is also the Bank’s general policy to obtain personal guarantees from the principals of the commercial loan borrowers.

The Bank’s commercial real estate loans are primarily secured by land for residential and commercial development, agricultural purpose properties, service industry buildings such as restaurants and motels, retail buildings and general purpose business space. The Bank attempts to mitigate the risks associated with these loans through thorough financial analyses, conservative underwriting procedures, including loan to value ratio standards, obtaining additional collateral, closely monitoring construction projects to control disbursement of funds on loans, and management’s knowledge of the local economy in which the Bank lends.

The Bank provides residential real estate construction loans to builders and individuals for single family dwellings. Residential construction loans are usually granted based upon “as completed” appraisals and are secured by the property under construction. Additional collateral may be taken if loan to value ratios exceed 80%. Site inspections are performed to determine pre-specified stages of completion before loan proceeds are disbursed. These loans typically have maturities of six to twelve months and may have fixed or variable rate features. Permanent financing options for individuals include fixed and variable rate loans with three- and five-year balloon features and one-, three- and five-year adjustable rate mortgage loans. The risk of loss associated with real estate construction lending is controlled through conservative underwriting procedures such as loan to value ratios of 80% or less at origination, obtaining additional collateral when prudent, and closely monitoring construction projects to control disbursement of funds on loans.

The Bank originates residential mortgage loans that are to be held in our loan portfolio as well as loans that are intended for sale in the secondary market. Loans sold in the secondary market are primarily sold to investors with which the Bank maintains a correspondent relationship. These loans are made in conformity with standard government-sponsored enterprise (“GSE”) underwriting criteria required by the investors to assure maximum eligibility for resale in the secondary market and are approved either by the Bank’s underwriter or the correspondent’s underwriter. Additionally, loans that are sold into the secondary market are typically residential long-term loans (15 or more years), generally with fixed rates of interest. Loans retained for the Bank’s portfolio typically include construction loans and loans that periodically reprice or mature prior to the end of an amortized term. Generally, loans are sold with servicing retained which includes loans sold to the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”) or Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”). As of December 31, 2022, the Bank was servicing $343.8 million in loans for FNMA and $74.1 million in loans for FHLMC.

A variety of consumer loans are offered to customers, including home equity loans, credit cards, marine loans and other secured and unsecured lines of credit and term loans. Careful analysis of an applicant’s creditworthiness is performed before granting credit, and ongoing monitoring of loans outstanding is performed in an effort to minimize risk of loss by identifying problem loans early.

Deposit Activities

The Bank offers a full array of deposit products including checking, savings and money market accounts, and regular and IRA certificates of deposit. The Bank also offers the CDARS program, providing up to $50 million of FDIC insurance to our customers. Another program offered by the Bank is the ICS program, which is an insured cash sweep program allowing customers the ability to insure deposits over $250 thousand among other Banks that participate in the ICS network while providing competitive rates and easy access to funds. In addition, we offer our commercial customers packages which include cash management services and various checking opportunities and other cash sweep products.

Trust Services

The Bank has a trust department through which it offers trust, asset management and financial planning services to customers within our market areas using the trade name Wye Financial Partners.

Seasonality

Management does not believe that our business activities are seasonal in nature.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

At March 1, 2023, we employed 481 persons, of which 469 were employed on a full-time basis. None of our employees are represented by any collective bargaining unit or are a party to a collective bargaining agreement. We believe the relationship with our employees to be excellent. Our ability to attract and retain employees is a key to our success. We offer a competitive total rewards program to our employees and monitor the competitiveness of our compensation and benefits programs in our various market areas.

​

The Company prides itself on being a values-driven organization, supporting diversity, equity and inclusion. Employees are empowered to share ideas that keep the organization connected. Our company core values guide each team member to:

•Integrity – Honesty, Commitment, Ethics

•Family – Teamwork, Open, Engage, Communicate

•Performance – Effort, Knowledge, Quality, Results

​

We believe that these values enable our success with our customers and have helped us build an inspiring, vibrant and accountability driven culture. In addition, we are committed to developing our staff through internal/external training programs, availability of online training resources, and continuing to implement leadership development programs to all

levels of leadership within the organization. This includes career development as well as identifying future leaders and preparing them for leadership opportunities.

​

COMPETITION

Shore Bancshares, Inc. and its subsidiaries operate in a highly competitive environment. Our competitors include community banks, commercial banks, credit unions, thrifts, mortgage banking companies, credit card issuers, investment advisory firms, brokerage firms, mutual fund companies, fintechs, title companies and e-commerce and other internet-based companies. We compete on a local and regional basis for banking and investment products and services.

The primary factors when competing in the financial service market include personalized services, the quality and range of products and services, interest rates on loans and deposits, lending services, price, customer convenience, and our ability to attract and retain experienced employees.

To compete in our market areas, we utilize multiple media channels including print, online, social media, television, radio, direct mail, e-mail and digital signage. Our employees also play a significant role in maintaining existing relationships with customers while establishing new relationships to grow all areas of our businesses.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

The Company is a financial holding company registered with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “FRB”) under the BHC Act and, as such, is subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the BHC Act and the regulations of the FRB.

Following a charter conversion occurring in 2021, the Bank is now a national banking association, chartered by and subject to the supervision of the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”). The deposits of the Bank are insured by the FDIC, so certain laws and regulations administered by the FDIC also govern its deposit taking operations. In addition to the foregoing, the Bank is subject to numerous state and federal statutes and regulations that affect the business of banking generally.

Nonbank affiliates of the Company are subject to examination by the FRB, and, as affiliates of the Bank, may be subject to examination by the Bank’s regulators from time to time.

To the extent that the following information describes statutory and regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the text of applicable statutory and regulatory provisions. Legislative and regulatory initiatives, which necessarily impact the regulation of the financial services industry, are introduced from time-to-time. We cannot predict whether or when potential legislation or new regulations will be enacted, and if enacted, the effect that new legislation or any implemented regulations and supervisory policies would have on our financial condition and results of operations. The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), by way of example, contains a comprehensive set of provisions designed to govern the practices and oversight of financial institutions and other participants in the financial markets. The Dodd-Frank Act made extensive changes in the regulation of financial institutions and their holding companies. Some of the changes brought about by the Dodd-Frank Act have been modified by the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act of 2018 (the “Regulatory Relief Act”), signed into law on May 24, 2018. The Dodd-Frank Act has increased the regulatory burden and compliance costs of the Company. Moreover, bank regulatory agencies can be more aggressive in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, which could result in an increased issuance of enforcement actions to financial institutions requiring action to address credit quality, liquidity and risk management, and capital adequacy, as well as other safety and soundness concerns.

Regulation of Financial Holding Companies

The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) amended the BHC Act and repealed the affiliation provisions of the Glass-Steagall Act of 1933, which, taken together, limited the securities, insurance and other non-banking activities of any company that controls an FDIC insured financial institution. Under the GLB Act, a bank holding company can elect, subject to certain qualifications, to become a “financial holding company.” The GLB Act provides that a financial holding company may engage in a full range of financial activities, including insurance and securities underwriting and agency activities, merchant banking, and insurance company portfolio investment activities, with new expedited notice procedures. The Company is a financial holding company.

Under FRB policy, the Company is expected to act as a source of strength to the Bank, and the FRB may charge the Company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices for failure to commit resources to the Bank when required. This support may be required at times when the Company may not have the resources to provide the support. Under the prompt corrective action provisions, if a controlled bank is undercapitalized, then the regulators could require the bank holding company to guarantee the bank’s capital restoration plan. In addition, if the FRB believes that a company’s activities, assets or affiliates represent a significant risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of a controlled bank, then the FRB could require the bank holding company to terminate the activities, liquidate the assets or divest the affiliates. The regulators may require these and other actions in support of controlled banks even if such actions are not in the best interests of the bank holding company or its stockholders. Because the Company is a bank holding company, it is viewed as a source of financial and managerial strength for any controlled depository institutions, like the Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Act, enacted in 2010, made sweeping changes to the financial regulatory landscape that impacts all financial institutions, including the Company and the Bank. The Dodd-Frank Act directs federal bank regulators to require that all companies that directly or indirectly control an insured depository institution serve as sources of financial strength for the institution. The term “source of financial strength” is defined under the Dodd-Frank Act as the ability of a company to provide financial assistance to its insured depository institution subsidiaries in the event of financial distress. The appropriate federal banking agency for such a depository institution may require reports from companies that control the insured depository institution to assess their abilities to serve as sources of strength and to enforce compliance with the source-of-strength requirements. The appropriate federal banking agency may also require a holding company to provide financial assistance to a bank with impaired capital. Under this requirement, the Company could be required to provide financial assistance to the Bank should it experience financial distress.

Federal Regulation of Banks

The OCC may prohibit national banking associations, such as the Bank, from engaging in activities or investments that the OCC believes is unsafe or unsound banking practices. The OCC has extensive enforcement authority over national banking associations to prohibit or correct activities that violate law, regulation or a regulatory agreement or which are deemed to be unsafe or unsound practices. Enforcement actions may include the appointment of a conservator or receiver, the issuance of a cease and desist order, the termination of deposit insurance, the imposition of civil money penalties on the institution, its directors, officers, employees and institution-affiliated parties, the issuance of directives to increase capital, the issuance of formal and informal agreements, the removal of or restrictions on directors, officers, employees and institution-affiliated parties, and the enforcement of any such mechanisms through restraining orders or other court actions.

The Bank is subject to the provisions of Section 23A and Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act. Section 23A limits the amount of loans or extensions of credit to, and investments in, the Company and its nonbank affiliates by the Bank. Section 23B requires that transactions between the Bank and the Company and its nonbank affiliates be on terms and under circumstances that are substantially the same as with non-affiliates.

The Bank is also subject to certain restrictions on extensions of credit to executive officers, directors, and principal stockholders or any related interest of such persons, which generally require that such credit extensions be made on substantially the same terms as are available to third parties dealing with the Bank and not involve more than the normal risk of repayment. Other laws tie the maximum amount that may be loaned to any one customer and its related interests to capital levels.

As part of the Federal Deposit Insurance Company Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), each federal banking regulator adopted non-capital safety and soundness standards for institutions under its authority. These standards include internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, fees and benefits. An institution that fails to meet those standards may be required by the agency to develop a plan acceptable to meet the standards. Failure to submit or implement such a plan may subject the institution to regulatory sanctions. The Company, on behalf of the Bank, believes that the Bank meets substantially all standards that have been adopted. FDICIA also imposes capital standards on insured depository institutions.

Deposit Insurance

Our deposits are insured up to applicable limits by the DIF of the FDIC. Deposit insurance is mandatory. We are required to pay assessments to the FDIC on a quarterly basis. The assessment amount is the product of multiplying the assessment base by the assessment amount.

The assessment base against which the assessment rate is applied to determine the total assessment due for a given period is the depository institution’s average total consolidated assets during the assessment period less average tangible equity during that assessment period. Tangible equity is defined in the assessment rule as Tier 1 Capital and is calculated monthly, unless the insured depository institution has less than $1 billion in assets, in which case the insured depository institution calculates Tier 1 Capital on an end-of-quarter basis. Parents or holding companies of other insured depository institutions are required to report separately from their subsidiary depository institutions.

