Salaries and employee benefits, the single largest component of noninterest expense, decreased $0.4 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, salaries and employee benefits decreased $0.3 million from 2004. The decrease in 2006 from 2005 was primarily attributable to a decrease in loan officer commissions, executive severance and term life insurance expense, partially offset by an increase in stock option expense. The Company adopted Statement 123R in 2006, which has resulted in an increase of stock option expense in noninterest expense of $780,000 in 2006. In 2005, stock option expense was not included in the salaries and employee benefits but rather disclosed in a footnote in the Company’s financial statements on a pro forma basis. The decrease in 2005 from 2004 was primarily attributable to a decrease in the number of employees.
Occupancy expense decreased $0.1 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, occupancy expense decreased $0.4 million from 2004. The decrease in 2006 from 2005 was primarily a result of lower depreciation on leasehold improvements and reduction in repairs at bank branches. The decrease in 2005 from 2004 was also a result of lower depreciation on leasehold improvements. Occupancy expense in 2006 and partially in 2005 were reduced because, during the third quarter of 2005, the Company amended two of its existing lease contracts to reduce monthly rent and extend the terms of the leases. These costs were 9% of total operating expenses in 2006 and remained fairly constant compared to 2005 and 2004.
Professional fees increased $0.1 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, professional fees decreased $1.0 million from 2004. The increase in 2006 was primarily attributable to increased legal and audit expenses, partially offset by a decrease in consultant expenses. The decrease in 2005 from 2004 was primarily attributable to decreased legal, audit and consulting expenses. Professional fees in 2004 included audit and consulting expenses related to compliance with Sarbanes-Oxley and legal expenses related to the proxy solicitation for the 2004 annual meeting and other corporate governance matters.
Client services decreased $0.4 million in 2006 from 2005 primarily due to the decrease in service fees charged to the Company from the third party vendors, such as for armored car services. In 2005, client services increased $0.4 million from 2004. The increase in 2005 from 2004 was primarily attributable to the increase in service fees charged to the Company from third party vendors who have certain deposit accounts.
Advertising and promotion costs increased $0.1 million in 2006 from 2005. The increase in 2006 from 2005 was due to an increase in business promotion. In 2005, advertising and promotion costs decreased $0.1 million from 2004. The decrease in 2005 from 2004 was primarily attributable to the discontinuation of certain sponsorships.
Low income housing investment losses and writedowns increased $0.04 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, low income housing investment losses and writedowns increased $0.1 million from 2004. The increase in 2006 was primarily attributable to the increased losses from three fully active limited partnerships. The Company obtains tax credits from these investments which reduce income tax expense. These investments are written down to zero over the period that tax credits are recognized, since no residual value is assumed.
Furniture and equipment expense decreased $0.2 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, furniture and equipment expense decreased $0.2 million from 2004. The decrease in 2006 was primarily due to lower depreciation on furniture and equipment. The decrease in 2005 was primarily due to fewer equipment repairs and lower depreciation on furniture and equipment.
Data processing expense increased $0.1 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, data processing expense decreased $0.1 million from 2004. The increase in 2006 from 2005 was primarily due to a higher volume of data processing. The decrease in 2005 was a result of cost saving by outsourcing the core data and item processing.
Retirement plan expense for directors decreased $0.3 million in 2006 from 2005. In 2005, retirement plan expense increased $0.3 million from 2004. The increase in 2005 was primarily due to more participants in 2005.
Amortization of leased equipment decreased $0.7 million in 2005 from 2004. All of the leased equipment was sold in the second half of 2005.
Operational losses in 2004 were primarily due to the write-off of electronic test equipment subject to an operating lease. The Company sold all leased equipment during the second quarter of 2005.
Other noninterest expenses remained fairly constant for 2006, 2005 and 2004.
Income Tax Expense
The Company computes its provision for income taxes on a monthly basis. As indicated in Note 7 in the Notes to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the amount of such provision is determined by applying the Company’s statutory income tax rates to pre-tax book income as adjusted for permanent differences between pre-tax book income and actual taxable income. These permanent differences include but are not limited to tax-exempt interest income, increases in the cash surrender value of life insurance policies, California Enterprise Zone deductions, certain expenses that are not allowed as tax deductions, and tax credits.
The Company’s federal and state income tax expense was $9.2 million in 2006, compared to $7.3 million and $3.2 million for 2