The FDIC’s methodology for setting assessments for individual banks has changed over time, although the broad policy is that lower-risk institutions should pay lower assessments than higher-risk institutions. The FDIC now uses a methodology, known as the “financial ratios method,” that began to apply on July 1, 2016, in order to meet requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act. The statute established a minimum designated reserve ratio (the “DFR”), for the DIF of 1.35% of the estimated insured deposits and required the FDIC to adopt a restoration plan should the reserve ratio fall below 1.35%. The financial ratios took effect when the DRR exceeded 1.15%. The FDIC declared that the DIF reserve ratio exceeded 1.15% by the end of the second quarter of 2016. Accordingly, beginning July 1, 2016, the FDIC began to use the financial ratios method. This methodology assigns a specific assessment rate to each institution based on the institution’s leverage capital, supervisory ratings, and information from the institution’s call report. Under this methodology, the assessment rate schedules used to determine assessments due from insured depository institutions become progressively lower when the reserve ratio in the DIF exceeds 2% and 2.5%.

On October 18, 2022, the FDIC adopted a final rule that increases initial base deposit insurance assessment rates by 2 basis points, beginning with the first quarterly assessment period of 2023. Due to the decline in the DIF reserve ratio below the statutory minimum of 1.35 percent as of June 30, 2020, caused by extraordinary growth in insured deposits during the first and second quarters of 2020, the FDIC established a Restoration Plan in September 2020 to restore the DIF reserve ratio to meet or exceed the statutory minimum of 1.35 percent within eight years. This 2020 plan did not include an increase in the deposit insurance assessment rate. On June 21, 2022, however, the FDIC adopted an Amended Restoration Plan and notice of proposed rulemaking to increase the deposit insurance assessment rates as it was otherwise at risk of not reaching the statutory minimum by the statutory deadline of September 30, 2028. The proposed rule was adopted as final without change.

​

Also, in the final rule adopted on October 18, 2022, the FDIC incorporated Accounting Standards Update (“ASU”) 2022-02, Financial Instruments - Credit Losses (Topic 326) Troubled Debt Restructurings and Vintage Disclosures in the risk-based deposit insurance assessment system applicable to all large and highly complex insured depository institutions. In March 2022, the FASB issued ASU 2022-02, which eliminates accounting guidance for troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”) and introduces new disclosures and enhances existing disclosures concerning certain loan refinancings and restructurings when a borrower is experiencing financial difficulty. The FDIC final rule amends the assessment regulations to include a new term, “modifications to borrowers experiencing financial difficulty,” in two financial measures—the underperforming assets ratio and the higher-risk assets ratio—used to determine deposit insurance assessments for large and highly complex insured depository institutions.

​

The Dodd-Frank Act also raised the limit for federal deposit insurance to $250,000 for most deposit accounts and increased the cash limit of Securities Investor Protection Corporation protection from $100,000 to $250,000.

The FDIC has authority to increase insurance assessments. A significant increase in insurance assessments would likely have an adverse effect on our operating expenses and results of operations. We cannot predict what insurance assessment rates will be in the future. Furthermore, deposit insurance may be terminated by the FDIC upon a finding that an insured depository 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.

Capital Adequacy Guidelines

Bank holding companies and banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal agencies. These agencies may establish higher minimum requirements if, for example, a banking organization previously has received special attention or has a high susceptibility to interest rate risk. Risk-based capital requirements determine the adequacy of capital based on the risk inherent in various classes of assets and off-balance sheet items. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the FRB must apply consolidated capital requirements to depository institution holding companies that are no less stringent than those currently applied to depository institutions. The Dodd-Frank Act additionally requires capital requirements to be countercyclical so that the required amount of capital increases in times of economic expansion and decreases in times of economic contraction, consistent with safety and soundness.

Under federal regulations, bank holding companies and banks must meet certain risk-based capital requirements. Effective as of January 1, 2015, the Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduced as a new capital measure “Common Equity Tier 1” (“CET1”), (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital, and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations. Beginning January 1, 2016, financial institutions were required to maintain a minimum “capital conservation buffer” to avoid restrictions on capital distributions such as dividends and equity repurchases and other payments such as discretionary bonuses to executive officers. The minimum capital conservation buffer was phased-in over a four year transition period with minimum buffers of 0.625%, 1.25%, 1.875%, and 2.50% during 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively.

As fully phased-in on January 1, 2019, Basel III subjects banks to the following risk-based capital requirements:

The Basel III final framework provides for a number of deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets dependent upon future taxable income and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1. Basel III also includes, as part of the definition of CET1 capital, a requirement that banking institutions include the amount of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”), which primarily consists of unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, which are not required to be treated as other-than-temporary impairment, net of tax) in calculating regulatory capital. Banking institutions had the option to opt out of including AOCI in CET1 capital if they elected to do so in their first

regulatory report following January 1, 2015. As permitted by Basel III, the Company and the Bank have elected to exclude AOCI from CET1.

In addition, goodwill and most intangible assets are deducted from Tier 1 capital. For purposes of applicable total risk-based capital regulatory guidelines, Tier 2 capital (sometimes referred to as “supplementary capital”) is defined to include, subject to limitations: perpetual preferred stock not included in Tier 1 capital, intermediate-term preferred stock and any related surplus, certain hybrid capital instruments, perpetual debt and mandatory convertible debt securities, allowances for loan and lease losses, and intermediate-term subordinated debt instruments. The maximum amount of qualifying Tier 2 capital is 100% of qualifying Tier 1 capital. For purposes of determining total capital under federal guidelines, total capital equals Tier 1 capital, plus qualifying Tier 2 capital, minus investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, reciprocal holdings of bank holding company capital securities, and deferred tax assets and other deductions.

Basel III changed the manner of calculating risk-weighted assets. New methodologies for determining risk-weighted assets in the general capital rules are included, including revisions to recognition of credit risk mitigation, including a greater recognition of financial collateral and a wider range of eligible guarantors. They also include risk weighting of equity exposures and past due loans; and higher (greater than 100%) risk weighting for certain commercial real estate exposures that have higher credit risk profiles, including higher loan to value and equity components. In particular, loans categorized as “high-volatility commercial real estate” loans (“HVCRE loans”), as defined pursuant to applicable federal regulations, are required to be assigned a 150% risk weighting, and require additional capital support.

In addition to the uniform risk-based capital guidelines and regulatory capital ratios that apply across the industry, the regulators have the discretion to set individual minimum capital requirements for specific institutions at rates significantly above the minimum guidelines and ratios. Future changes in regulations or practices could further reduce the amount of capital recognized for purposes of capital adequacy. Such a change could affect our ability to grow and could restrict the amount of profits, if any, available for the payment of dividends.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal banking agencies to adopt capital requirements that address the risks that the activities of an institution poses to the institution and the public and private stakeholders, including risks arising from certain enumerated activities.

Basel III is currently applicable to the Bank and the Company.  Overall, the Company believes that implementation of the Basel III Rule has not had and will not have a material adverse effect on the Company’s or the Bank’s capital ratios, earnings, stockholders’ equity, or its ability to pay dividends, effect stock repurchases or pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee published standards that it described as the finalization of the Basel III post-crisis regulatory reforms (the standards are commonly referred to as “Basel IV”). Among other things, these standards revise the Basel Committee’s standardized approach for credit risk (including recalibrating risk weights and introducing new capital requirements for certain “unconditionally cancellable commitments,” such as unused credit card lines of credit) and provides a new standardized approach for operational risk capital. Under the Basel framework, these standards were generally effective on January 1, 2022, with an aggregate output floor phasing in through January 1, 2027. Under the current U.S. capital rules, operational risk capital requirements and a capital floor apply only to advanced approaches institutions, and not to the Company or the Bank. The impact of Basel IV on us will depend on the manner in which it is implemented by the federal bank regulators.

In 2018, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a variety of proposals and made statements concerning regulatory capital standards. These proposals touched on such areas as commercial real estate exposure, credit loss allowances under generally accepted accounting principles and capital requirements for covered swap entities, among others. Public statements by key agency officials have also suggested a revisiting of capital policy and supervisory approaches on a going-forward basis. In July 2019, the federal bank regulators adopted a final rule that simplifies the capital treatment for certain deferred tax assets, mortgage servicing assets, investments in non-consolidated financial entities and minority interests for banking organizations, such as the Company and the Bank, that are not subject to the advanced approaches requirements. We will be assessing the impact on us of these new regulations and supervisory approaches as they are proposed and implemented.

In February 2019, the U.S. federal bank regulatory agencies approved a final rule modifying their regulatory capital rules and providing an option to phase-in over a three-year period the Day 1 adverse regulatory capital effects of CECL accounting standard.  As a result, entities may gradually phase in the full effect of CECL on regulatory capital over a three-year transition period. The requirement to implement the CECL model was effective January 1, 2023.

Prompt Corrective Action

The federal banking regulators are required to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to capital-deficient institutions. Federal banking regulations define, for each capital category, the levels at which institutions are “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” and “critically undercapitalized.” Under applicable regulations, the Bank was “well capitalized,” which means it had a common equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5% or higher; a Tier I risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or higher; a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or higher; a leverage ratio of 5.0% or higher; and was not subject to any written agreement, order or directive requiring it to maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure.

As noted above, Basel III integrates the capital requirements into the prompt corrective action category definitions set forth below.

​

As of December 31, 2022, the Bank and the Company exceeded all regulatory capital requirements and exceeded the minimum CET 1, Tier 1 and total capital ratio inclusive of the fully phased-in capital conservation buffer of 7.0%, 8.5%, and 10.5%, respectively.

An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters. An institution’s capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying prompt corrective action regulations, and the capital category may not constitute an accurate representation of the institution’s overall financial condition or prospects for other purposes.

In the event an institution becomes “undercapitalized,” it must submit a capital restoration plan. The capital restoration plan will not be accepted by the regulators unless each company having control of the undercapitalized institution guarantees the subsidiary’s compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institution’s holding company is entitled to a priority of payment in bankruptcy. The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5% of the institution’s assets at the time it became undercapitalized or the amount necessary to cause the institution to be “adequately capitalized.” The bank regulators have greater power in situations where an institution becomes “significantly” or “critically” undercapitalized or fails to submit a capital restoration plan. In addition to requiring undercapitalized institutions to submit a capital restoration plan, bank regulations contain broad restrictions on certain activities of undercapitalized institutions including asset growth, acquisitions, branch establishment and expansion into new lines of business. With certain exceptions, an insured depository institution is prohibited from making capital distributions, including dividends, and is prohibited from paying management fees to control persons if the institution would be undercapitalized after any such distribution or payment.

As an institution’s capital decreases, the regulators’ enforcement powers become more severe. A significantly undercapitalized institution is subject to mandated capital raising activities, restrictions on interest rates paid and transactions with affiliates, removal of management, and other restrictions. A regulator has limited discretion in dealing with a critically undercapitalized institution and is virtually required to appoint a receiver or conservator.

Banks with risk-based capital and leverage ratios below the required minimums may also be subject to certain administrative actions, including the termination of deposit insurance upon notice and hearing, or a temporary suspension of insurance without a hearing in the event the institution has no tangible capital.

Safety and Soundness Standards

The federal banking agencies have adopted guidelines designed to assist the federal banking agencies in identifying and addressing potential safety and soundness concerns before capital becomes impaired. The guidelines set forth operational and managerial standards relating to: (i) internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems; (ii) loan documentation; (iii) credit underwriting; (iv) asset growth; (v) earnings; and (vi) compensation, fees and benefits.

In addition, the federal banking agencies have also adopted safety and soundness guidelines with respect to asset quality and for evaluating and monitoring earnings to ensure that earnings are sufficient for the maintenance of adequate capital and reserves. These guidelines provide six standards for establishing and maintaining a system to identify problem assets and prevent those assets from deteriorating. Under these standards, an insured depository institution should: (i) conduct periodic asset quality reviews to identify problem assets; (ii) estimate the inherent losses in problem assets and establish reserves that are sufficient to absorb estimated losses; (iii) compare problem asset totals to capital; (iv) take appropriate corrective action to resolve problem assets; (v) consider the size and potential risks of material asset concentrations; and (vi) provide periodic asset quality reports with adequate information for management and the board of directors to assess the level of asset risk.

Community Reinvestment Act

The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires the federal banking regulatory agencies to assess all financial institutions that they regulate to determine whether these institutions are meeting the credit needs of the communities they serve, including their assessment area(s) (as established for these purposes in accordance with applicable regulations based principally on the location of branch offices). In addition to substantial penalties and corrective measures that may be required for a violation of certain fair lending laws, the federal banking agencies may take compliance with such laws and CRA into account when regulating and supervising other activities. Under the CRA, institutions are assigned a rating of “outstanding,” “satisfactory,” “needs to improve,” or “unsatisfactory.” An institution’s record in meeting the requirements of the CRA is based on a performance-based evaluation system, and is made publicly available and is taken into consideration in evaluating any applications it files with federal regulators to engage in certain activities, including approval of a branch or other deposit facility, mergers and acquisitions, office relocations, or expansions into nonbanking activities. Our Bank received a “satisfactory” rating in its most recent CRA evaluation.

In April 2018, the U.S. Department of Treasury issued a memorandum to the federal banking regulators recommending changes to the CRA’s regulations to reduce their complexity and associated burden on banks, and in December 2019, the FDIC and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) proposed for public comment rules to modernize the agencies' regulations under the CRA. The OCC adopted its final rules in May 2020, and then on December 14, 2021, the OCC rescinded the 2020 rules and replaced them with rules based on the rules adopted jointly by the federal bank regulatory agencies in 1995. We will continue to evaluate the impact of any changes to the CRA regulations.

Anti-Terrorism, Money Laundering Legislation and OFAC

The Bank is subject to the BSA and the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “USA PATRIOT Act”). These statutes and related rules and regulations impose requirements and limitations on specified financial transactions and accounts and other relationships intended to guard against money laundering and terrorism financing. The principal requirements for an insured depository institution include (i) establishment of an anti-money laundering program that includes training and audit components,

(ii) establishment of a “know your customer” program involving due diligence to confirm the identities of persons seeking to open accounts and to deny accounts to those persons unable to demonstrate their identities, (iii) the filing of currency transaction reports for deposits and withdrawals of large amounts of cash and suspicious activities reports for activity that might signify money laundering, tax evasion, or other criminal activities, (iv) additional precautions for accounts sought and managed for non-U.S. persons and (v) verification and certification of money laundering risk with respect to private banking and foreign correspondent banking relationships. For many of these tasks a bank must keep records to be made available to its primary federal regulator. Anti-money laundering rules and policies are developed by a bureau within  the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), but compliance by individual institutions is overseen by its primary federal regulator.

The Bank has established appropriate anti-money laundering and customer identification programs. The Bank also maintains records of cash purchases of negotiable instruments, files reports of certain cash transactions exceeding $10,000 (daily aggregate amount), and reports suspicious activity that might signify money laundering, tax evasion, or other criminal activities pursuant to the BSA. The Bank otherwise has implemented policies and procedures to comply with the foregoing requirements.

The U.S Department of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”), administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions against targeted foreign countries and persons, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC publishes lists of persons that are the target of sanctions, including the List of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. Financial institutions are responsible for, among other things, blocking accounts of and transactions with sanctioned persons and countries, prohibiting unlicensed trade and financial transactions with them and reporting blocked and rejected transactions after their occurrence. If the Company or the Bank finds a name or other information on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list or that otherwise indicates that the transaction involves a target of sanctions, the Company or the Bank generally must freeze or block such account or transaction, file a suspicious activity report, and notify the appropriate authorities. Banking regulators examine banks for compliance with the economic sanctions regulations administered by OFAC.

The Bank has implemented policies and procedures to comply with the foregoing requirements.

Data Privacy and Cybersecurity

The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted guidelines for safeguarding confidential, personal, non-public customer information. These guidelines require each financial institution, under the supervision and ongoing oversight of its board of directors or an appropriate committee thereof, to create, implement, and maintain a comprehensive written information security program designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazard to the security or integrity of such information, and protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. We have adopted a customer information security program to comply with these requirements.

The GLB Act requires financial institutions to implement policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of non-public personal information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. The GLB Act requires disclosures to consumers on policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of such non-public personal information and, except as otherwise required by law, prohibit disclosing such information except as provided in the Bank’s policies and procedures. We have implemented privacy policies addressing these restrictions that are distributed regularly to all existing and new customers of the Bank.

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 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 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 institution or its critical

service providers fall victim to this type of cyber-attack. If we fail to observe the regulatory guidance, we could be subject to various regulatory sanctions, including financial penalties.

In November 2021, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a joint rule establishing computer-security incident notification requirements for banking organizations and their service providers.  This rule requires new notification requirements where a banking organization experiences a computer-security incident.

State regulators have 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. In June 2018, the California legislature passed the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “California Privacy Act”), which took effect on January 1, 2020.  The California Privacy Act, which covers businesses that obtain or access personal information on California resident consumers, grants consumers enhanced privacy rights and control over their personal information and imposes significant requirements on covered companies with respect to consumer data privacy rights. We expect this trend of state-level activity to continue, and are continually monitoring developments in the states in which we operate.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

The Dodd-Frank Act created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which is an independent bureau with broad authority to regulate the consumer finance industry, including regulated financial institutions, nonbanks and others involved in extending credit to consumers. The CFPB has authority through rulemaking, orders, policy statements, guidance, and enforcement actions to administer and enforce federal consumer financial laws, to oversee several entities and market segments not previously under the supervision of a federal regulator, and to impose its own regulations and pursue enforcement actions when it determines that a practice is unfair, deceptive, or abusive. The federal consumer financial laws and all the functions and responsibilities associated with them, many of which were previously enforced by other federal regulatory agencies, were transferred to the CFPB on July 21, 2011. While the CFPB has the power to interpret, administer, and enforce federal consumer financial laws, the Dodd-Frank Act provides that the federal banking regulatory agencies continue to have examination and enforcement powers over the financial institutions that they supervise relating to the matters within the jurisdiction of the CFPB if such institutions have less than $10 billion in assets. The Dodd-Frank Act also gives state attorneys general the ability to enforce federal consumer protection laws.

Mortgage Loan Origination

The Dodd-Frank Act authorizes the CFPB to establish certain minimum standards for the origination of residential mortgages, including a determination of the borrower’s ability to repay. Under the Dodd-Frank Act and the implementing final rule adopted by the CFPB (the ATR/QM Rule), a financial institution may not make a residential mortgage loan to a consumer unless it first makes a “reasonable and good faith determination” that the consumer has a “reasonable ability” to repay the loan. In addition, the ATR/QM Rule limits prepayment penalties and permits borrowers to raise certain defenses to foreclosure if the financial institution has not complied with these requirements. The ATR/QM Rule defines a “qualified mortgage” to include a loan with a borrower debt-to-income (DTI) ratio of less than or equal to 43% or, alternatively, a loan eligible for purchase by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac while they operate under federal conservatorship or receivership (the Fannie/Freddie QM Alternative), and loans that comply with similar ATR/QM rules established by the Federal Housing Administration, Veterans Administration, or United States Department of Agriculture. Additionally, a qualified mortgage may not: (i) contain excess upfront points and fees; (ii) have a term greater than 30 years; or (iii) include interest only or negative amortization payments. The ATR/QM Rule specifies the types of income and assets that may be considered in the ability-to-repay determination, the permissible sources for verification, and the required methods of calculating the loan’s monthly payments. The ATR/QM Rule became effective in January 2014.

The CFPB amended the ATR/QM rule in December of 2020.  One of the amendments modifies the requirements for a loan to qualify as a QM as well as certain other provisions in the ATR/QM Rule, and eliminates the Fannie/Freddie QM Alternative.  This amendment essentially replaces the 43% DTI limit with an APR-based limitation, which for most loans

requires that the loan's annual percentage rate (APR) not exceed the average prime offer rate for a comparable transaction by 2.25 percentage points or more as of the date the interest rate is set.

A second amendment creates a new class of QMs, called Seasoned QMs, which are essentially first-lien loans that could not be classified as QMs when originated for reason only that they had DTI ratios above 43%, but which have been held by the original creditor (or the first purchaser) for at least 36 months, during which time the borrower had no more than two 30-day delinquencies and no delinquencies of 60 days or more.

Both of these amendments were originally slated to become effective on March 1, 2021, but the amendment eliminating the Fannie/Freddie QM Alternative was given a mandatory compliance date of July 1, 2021 (the same date that the Fannie/Freddie QM Alternative was set to expire). However, the mandatory compliance date for the elimination of the Fannie/Freddie QM Alternative was subsequently extended until October of 2022.  Despite this extension, Fannie and Freddie stopped buying loans, with application dates on or after July 1, 2021, that only qualified as QMs based on the Fannie/Freddie QM alternative.  

The risks to lenders resulting from these amendments is as yet uncertain.

The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act enacted in 2018 (the “Regulatory Relief Act”)  provides that for certain insured depository institutions and insured credit unions with less than $10 billion in total consolidated assets, mortgage loans that are originated and retained in portfolio will automatically be deemed to satisfy the “ability to repay” requirement. To qualify for this, the insured depository institutions and credit unions must meet conditions relating to prepayment penalties, points and fees, negative amortization, interest-only features and documentation.

The Regulatory Relief Act also directs Federal banking agencies to issue regulations exempting certain insured depository institutions and insured credit unions with assets of $10 billion or less from the requirement to establish escrow accounts for certain residential mortgage loans.

It also exempts insured depository institutions and insured credit unions that originated fewer than 500 closed-end mortgage loans or 500 open-end lines of credit in each of the two preceding years from a subset of disclosure requirements (recently imposed by the CFPB) under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (“HMDA”), provided they have received certain minimum CRA ratings in their most recent examinations.

The Regulatory Relief Act also directs the Comptroller of the Currency to conduct a study assessing the effect of the exemption described above on the amount of HMDA data available at the national and local level.

In addition, Section 941 of the Dodd-Frank Act amended the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”) to require sponsors of asset-backed securities (“ABS”) to retain at least 5% of the credit risk of the assets underlying the securities and generally prohibits sponsors from transferring or hedging that credit risk. In October 2014, the federal banking regulatory agencies adopted a final rule to implement this requirement (the “Risk Retention Rule”). Among other things, the Risk Retention Rule requires a securitizer to retain not less than 5% of the credit risk of any asset that the securitizer, through the issuance of an ABS, transfers, sells, or conveys to a third party; and prohibits a securitizer from directly or indirectly hedging or otherwise transferring the credit risk that the securitizer is required to retain. In certain situations, the final rule allows securitizers to allocate a portion of the risk retention requirement to the originator(s) of the securitized assets, if an originator contributes at least 20% of the assets in the securitization. The Risk Retention Rule also provides an exemption to the risk retention requirements for an ABS collateralized exclusively by Qualified Residential Mortgages (“QRMs”), and ties the definition of a QRM to the definition of a “qualified mortgage” established by the CFPB for purposes of evaluating a consumer’s ability to repay a mortgage loan. The federal banking agencies have agreed to review the definition of QRMs in 2019, following the CFPB’s own review of its “qualified mortgage” regulation. For purposes of residential mortgage securitizations, the Risk Retention Rule took effect on December 24, 2015. For all other securitizations, the rule took effect on December 24, 2016.

​

Other Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act

The Dodd-Frank Act implements far-reaching changes across the financial regulatory landscape. In addition to the reforms previously mentioned, the Dodd-Frank Act also:

Although a significant number of the rules and regulations mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act have been finalized, many of the requirements called for have yet to be implemented and will likely be subject to implementing regulations over the course of several years. Given the uncertainty associated with the manner in which the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will be implemented by the various agencies, the full extent of the impact such requirements will have on financial institutions’ operations is unclear.

Other Laws and Regulations

Our operations are subject to several additional laws, some of which are specific to banking and others of which are applicable to commercial operations generally. For example, with respect to our lending practices, we are subject to the following laws and regulations, among several others:

We are also subject to a variety of laws and regulations that are not limited to banking organizations. For example, in lending to commercial and consumer borrowers, and in owning and operating our own property, we are subject to regulations and potential liabilities under state and federal environmental laws. In addition, we must comply with privacy and data security laws and regulations at both the federal and state level.

The banking industry is heavily regulated by regulatory agencies at the federal and state levels. Like most of our competitors, we have faced and expect to continue to face increased regulation and regulatory and political scrutiny, which creates significant uncertainty for us, as well as for the financial services industry in general.

Enforcement Powers

The federal regulatory agencies have substantial penalties available to use against depository institutions and certain “institution-affiliated parties.” Institution-affiliated parties primarily include management, employees, and agents of a financial institution, as well as independent contractors and consultants, such as attorneys, accountants, and others who participate in the conduct of the financial institution’s affairs. An institution can be subject to an enforcement action due to the failure to timely file required reports, the filing of false or misleading information, or the submission of inaccurate reports, or engaging in other unsafe or unsound banking practices.

The Financial Institution Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act provided regulators with greater flexibility to commence enforcement actions against institutions and institution-affiliated parties and to terminate an institution’s deposit insurance. It also expanded the power of banking regulatory agencies to issue regulatory orders. Such orders may, among other things, require affirmative action to correct any harm resulting from a violation or practice, including restitution, reimbursement, indemnification, or guarantees against loss. A financial institution may also be ordered to restrict its growth, dispose of certain assets, rescind agreements or contracts, or take other actions as determined by the ordering agency to be appropriate. The Dodd-Frank Act increases regulatory oversight, supervision and examination of banks, BHCs, and their respective subsidiaries by the appropriate regulatory agency.

Federal Securities Laws

The shares of the Company’s common stock are registered with the SEC under Section 12(b) of the Act and listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. The Company is subject to information reporting requirements, proxy solicitation requirements, insider trading restrictions and other requirements of the Exchange Act, including the requirements imposed under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and the rules of The NASDAQ Stock Market, LLC. Among other things, loans to and other transactions with insiders are subject to restrictions and heightened disclosure, directors and certain committees of the Board must satisfy certain independence requirements, and the Company is generally required to comply with certain corporate governance requirements.

Governmental Monetary and Credit Policies and Economic Controls

The earnings and growth of the banking industry and ultimately of the Company are affected by the monetary and credit policies of governmental authorities, including the FRB. An important function of the FRB is to regulate the national

supply of bank credit in order to control recessionary and inflationary pressures. Among the instruments of monetary policy used by the FRB to implement these objectives are open market operations in U.S. Government securities, changes in the federal funds rate, changes in the discount rate of member bank borrowings, and changes in reserve requirements against member bank deposits. These means are used in varying combinations to influence overall growth of bank loans, investments and deposits and may also affect interest rates charged on loans or paid for deposits. The monetary policies of the FRB authorities have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to have such an effect in the future. In view of changing conditions in the national economy and in the money markets, as well as the effect of actions by monetary and fiscal authorities, including the FRB, no prediction can be made as to possible future changes in interest rates, deposit levels, loan demand or their effect on the business and earnings of the Company and its subsidiaries.

AVAILABLE INFORMATION

The Company maintains an Internet site at www.shorebancshares.com on which it makes available, free of charge, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to the foregoing as soon as reasonably practicable after these reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. In addition, stockholders may access these reports and documents on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov . The information on, or accessible through, our website or any other website cited in this Annual Report on Form 10-K is not part of, or incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report on Form 10-K and should not be relied upon in determining whether to make an investment decision.

​

Item 1A.      RISK FACTORS.

An investment in our common stock involves significant risks. You should consider carefully the risk factors included below together with all of the information included in or incorporated by reference into this annual report, as the same may be updated from time to time by our future filings with the SEC under the Exchange Act, before making a decision to invest in our common stock. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. If any of the matters included in the following information about risk factors were to occur, our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows or prospects could be materially and adversely affected. In such case, you may lose all or a substantial part of your investment. To the extent that any of the information contained in this document constitutes forward-looking statements, the risk factors below should be reviewed as cautionary statements identifying important factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in any forward-looking statements made by us or on our behalf. See “Cautionary note regarding forward-looking statements.”

Risks Relating to Our Business

Our business is adversely affected by unfavorable economic, market, and political conditions.

In the event of an economic recession, our operating results could be adversely affected because we could experience higher loan and lease charge-offs and higher operating costs. Global economic conditions also affect our operating results because global economic conditions directly influence the U.S. economic conditions. Sources of global economic and market instability include, but are not limited to, the potential economic slowdown in United Kingdom, Europe and the United States, the impact of trade negotiations, economic conditions in China, including the global economic impacts of the Chinese economy, China’s regulation of commerce, escalating military tensions in Europe as a result of Russia's invasion of Ukraine, and the effects of the recent pandemic or other health crises. Various market conditions also affect our operating results. Certain changes in interest rates, inflation, or the financial markets could affect demand for our products. Real estate market conditions directly affect performance of our loans secured by real estate. Debt markets affect the availability of credit which impacts the rates and terms at which we offer loans and leases. Stock market downturns often signal broader economic deterioration and/or a downward trend in business earnings which may adversely affect businesses’ ability to raise capital and/or service their debts. Political and electoral changes, developments, conflicts, and conditions have in the past introduced, and may in the future introduce, additional uncertainty which may also affect our operating results.

Our performance could be negatively affected to the extent there is deterioration in business and economic conditions, including persistent inflation, supply chain issues or labor shortages, which have direct or indirect material adverse impacts on us, our customers, and our counterparties. These conditions could result in one or more of the following:

•   a decrease in the demand for our loans and leases and other products and services offered by us;

•   a decrease in our deposit balances due to overall reductions in the accounts of customers;

•   a decrease in the value of collateral securing our loans and leases;

•   an increase in the level of nonperforming and classified loans and leases;

•   an increase in provisions for credit losses and loan and lease charge-offs;

•   a decrease in net interest income derived from our lending and deposit gathering activities;

•   a decrease in the Company's stock price;

•   a decrease in our ability to access the capital markets; or

•   an increase in our operating expenses associated with attending to the effects of certain circumstances listed  above.

Continued inflation poses risk to the economy overall, and could indirectly pose challenges to our clients and to our business. Elevated inflation can impact our business customers through the loss of purchasing power for their customers, leading to lower sales. Rising inflation can also increase input and inventory costs for our customers, forcing them to raise their prices or lower their profitability. Supply chain disruption, also leading to inflation, can delay our customers’ shipping ability, or timing on receiving inputs for their production or inventory. Inflation can lead to higher wages for our business customers, increasing costs. All of these inflationary risks for our business customer base can be financially detrimental, leading to increased likelihood that the customer may default on a loan. In addition, sustained inflationary pressures have resulted in the FRB increasing interest rates by 475 basis points since January 1, 2022 with current federal funds rate range of between 4.75% to 5.00%.  To the extent such conditions exist or worsen, we could experience adverse effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

​

Adverse developments affecting financial institutions or the financial services industry generally, such as actual events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults or non-performance, could adversely affect our operations and lidquidity.

​

Actual events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions for the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. For example, on March 10, 2023, Silicon Valley Bank (“SVB”) was closed by the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation, which appointed the FDIC as receiver. Similarly, on March 12, 2023, Signature Bank was placed into receivership. Despite subsequent actions taken by the U.S. Department of the Treasury, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the FDIC to ensure that all depositors of SVB had access to all of their cash deposits following the closure of SVB, uncertainty remains with respect to the health of the U.S. banking system, particularly around liquidity, uninsured deposits and deposit concentration.

​

Inflation and rapid increases in interest rates have led to a decline in the fair value of securities portfolios with yields below current market interest rates. The U.S. Federal Reserve Board announced a program to provide up to $25 billion of loans to financial institutions secured by such government securities held by financial institutions to mitigate the risk of potential losses on the sale of such instruments. However, widespread demands for customer withdrawals or other needs of financial institutions for immediate liquidity may exceed the capacity of such program. There is no guarantee that the U.S. Department of Treasury, the U.S. Federal Reserve and the FDIC will provide access to uninsured funds in the future in the event of the closure of other banks or financial institutions in a timely fashion or at all.

​

If such levels of market disruption and volatility continue, there can be no assurance that we will not experience adverse effects, which may materially affect the market price of our common stock and/or our liquidity, financial condition and profitability.

​

A majority of our business is concentrated in Maryland and Delaware, a significant amount of which is concentrated in real estate lending, so a decline in the local economy and real estate markets could adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

Because most of our loans are made to customers who reside in Maryland and Delaware, a decline in local economic conditions may have a greater effect on our earnings and capital than on the earnings and capital of larger financial institutions whose loan portfolios are geographically diverse. Further, a significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate, including construction and land development loans, all of which are in greater demand when interest rates are low and economic conditions are good. Accordingly, a decline in local economic conditions would likely have an adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations, and the impact on us would likely be greater than the impact felt by larger financial institutions whose loan portfolios are geographically diverse. We cannot guarantee that any risk management practices that we implement to address our geographic and loan concentrations will be effective in preventing losses relating to our loan portfolio.

Our concentrations of commercial real estate loans could subject us to increased regulatory scrutiny and directives, which could force us to preserve or raise capital and/or limit our future commercial lending activities.

The FRB and the FDIC, along with the other federal banking regulators, issued guidance in December 2006 entitled “Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices” directed at institutions that have particularly high concentrations of commercial real estate loans within their lending portfolios. This guidance suggests that these institutions face a heightened risk of financial difficulties in the event of adverse changes in the economy and commercial real estate markets. Accordingly, the guidance suggests that institutions whose concentrations exceed certain percentages of capital should implement heightened risk management practices appropriate to their concentration risk. Federal bank regulatory guidelines identify institutions potentially exposed to commercial real estate concentration risk as those that have (i) experienced rapid growth in commercial real estate lending, (ii) notable exposure to a specific type of commercial real estate, (iii) total reported loans for construction, land development and other land loans representing 100% or more of the institution’s capital, or (iv) total commercial real estate loans representing 300% or more of the institution’s capital if the outstanding balance of the institution’s commercial real estate loan portfolio has increased 50% or more during the prior 36 months. The guidance provides that banking regulators may require such institutions to reduce their concentrations and/or maintain higher capital ratios than institutions with lower concentrations in commercial real estate. Due to our emphasis on commercial real estate and construction lending, as of December 31, 2022, non-owner-occupied commercial real estate loans (including construction, land and land development loans) represented 290.4% of total risk-based capital. Construction, land and land development loans represent 69.8% of total risk-based capital. The commercial real estate portfolio has increased 117.7% during the prior 36 months. We may be subject to heightened supervisory scrutiny during future examinations and/or be required to maintain higher levels of capital as a result of our commercial real estate concentrations, which could require us to obtain additional capital, and may adversely affect shareholder returns. Management cannot predict the extent to which this guidance will impact our operations or capital requirements. Further, we cannot guarantee that any risk management practices we implement will be effective in preventing losses resulting from concentrations in our commercial real estate portfolio.

Interest rates and other economic conditions will impact our results of operations.

Our results of operations may be materially and adversely affected by changes in prevailing economic conditions, including declines in real estate values, rapid changes in interest rates and the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government. Our results of operations are significantly impacted by the spread between the interest rates earned on assets and the interest rates paid on deposits and other interest-bearing liabilities (i.e., net interest income), including advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (the “FHLB”) of Atlanta. Interest rate risk arises from mismatches (i.e., the interest sensitivity gap) between the dollar amount of repricing or maturing assets and liabilities. If more assets reprice or mature than liabilities during a falling interest rate environment, then our earnings could be negatively impacted. Conversely, if more liabilities reprice or mature than assets during a rising interest rate environment, then our earnings could be negatively impacted.

Changes in market interest rates are affected by many factors beyond our control, including inflation, unemployment, money supply, international events, and events in world financial markets. In response to inflationary pressures, the FRB has increased interest rates by 475 basis points since January 1, 2022 with a current federal funds rate range of between 4.75% to 5.00%.  Increases in interest rates could adversely affect borrowers’ ability to pay the principal or interest on existing loans or reduce their desire to borrow more money. This may lead to an increase in our nonperforming assets, a decrease in loan originations, or a reduction in the value of and income from our loans, any of which could have a material and negative effect on our results of operations.

The Bank may experience credit losses in excess of its allowances, which would adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations.

The risk of credit losses on loans varies with, among other things, general economic conditions, the type of loan being made, the creditworthiness of the borrower over the term of the loan and, in the case of a collateralized loan, the value and marketability of the collateral for the loan. Management at the Bank bases the allowance for credit losses upon, among other things, historical experience, an evaluation of economic conditions and regular reviews of delinquencies and loan portfolio quality. If management’s assumptions and judgments prove to be incorrect and the allowance for credit losses is inadequate to absorb future losses, or if the bank regulatory authorities, as a part of their examination process, require the Bank to increase its allowance for credit losses, our earnings and capital could be significantly and adversely affected. We estimate losses inherent in our loan portfolio, the adequacy of our allowance for credit losses and the values of certain assets by using estimates based on difficult, subjective, and complex judgments, including estimates as to the effects of economic conditions and how those economic conditions might affect the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans or the value of assets. Material additions to the allowance for credit losses at the Bank would result in a decrease in the Bank’s net income and capital and could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition.

Our investment securities portfolio is subject to credit risk, market risk and liquidity risk.

As of December 31, 2022, we had classified 12.9% of our debt securities as available-for-sale pursuant to the Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) Topic 320 (“ASC 320”) of the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) relating to accounting for investments. ASC 320 requires that unrealized gains and losses in the estimated value of the available-for-sale portfolio be “marked to market” and reflected as a separate item in stockholders’ equity (net of tax) as accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). The remaining debt securities are classified as held-to-maturity in accordance with ASC 320 and are stated at amortized cost. Equity securities with readily determinable fair values are recorded at fair value with changes in fair value recorded in earnings. Stockholders’ equity will continue to reflect the unrealized gains and losses (net of tax) of these investments. At December 31, 2022, the Company’s accumulated other comprehensive loss amounted to $9.0 million. There can be no assurance that the market value of our investment portfolio will not continue to decline, causing a corresponding decline in stockholders’ equity.

The Bank is a member of the FHLB of Atlanta and our investments include stock issued by the FHLB of Atlanta. These investments could be subject to future impairment charges and there can be no guaranty of future dividends.

Management believes that several factors will affect the market values of our investment portfolio. These risk factors include, but are not limited to, changes in interest rates, rating agency downgrades of the securities, defaults of the issuers of the securities, lack of market pricing of the securities, and instability in the credit markets. Lack of market activity with respect to some securities has, in certain circumstances, required us to base our fair market valuation on unobservable inputs. Any changes in these risk factors, in current accounting principles or interpretations of these principles could impact our assessment of fair value and thus the determination of other-than-temporary impairment of the securities in the investment securities portfolio. Write-downs of investment securities would negatively affect our earnings and regulatory capital ratios.

Impairment of investment securities, goodwill, other intangible assets, or deferred tax assets could require charges to earnings, which could result in a negative impact on our results of operations.

We are required to record a non-cash charge to earnings when management determines that an investment security is other-than-temporarily impaired. In assessing whether the impairment of an investment security is other-than-temporary,

management considers the length of time and extent to which the fair value has been less than cost, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and the intent and ability to retain our investment in the security for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value in the near term.

Under current accounting standards, goodwill is not amortized but, instead, is subject to impairment tests on at least an annual basis or more frequently if an event occurs or circumstances change that reduce the fair value of a reporting unit below its carrying amount. Intangible assets other than goodwill are also subject to impairment tests at least annually. A decline in the price of the Company’s common stock or occurrence of a triggering event following any of our quarterly earnings releases and prior to the filing of the periodic report for that period could, under certain circumstances, cause us to perform goodwill and other intangible assets impairment tests and result in an impairment charge being recorded for that period which was not reflected in such earnings release. In the event that we conclude that all or a portion of our goodwill or other intangible assets may be impaired, a non-cash charge for the amount of such impairment would be recorded to earnings. At December 31, 2022, we had recorded goodwill of $63.3 million and other intangible assets of $5.5 million, representing approximately 17.4% and 1.5% of stockholders’ equity, respectively.

In assessing the realizability of deferred tax assets, management considers whether it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be realized. Assessing the need for, or the sufficiency of, a valuation allowance requires management to evaluate all available evidence, both negative and positive, including the recent trend of quarterly earnings. Positive evidence necessary to overcome the negative evidence includes whether future taxable income in sufficient amounts and character within the carryback and carryforward periods is available under the tax law, including the use of tax planning strategies. When negative evidence (e.g., cumulative losses in recent years, history of operating loss or tax credit carry forwards expiring unused) exists, more positive evidence than negative evidence will be necessary. At December 31, 2022, our gross deferred tax assets were approximately $15.1 million.  There was a valuation allowance of deferred taxes of $791 thousand recorded at December 31, 2022 as management believes it is more likely than not that net operating losses for the parent company only will not be realized for state income tax purposes.  The holding company files a separate return with the state of Maryland and does not expect that the holding company will generate sufficient taxable income to utilize its deferred tax assets. No valuation allowance is currently recorded for state deferred income taxes of the Company’s subsidiaries or at the Federal level where the Company files consolidated tax return.

Changes in accounting standards or interpretation of new or existing standards may affect how we report our financial condition and results of operations.

From time to time the FASB and the SEC change accounting regulations and reporting standards that govern the preparation of the Company’s financial statements. In addition, the FASB, SEC, bank regulators and the outside independent auditors may revise their previous interpretations regarding existing accounting regulations and the application of these accounting standards. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how to record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, there could be a requirement to apply a new or revised accounting standard retroactively, resulting in the restatement of prior period financial statements.

Our future success will depend on our ability to compete effectively in the highly competitive financial services industry.

We face substantial competition in all phases of our operations from a variety of different competitors. We compete with commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, money market funds and other mutual funds, as well as other local and community, super-regional, national and international financial institutions that operate offices in our primary market areas and elsewhere. Our future growth and success will depend on our ability to compete effectively in this highly competitive financial services environment. Failure to compete effectively to attract new or to retain existing, clients may reduce or limit our net income and our market share and may adversely affect our results of operations, financial condition and growth.

Our funding sources may prove insufficient to replace deposits and support our future growth.

We rely on customer deposits, advances from the FHLB, and lines of credit at other financial institutions to fund our operations. Although we have historically been able to replace maturing deposits and advances if desired, no assurance can be given that we would be able to replace such funds in the future if our financial condition or the financial condition of the FHLB or market conditions were to change. Our financial flexibility will be severely constrained and/or our cost of funds will increase if we are unable to maintain our access to funding or if financing necessary to accommodate future growth is not available at favorable interest rates. Finally, if we are required to place greater reliance on more expensive funding sources to support future growth, our revenues may not increase proportionately to cover our costs. In this case, our profitability would be adversely affected.

The cost savings that we estimate for mergers and acquisitions may not be realized.

​

The success of our mergers and acquisitions may depend, in part, on the ability to realize the estimated cost savings from combining the acquired businesses with our existing operations. It is possible that the potential cost savings could turn out to be more difficult to achieve than anticipated. The cost savings estimates also depend on the ability to combine the businesses in a manner that permits those cost savings to be realized. If the estimates turn out to be incorrect or there is an inability to combine successfully, the anticipated cost savings may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

​

Combining acquired businesses may be more difficult, costly, or time-consuming than expected, or could result in the loss of customers.

​

It is possible that the process of merger integration of acquired companies could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of ongoing business or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect the ability to maintain relationships with clients and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the merger or acquisition. There also may be disruptions that cause the Bank to lose customers or cause customers to withdraw their deposits. Customers may not readily accept changes to their banking arrangements or other customer relationships after the merger or acquisition.

​

The loss of key personnel could disrupt our operations and result in reduced earnings.

Our growth and profitability will depend upon our ability to attract and retain skilled managerial, marketing and technical personnel. Competition for qualified personnel in the financial services industry is intense, and there can be no assurance that we will be successful in attracting and retaining such personnel.

Our lending activities subject us to the risk of environmental liabilities.

A significant portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real property. During the ordinary course of business, we may foreclose on and take title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, we may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage.

Environmental laws may require us to incur substantial expenses and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit our ability to use or sell the affected property. In addition, future laws or more stringent interpretations of enforcement policies with respect to existing laws may increase our exposure to environmental liability. Although we have policies and procedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure action on real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

​

Income from mortgage-banking operations is volatile and we may incur losses with respect to our mortgage-banking operations that could negatively affect our earnings.

One component of our strategy is to sell on the secondary market the longer term, conforming fixed-rate residential mortgage loans that we originate, earning noninterest income in the form of gains on the sale of the loans. When interest rates rise, as they have since the first quarter of 2022, the demand for mortgage loans tends to fall and may reduce the number of loans we can originate for sale. Weak or deteriorating economic conditions also tend to reduce loan demand. Although we sell, and intend to continue selling, most loans in the secondary market with limited or no recourse, we are required, and will continue to be required, to give customary representations and warranties to the buyers relating to compliance with applicable law. If we breach those representations and warranties, the buyers will be able to require us to repurchase the loans and we may incur a loss on the repurchase. We have not been required to repurchase any loans as of December 31, 2022.

We provide banking services to customers who do business in the cannabis industry and the strict enforcement of federal laws regarding cannabis would likely result in our inability to continue to provide banking services to these customers and we could have legal action taken against us by the federal government.

We have deposit and loan customers that are licensed by the state of Maryland to do business in the cannabis industry as growers, processors, and dispensaries. While cannabis is legal in the state of Maryland, it remains classified as a Schedule I controlled substance under the Federal Controlled Substances Act (“CSA”). As such, the cultivation, use, distribution, and possession of cannabis is a violation of federal law that is punishable by imprisonment and fines. Moreover, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled in USA v. Oakland Cannabis Buyers’ Coop. that the federal government has the authority to regulate and criminalize cannabis, including medical marijuana.

In January 2018, the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) rescinded the “Cole Memo” and related memoranda which characterized the enforcement of the CSA against persons and entities complying with state regulatory systems permitting the use, manufacture and sale of medical marijuana as an inefficient use of their prosecutorial resources and discretion. The impact of the DOJ’s rescission of the Cole Memo and related memoranda is unclear, but may result in the DOJ increasing its enforcement actions against the regulated cannabis industry generally.

As in past years, the U.S. Congress has enacted an omnibus spending bill that includes a provision prohibiting the DOJ and the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration from using funds appropriated by that bill to prevent states from implementing their medical-use cannabis laws. This provision was recently renewed as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2022. While this provision has been re-enacted every year since 2014, and is expected to continue to be re-enacted in future federal spending bills, if Congress and the President fail to further renew the provision, then the ability of medical cannabis businesses to act in this area, and the Bank’s ability to provide banking products and services to such businesses, may be impeded. Further, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit held in USA v. McIntosh that this provision prohibits the DOJ from spending funds from relevant appropriations acts to prosecute individuals who engage in conduct permitted by state medical-use cannabis laws and who strictly comply with such laws. There is no guarantee that the U.S. Congress will extend this provision or that U.S. Federal courts located outside the Ninth Circuit will follow the ruling in USA v. McIntosh. As of the date of filing this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are aware of no federal or state court in or for Maryland that has addressed the merits of the McIntosh ruling.

Federal prosecutors have significant discretion and there can be no assurance that the federal prosecutor for the District of Maryland will not choose to strictly enforce the federal laws governing cannabis, including medical-use cannabis, or that the federal courts in Maryland will follow the Ninth Circuit’s ruling in USA v. McIntosh. Any change in the federal government’s enforcement position, could cause us to immediately cease providing banking services to the medical-use cannabis industry in Maryland.

Additionally, as the possession and use of cannabis remains illegal under the CSA, we may be deemed to be aiding and abetting illegal activities through the services that we provide to these customers and could have legal action taken against us by the Federal government, including imprisonment and fines. Any change in position or potential action taken against us could result in significant financial damage to us and our stockholders.

The FinCEN published guidelines in 2014 for financial institutions servicing state legal cannabis business. These guidelines were issued for the explicit purpose so “that financial institutions can provide services to marijuana-related businesses in a manner consistent with their obligations to know their customers and to report possible criminal activity.” The Bank has and will continue to follow this and other FinCEN guidance in the areas of cannabis banking. Any adverse change in this FinCEN guidance, any new regulations or legislation, any change in existing regulations or oversight, whether a change in regulatory policy or a change in a regulator’s interpretation of a law or regulation, could have a negative impact on our interest income and noninterest income, as well as the cost of our operations, increasing our cost of regulatory compliance and of doing business, and/or otherwise affect us, which may materially affect our profitability.

We may be subject to other adverse claims.

We may from time to time be subject to claims from customers for losses due to alleged breaches of fiduciary duties, errors and omissions of employees, officers and agents, incomplete documentation, the failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations, or many other reasons. Also, our employees may knowingly or unknowingly violate laws and regulations. Management may not be aware of any violations until after their occurrence. This lack of knowledge may not insulate us or our subsidiary from liability. Claims and legal actions may result in legal expenses and liabilities that may reduce our profitability and hurt our financial condition.

We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information about customers and counterparties and our financial condition could be adversely affected if we rely on misleading information.

In deciding whether to extend credit or to enter into other transactions with customers and counterparties, we may rely on information furnished to us by or on behalf of customers and counterparties, including financial statements and other financial information, which we do not independently verify. We also may rely on representations of customers and counterparties as to the accuracy and completeness of that information and, with respect to financial statements, on reports of independent auditors. For example, in deciding whether to extend credit to customers, we may assume that a customer’s audited financial statements conform with U.S. GAAP and present fairly, in all material respects, the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the customer. Our financial condition and results of operations could be negatively impacted to the extent we rely on financial statements that do not comply with GAAP or are materially misleading.

Our exposure to operational, technological and organizational risk may adversely affect us.

We are exposed to many types of operational risks, including reputation, legal and compliance risk, the risk of fraud or theft by employees or outsiders, unauthorized transactions by employees or operational errors, clerical or record-keeping errors, and errors resulting from faulty or disabled computer or telecommunications systems.

Certain errors may be repeated or compounded before they are discovered and successfully rectified. Our necessary dependence upon automated systems to record and process transactions may further increase the risk that technical system flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect. We may also be subject to disruptions of our operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond our control (for example, computer viruses or electrical or telecommunications outages), which may give rise to disruption of service to customers and to financial loss or liability. We are further exposed to the risk that our external vendors may be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors by their respective employees as are we) and to the risk that our (or our vendors’) business continuity and data security systems prove to be inadequate.

Our information systems may experience an interruption or breach in security.

We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business. We, our customers, and other financial institutions with which we interact, are subject to ongoing, continuous attempts to penetrate key systems by individual hackers, organized criminals, and in some cases, state-sponsored organizations. Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan and other systems, misappropriation of funds, and theft of proprietary Company or customer data. The occurrence of any failure, interruption or security breach of our information systems could damage our reputation,

result in a loss of customer business, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability.

Security breaches and other disruptions could compromise our information and expose us to liability, which would cause our business and reputation to suffer.

In the ordinary course of our business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our customers, suppliers and business partners, and personally identifiable information of our customers and employees, in our data centers and on our networks. The secure processing, maintenance and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure may be vulnerable to attacks by hackers or breached due to employee error, malfeasance or other disruptions. Any such breach could compromise our networks and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost or stolen. Any such access, disclosure or other loss of information could result in legal claims or proceedings, liability under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, and regulatory penalties, disrupt our operations and the services we provide to customers, damage our reputation, and cause a loss of confidence in our products and services, which could adversely affect our business, revenues and competitive position.

Our reliance on third party vendors could expose us to additional cyber risk and liability.

The operation of our business involves outsourcing of certain business functions and reliance on third-party providers, which may result in transmission and maintenance of personal, confidential, and proprietary information to and by such vendors. Although we require third-party providers to maintain certain levels of information security, such providers remain vulnerable to breaches, unauthorized access, misuse, computer viruses, or other malicious attacks that could ultimately compromise sensitive information possessed by our company. Although we contract to limit our liability in connection with attacks against third-party providers, we remain exposed to risk of loss associated with such vendors.

We outsource certain aspects of our data processing to certain third-party providers which may expose us to additional risk.

We outsource certain key aspects of our data processing to certain third-party providers. While we have selected these third-party providers carefully, we cannot control their actions. If our third-party providers encounter difficulties, including those which result from their failure to provide services for any reason or their poor performance of services, or if we have difficulty in communicating with them, our ability to adequately process and account for customer transactions could be affected, and our business operations could be adversely impacted. Replacing these third-party providers could also entail significant delay and expense.

Our third-party providers may be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes and other security breaches. Threats to information security also exist in the processing of customer information through various other third-party providers and their personnel. We may be required to expend significant additional resources to protect against the threat of such security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by such security breaches or viruses. To the extent that the activities of our third-party providers or the activities of our customers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches and viruses could expose us to claims, regulatory scrutiny, litigation and other possible liabilities.

We are dependent on our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers, and systems failures, interruptions or breaches of security could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our business is highly dependent on the successful and uninterrupted functioning of our information technology and telecommunications systems and third-party servicers. We outsource many of our major systems, such as data processing and deposit processing systems. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. If sustained or

repeated, a system failure or service denial could result in a deterioration of our ability to provide customer service, compromise our ability to operate effectively, damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business and/or subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, we provide our customers the ability to bank remotely, including online over the Internet. The secure transmission of confidential information is a critical element of remote banking. Our network could be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes, spam attacks, human error, natural disasters, power loss and other security breaches. We may be required to spend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by security breaches or viruses. Further, we outsource some of the data processing functions used for remote banking, and accordingly we are dependent on the expertise and performance of our third-party providers. To the extent that our activities, the activities of our customers, or the activities of our third-party service providers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches and viruses could expose us to claims, litigation and other possible liabilities. Any inability to prevent security breaches or computer viruses could also cause existing customers to lose confidence in our systems and could adversely affect our reputation, results of operations and ability to attract and maintain customers and businesses. In addition, a security breach could also subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability and cause reputational damage.

Technological changes affect our business, and we may have fewer resources than many competitors to invest in technological improvements.

Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to use technology to provide products and services that provide convenience to customers and to create additional efficiencies in operations. We may need to make significant additional capital investments in technology in the future, and we may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services.

The replacement of the LIBOR benchmark interest rate may have an impact on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Certain loans made by us were made at variable rates that use LIBOR as a benchmark for establishing the interest rate. In addition, we also have investments, debt instruments and interest rate derivatives that reference LIBOR. On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (“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 Federal Reserve jointly announced that entering into new contacts 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 U.S. dollar LIBOR, and immediately after June 30, 2023, in the case of the remaining U.S. dollar LIBOR settings. In the United States, efforts to identify a set of alternative U.S. dollar reference interest rates are ongoing, and the Alternative Reference Rate Committee (“ARRC”) has recommended the use of 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 the Bank's costs to raise funds for SOFR as compared to LIBOR. For cash products and loans, the 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. To further reduce differences between replacement indices and substitute indices, market practitioners have also gravitated towards credit sensitive rates, the leading among them being the Bloomberg Short-Term Bank Yield Index (“BSBY”). The ARRC announced on October 21, 2020 that they are not well positioned to adjudicate the development of a credit sensitive rate and will not criticize firms solely for using reference rates other than SOFR, such as BSBY. After an extended analysis by a multidisciplinary project team to identify operational and contractual best practices, assess our risks, and identify the detailed list of all financial instruments impacted, we adopted the SOFR family of interest rates for our financial instruments going forward. Under the oversight of our Enterprise Risk Committee, we are managing the transition, facilitating communication with our customers and counterparties, and monitoring the impacts of this transition.

​

There are also operational issues which may create a delay in the transition to SOFR or other substitute indices, leading to uncertainty across the industry. The implementation of a substitute index or indices for the calculation of interest rates under our loan agreements with our borrowers may incur significant expenses in effecting the transition, may result in reduced loan balances if borrowers do not accept the substitute index or indices, and may result in disputes or litigation with customers over the appropriateness or comparability to LIBOR of the substitute index or indices, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations. The transition from LIBOR could create considerable costs and additional risk. The discontinuance of LIBOR and related uncertainty may adversely affect the market value of, the return on, or the expenses associated with our financial assets and liabilities that are based on or are linked to LIBOR. In addition, the market transition away from LIBOR could prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of our preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate. Although we are currently unable to assess the ultimate impact of the transition from LIBOR, the failure to adequately manage the transition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

​

Climate change manifesting as physical or transition risks could adversely affect our operations, businesses and customers.

​

There is an increasing concern over the risks of climate change and related environmental sustainability matters. The physical risks of climate change include discrete events, such as flooding and wildfires, and longer-term shifts in climate patterns, such as extreme heat, sea level rise, and more frequent and prolonged drought. Under medium or longer-term scenarios, such events, if uninterrupted or unaddressed, could disrupt our operations or those of our customers or third parties on which we rely, including through direct damage to assets and indirect impacts from supply chain disruption and market volatility. Additionally, transitioning to a low-carbon economy may entail extensive policy, legal, technology and market initiatives. Transition risks, including changes in consumer preferences and additional regulatory requirements or supervisory expectations or taxes, could increase our expenses and undermine our strategies. In addition, our reputation and client relationships may be damaged as a result of our practices related to climate change, including our involvement, or our customers’ involvement, in certain industries or projects, in the absence of mitigation and/or transition measures, associated with causing or exacerbating climate change, as well as any decisions we make to continue to conduct or change our activities in response to considerations relating to climate change. As climate risk is interconnected with all key risk types, we have developed and continue to enhance processes to embed climate risk considerations into our risk management strategies established for risks such as market, credit and operational risks; however, because the timing and severity of climate change may not be predictable, our risk management strategies may not be effective in mitigating climate risk exposure.

​

Risks Relating to the Regulation of our Industry

We operate in a highly regulated environment, which could restrain our growth and profitability.

Banking is highly regulated under federal and state law. As such, we are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and legal requirements that govern almost all aspects of our operations. Compliance with laws and regulations can be difficult and costly, and changes to laws and regulations often impose additional operating costs. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations, even if the failure follows good faith effort or reflects a difference in interpretation, could subject us to restrictions on our business activities, enforcement actions and fines and other penalties, any of which could adversely affect our results of operations, regulatory capital levels and the price of our securities. Further, any new laws, rules and regulations, such as the Dodd-Frank Act, could make compliance more difficult or expensive or otherwise adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Federal regulators periodically examine our business, and we may be required to remediate adverse examination findings.

The FRB and the OCC periodically examine our business, including our compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, the FRB or the OCC were to determine that our financial condition, capital resource, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity or other aspects of any of our operations had become unsatisfactory, or that we were in violation of any law or regulation, it may take a number of different remedial actions as it deems appropriate. Any

regulatory action against us could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our FDIC deposit insurance premiums and assessments may increase.

The deposits of the Bank are insured by the FDIC up to legal limits and, accordingly, subject to the payment of FDIC deposit insurance assessments. The Bank’s regular assessments are determined by its risk classifications, which are based on its regulatory capital levels and the level of supervisory concern that it poses. Further increase in assessment rates or special assessments may occur in the future, especially if there are significant additional financial institution failures. Any future special assessments, increases in assessment rates or required prepayments in FDIC insurance premiums could reduce our profitability or limit our ability to pursue certain business opportunities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to numerous laws designed to protect consumers, including the Community Reinvestment Act and fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to a wide variety of sanctions.

The CRA, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act and other fair lending laws and regulations impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Department of Justice and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful regulatory challenge to an institution’s performance under the CRA or fair lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisition activity, restrictions on expansion and restrictions on entering new business lines. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We are subject to evolving and extensive regulations and requirements. Our failure to adhere to these requirements or the failure or circumvention of our controls and procedures could seriously harm our business.

We are subject to extensive regulation as a financial institution and are also required to follow the corporate governance and financial reporting practices and policies required of a company whose stock is registered under the Exchange Act and listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market. Compliance with these requirements means we incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses. Compliance also requires a significant diversion of management time and attention, particularly with regard to disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. Although we have reviewed, and will continue to review, our disclosure controls and procedures in order to determine whether they are effective, our controls and procedures may not be able to prevent errors or frauds in the future.

Faulty judgments, simple errors or mistakes, or the failure of our personnel to adhere to established controls and procedures may make it difficult for us to ensure that the objectives of the control system will be met. A failure of our controls and procedures to detect other than inconsequential errors or fraud could seriously harm our business and results of operations.

We face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the BSA and other anti-money laundering statues and regulations.

The BSA, the USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain an effective anti-money laundering program and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal Financial Crimes Enforcement Network is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration and Internal Revenue Service. We are also subject to increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by the Office of Foreign Assets Control. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions, which may include restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including our acquisition plans. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could

also have serious reputational consequences for us. Any of these results could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Relating to the Company’s Securities

Our common stock is not insured by any governmental entity.

Our common stock is not a deposit account or other obligation of any bank and is not insured by the FDIC or any other governmental entity. Investment in our common stock is subject to risk, including possible loss.

Our ability to pay dividends is limited by law and contract.

The continued ability to pay dividends to shareholders depends in part on dividends from the Bank. The amount of dividends that the Bank may pay to the Company is limited by federal laws and regulations. The ability of the Bank to pay dividends is also subject to its profitability, financial condition and cash flow requirements. There is no assurance that the Bank will be able to pay dividends to the Company in the future. The decision may be made to limit the payment of dividends even when the legal ability to pay them exists, in order to retain earnings for other uses.

Our 2035 Debentures contain restrictions on our ability to declare and pay dividends on or repurchase our common stock.

Under the terms of our Junior Subordinated Debt Securities due 2035 (the “2035 Debentures”), if (i) there has occurred and is continuing an event of default; (ii) we are in default with respect to payment of any obligations under the related guarantee; or (iii) we have given notice of our election to defer payments of interest on the 2035 Debentures by extending the interest distribution period as provided in the indenture governing the 2035 Debentures and such period, or any extension thereof, has commenced and is continuing, then we may not, among other things, declare or pay any dividends or distributions on, or redeem, purchase, acquire, or make a liquidation payment with respect to, any of our

capital stock, including our common stock. As of December 31, 2022, we were current on all interest due on the 2035 Debentures.

The shares of our common stock are not heavily traded.

Shares of our common stock are listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market, but are not heavily traded. Securities that are not heavily traded can be more volatile than stock trading in an active public market. Stock price volatility may make it more difficult for you to resell your common stock when you want and at prices you find attractive. Our stock price can fluctuate significantly and may decline in response to a variety of factors.

Management cannot predict the extent to which an active public market for the shares of the common stock will develop or be sustained in the future. Accordingly, holders of shares of our common stock may not be able to sell them at the volumes, prices, or times that they desire. General market fluctuations, industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events, such as economic slowdowns or recessions, interest rate changes or credit loss trends, could also cause our stock price to decrease regardless of operating results. We urge you to obtain current market quotations for our common stock when you consider investing in our common stock.

Future sales of our common stock or other securities may dilute the value and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

In many situations, the board of directors has the authority, without any vote of our shareholders, to issue shares of authorized but unissued stock, including shares authorized and unissued under our equity incentive plans. In the future, additional securities may be issued, through public or private offerings, in order to raise additional capital. Any such issuance would dilute the percentage of ownership interest of existing shareholders and may dilute the per share book value of our common stock. In addition, option holders may exercise their options at a time when we would otherwise be able to obtain additional equity capital on more favorable terms.

Provisions in our governing documents and Maryland law may have an anti-takeover effect, and there are substantial regulatory limitations on changes of control of bank holding companies.

​

Our corporate organizational documents and provisions of federal and state law to which we are subject contain certain provisions that could have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, make more difficult or prevent an attempted acquisition that you may favor or an attempted replacement of our board of directors or management.

​

In addition, certain provisions of Maryland law may delay, discourage or prevent an attempted acquisition or change in control. Furthermore, banking laws impose notice, approval, and ongoing regulatory requirements on any shareholder or other party that seeks to acquire direct or indirect “control” of an FDIC-insured depository institution or its holding company. These laws include the BHC Act and the Change in Bank Control Act. These laws could delay or prevent an acquisition.

​

We may issue debt and equity securities that are senior to the common stock as to distributions and in liquidation, which could negatively affect the value of the common stock.

In the future, we may increase our capital resources by entering into debt or debt-like financing or issuing debt or equity securities, which could include issuances of senior notes, subordinated notes, preferred stock or common stock. In the event of our liquidation, our lenders and holders of our debt or preferred securities would receive a distribution of our available assets before distributions to the holders of our common stock. Our decision to incur debt and issue securities in future offerings will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control. We cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of its future offerings and debt financings. Future offerings could reduce the value of shares of our common stock and dilute a stockholder’s interest in us.

​

Risks related to the Proposed Merger

​

We expect to continue to incur substantial costs related to the Mergerand integration.

​

We have incurred and will continue to incur substantial costs in connection with the proposed Merger. These costs include legal, financial advisory, accounting, consulting and other advisory fees, retention, severance and employee benefit-related costs, public company filing fees and other regulatory fees, financial printing and other printing costs, closing, integration and other related costs. While we have attempted to accurately forecast these costs, factors that are beyond our control or that we have failed to accurately estimate could result in us incurring future charges in excess of our current estimates. These charges could be material and could materially adversely affect our future earnings. If the merger is not completed, we would have incurred these expenses without realizing the expected benefits of the Merger.

​

​

Failure to complete the proposed Merger could negatively impact Shore.

​

If the Merger with TCFC is not completed for any reason there may be various adverse consequences and we may experience negative reactions from the financial markets and from our customers and employees. For example, our business may have been impacted adversely by the failure to pursue other beneficial opportunities due to the focus of management on the Merger, the benefits from which may not be realized. Additionally, if the merger agreement is terminated, the market price of our common stock could decline to the extent that current market prices reflect a market assumption that the Merger will be beneficial and will be completed. We also could be subject to litigation related to any failure to complete the Merger or to proceedings commenced against us to perform obligations under the merger agreement. If the merger agreement is terminated under certain circumstances, we may be required to pay a termination fee of $10.5 million to TCFC.

​

The proposed integration of Shore and TCFC may be more difficult, costly or time consuming than expected and Shore may fail to realize the anticipated benefits of the proposed Merger.

​

The success of the proposed  Merger will depend, in part, on the ability to realize the anticipated growth opportunities and cost savings from combining the businesses of Shore and TCFC. To realize the anticipated benefits and cost savings from

the proposed Merger, we must successfully integrate and combine the businesses of Shore and TCFC in a manner that permits those cost savings to be realized. If we are not able to successfully achieve these objectives, or if we have failed to accurately estimate the anticipated benefits of the proposed Merger, the anticipated benefits may not be realized fully or at all, they may take longer to realize than expected, and we may incur additional unforeseen expenses.

​

The integration process could result in the loss of key employees, diversion of management attention and resources, the disruption of the combined company’s ongoing businesses or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect the combined company’s ability to maintain relationships with clients, customers, depositors and employees.

​

Furthermore, the board of directors and executive leadership of the combined company will consist of former directors and executive officers from each of Shore and TCFC. Combining the boards of directors and management teams of each company into a single board and a single management team could require the reconciliation of differing priorities and philosophies.

​

We will be subject to business uncertainties and contractual restrictions while the proposed Merger with TCFC is pending.

​

Uncertainty about the effect of the Merger on employees and customers may have an adverse effect on Shore. These uncertainties may impair our ability to attract, retain and motivate key personnel until the Merger is completed, and could cause customers and others that deal with us to seek to change existing business relationships with Shore. In addition, subject to certain exceptions, we have agreed to operate our business in the ordinary course in all material respects and to refrain from taking certain actions that may adversely affect our ability to consummate the transactions contemplated by the merger agreement on a timely basis without the consent of TCFC. These restrictions may prevent us from pursuing attractive business opportunities that may arise prior to the completion of the Merger.

​

Our future results may suffer if we do not effectively manage our expanded operations.

​

As a result of the proposed Merger, the size, scope, and complexity of our business would increase significantly beyond that of either Shore’s or TCFC’s business prior to the proposed Merger. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to manage and achieve the benefits we have anticipated will be associated with this expanded business, challenges, including challenges related to the management and monitoring of new operations, and the associated increased costs and complexity. There can be no assurances that we will be successful or that we will realize the expected operating efficiencies, cost savings, growth opportunities, revenue enhancements or other benefits currently anticipated.

​

​

Item 1B.      Unresolved Staff Comments.

None.

​

Item 2.      Properties.

Our offices are listed in the tables below. The address of the Company and Bank’s main office is 18 East Dover Street in Easton, Maryland. The Company owns the real property at 28969 Information Lane in Easton, Maryland, which also houses the Operations, Information Technology, and Human Resources departments of the Company and its subsidiaries.

PART II

Item 5.      Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities.

MARKET INFORMATION, HOLDERS AND CASH DIVIDENDS

The shares of the Company’s common stock are listed on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol “SHBI”. As of March 1, 2023, the Company had approximately 1,916 registered holders of record.

Shareholders received quarterly cash dividends on shares of common stock totaling $9.5 million in 2022 and $6.6 million in 2021. Dividends remained at $0.12 for the entire year of 2022.   As a general matter, the payment of dividends is at the discretion of the Company’s Board of Directors, based on such factors as operating results, financial condition, capital adequacy, regulatory requirements, and stockholder return. The Company anticipates continuing a regular quarterly cash dividend, although future dividend increases must be approved by TCFC prior to the planned merger in accordance with agreement and plan of merger signed December 14, 2022. However, we have no obligation to pay dividends and we may change our dividend policy at any time without notice to shareholders. Any future determination to pay dividends to holders of our common stock will depend on our results of operations, financial condition, capital requirements, banking regulations, contractual restrictions and any other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant.

The transfer agent for the Company’s common stock is:

Broadridge

51 Mercedes Way

Edgewood, NY 11717

Investor Relations: 1-800-353-0103

E-mail for investor inquiries: shareholder@broadridge.com .

www.broadridge.com

​

EQUITY COMPENSATION PLAN INFORMATION

The following table provides information as of December 31, 2022, with respect to options outstanding and shares available for future awards under the Company’s active equity incentive plans.

​

​

All other information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to the section of the Company’s definitive proxy statement to be filed in connection with the 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders entitled “Beneficial Ownership of Common Stock”.

​

​

UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

​

There were no unregistered sales of the Company’s stock during the fourth quarter of 2022.

​

The Company announced a new stock repurchase program that was approved on July 6, 2022. Under the new stock repurchase program, the Company is authorized to repurchase up to $5.0 million of the Company’s Common Stock, representing approximately 1.4% of its issued and outstanding Common Stock based on the closing price of the Company’s Common Stock on July 5, 2022. The program may be limited or terminated at any time without prior notice. The program will expire March 31, 2023. There were no purchases made by or on behalf of us or any “affiliated purchaser” (as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Exchange Act) of our common stock during the fourth quarter of 2022.

​

​

Item 6.      Reserved

​

​

Item 7.      Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.

The following discussion compares the Company’s financial condition at December 31, 2022 to its financial condition at December 31, 2021 and the results of operations for the years ended December 31, 2022 and 2021. This discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the Notes thereto appearing in Item 8 of Part II of this annual report.

PERFORMANCE OVERVIEW

The Company recorded net income of $31.2 million for 2022 and net income of $15.4 million for 2021. The basic and diluted income per share was $1.57 and $1.17 for fiscal year 2022 and 2021, respectively. When comparing net income for 2022 to 2021, earnings increased due to increases in net interest income $37.2 million and noninterest income of $9.6 million primarily offset by an increase in noninterest expense of $23.5 million related to increases in salaries and wages, employee benefits, and other loan and customer expenses primarily due to the acquisition of Severn Bancorp, Inc. (“Severn”) in the fourth quarter of 2021.

Total assets were $3.477 billion at December 31, 2022, a $17.1 million, or less than 1.0%, increase when compared to $3.460 billion at the end of 2021.  During 2022, the Company shifted its asset mix by deploying cash and cash equivalents into higher yielding loans and investment securities.

Total deposits decreased $16.5 million, or less than 1%, when compared to December 31, 2021.  The decrease in total deposits was due to decreases in money market and savings accounts of $85.7 million, noninterest-bearing deposits of $65.5 million and time deposits of $35.2 million, partially offset by an increase in interest bearing checking accounts of $170.0 million.  

Total stockholders’ equity increased $13.6 million, or 3.9%, when compared to December 31, 2021, primarily due to current year earnings, partially offset by unrealized losses on available for sale securities of $9.1 million and dividends paid to common stockholders of $9.5 million.  At December 31, 2022, the ratio of total equity to total assets was 10.48% and the ratio of total tangible equity to total tangible assets was 8.67%, compared to 10.14% and 8.25% for 2021.

CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES

The Company’s consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with GAAP and follow general practices within the industries in which it operates. Application of these principles requires management to make estimates, assumptions, and judgments that affect the amounts reported in the financial statements and accompanying notes. These estimates, assumptions, and judgments are based on information available as of the date of the financial statements; accordingly, as this information changes, the financial statements could reflect different estimates, assumptions, and judgments. Certain policies inherently have a greater reliance on the use of estimates, assumptions, and judgments and as such have a greater possibility of producing results that could be materially different than originally reported.

The most significant accounting policies that the Company follows are presented in Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements. These policies, along with the disclosures presented in the notes to the financial statements and in this discussion, provide information on how significant assets and liabilities are valued in the financial statements and how those values are determined. Based on the valuation techniques used and the sensitivity of financial statement amounts to the methods, assumptions, and estimates underlying those amounts, management has determined that the accounting policies with respect to the allowance for credit losses, accounting for loans acquired in business combinations, and goodwill are critical accounting policies. These policies are considered critical because they relate to accounting areas that require the most subjective or complex judgments, and, as such, could be most subject to revision as new information becomes available.

Loans Acquired in a Business Combination

Acquired loans are classified as either (i) purchase credit-impaired (“PCI”) loans or (ii) purchased performing loans and are recorded at fair value on the date of acquisition.

​

PCI loans are those for which there is evidence of credit deterioration since origination and for which it is probable at the date of acquisition that the Company will not collect all contractually required principal and interest payments. When determining fair value, PCI loans are aggregated into pools of loans based on common risk characteristics as of the date of acquisition such as loan type, date of origination, and evidence of credit quality deterioration such as internal risk grades and past due and nonaccrual status. The difference between contractually required payments at acquisition and the cash flows expected to be collected at acquisition is referred to as the “nonaccretable difference.” Any excess of cash flows expected at acquisition over the estimated fair value is referred to as the “accretable yield” and is recognized as interest income over the remaining life of the loan when there is a reasonable expectation about the amount and timing of such cash flows.

​

On a quarterly basis, we evaluate our estimate of cash flows expected to be collected on PCI loans. Estimates of cash flows for PCI loans require significant judgment. Subsequent decreases to the expected cash flows will generally result in a provision for loan losses resulting in an increase to the allowance for loan losses. Subsequent significant increases in cash flows may result in a reversal of post-acquisition provision for loan losses or a transfer from nonaccretable difference to accretable yield that increases interest income over the remaining life of the loan, or pool(s) of loans. Disposals of loans, which may include sale of loans to third parties, receipt of payments in full or in part from the borrower or foreclosure of the collateral, result in removal of the loan from the PCI loan portfolio at its carrying amount.

​

PCI loans are not classified as nonperforming by the Company at the time they are acquired, regardless of whether they had been classified as nonperforming by the previous holder of such loans, and they will not be classified as nonperforming so long as, at quarterly re-estimation periods, we believe we will fully collect the new carrying value of the pools of loans.

​

The Company accounts for purchased performing loans using the contractual cash flows method of recognizing discount accretion based on the acquired loans’ contractual cash flows. Purchased performing loans are recorded at fair value, including a credit discount.  The fair value discount is accreted as an adjustment to yield over the estimated lives of the loans. There is no allowance for loan losses established at the acquisition date for purchased performing loans. A provision for loan losses may be required for any deterioration in these loans in future periods.

​

Allowance for Credit Losses

The allowance for credit losses represents management’s estimate of probable credit losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date. Determining the amount of the allowance for credit losses is considered a critical accounting estimate because it requires significant judgment and the use of estimates related to the amount and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on pools of similar loans based on historical loss experience, and consideration of current economic trends and conditions and other factors impacting the loan portfolio, all of which may be susceptible to significant change. The loan portfolio also represents the largest asset type on the consolidated balance sheets. Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements describes the methodology used to determine the allowance for credit losses. A discussion of the allowance determination and factors driving changes in the amount of the allowance for credit losses is included in the Asset Quality - Provision for Credit Losses and Risk Management section below.

Goodwill Impairment

Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of the net assets acquired. Determining fair value is subjective, requiring the use of estimates, assumptions and management judgment. Goodwill is tested at least annually for impairment, usually during the fourth quarter, and on an interim basis if circumstances dictate. Impairment testing requires a qualitative assessment or that the fair value of each of the Company’s reporting units be compared to the carrying amount of its net assets, including goodwill. If the fair value of a reporting unit is less than book value, an expense may be required to write down the related goodwill to record an impairment loss. As of December 31, 2022, the Company had banking and mortgage reporting units.

RECENT ACCOUNTING PRONOUNCEMENTS AND DEVELOPMENTS

The Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements discuss the expected impact of accounting policies recently issued or proposed but not yet required to be adopted. To the extent the adoption of new accounting standards materially affects our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity, the impacts are discussed in the applicable section(s) of this discussion and Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements.

RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

Net Interest Income and Net Interest Margin

Net interest income remains the most significant factor affecting our results of operations. Net interest income represents the excess of interest and fees earned on total average earning assets (loans, investment securities, federal funds sold and interest-bearing deposits with other banks) over interest owed on average interest-bearing liabilities (deposits and borrowings). Tax-equivalent net interest income is net interest income adjusted for the tax-favored status of income from certain loans and investments. As shown in the table below, tax-equivalent net interest income for 2022 was $101.5 million. This represented a $37.2 million, or 57.8%, increase from 2021. The increase in net interest income when comparing 2022 to 2021 was primarily the result of higher average balances on earnings assets of $1.04 billion, or 47.4%, partially offset by an increase in interest bearing deposits of $684.5 million, higher rates paid on interest bearing deposits of 16bps, and additional interest on subordinated debt acquired in the 4^th quarter of 2021. This was the result of a full year of integration with Severn, significant loan growth, and a rising interest rate environment resulting in higher yields on loans and deposits.  

Our net interest margin (i.e., tax-equivalent net interest income divided by average earning assets) is managed through loan and deposit pricing and asset/liability strategies. The net interest margin was 3.15% for 2022 and 2.94% for 2021. The net interest margin increased when comparing 2022 to 2021 primarily due to an increase in the average yield on total earning assets of 33bps, partially offset by higher interest rates paid on interest bearing deposits and borrowings. The net interest spread, which is the difference between the average yield on earning assets and the average rate paid for interest-bearing liabilities was 2.96% for 2022 and 2.80% for 2021.

​

​

​

​

of deposit over $100 thousand experienced significant growth with increases in the average balances of $348.0 million, $187.7 million and $95.7 million, respectively, while the average rates paid on these deposits increased 47 and 14bps on demand deposits and money market/savings deposits, respectively and decreased 27bps on certificates of deposit over $100 thousand.

The following Rate/Volume Variance Analysis identifies the portion of the changes in tax-equivalent net interest income attributable to changes in volume of average balances or to changes in the yield on earning assets and rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The rate and volume variance for each category has been allocated on a consistent basis between rate and volume variances, based on a percentage of rate, or volume, variance to the sum of the absolute two variances.

​

Noninterest Income

Noninterest income increased $9.6 million, or 71.0%, in 2022 when compared to 2021. The increase in noninterest income primarily consisted of increases in revenue associated with the mortgage division of $4.3 million, service charges on deposit accounts of $2.3 million, revenue from Mid-Maryland Title of $1.1 million and other noninterest income of $1.2 million.  The increase in other noninterest income was primarily due to increases in rental fee income of $1.3 million.  These changes were all primarily attributable to the acquisition of Severn in the 4^th quarter of 2021.

​

​

​

The following table summarizes our noninterest income for the presented years ended December 31.

​

Noninterest Expense

Noninterest expense, excluding merger related expenses, increased $29.9 million, or 62.0%, when compared to the same period in 2021. The increase was mainly the result of increases in salaries and wages, employee related benefits, occupancy expense, data processing, amortization of intangible assets, FDIC insurance premium expense, and legal and professional fees which were all significantly impacted by adding Severn and its operations for the full year of 2022 as well as the addition of two new branches in 2022

The Company had 464 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2022, and 454 full-time equivalent employees at December 31, 2021.

The following table summarizes our noninterest expense for the years ended December 31.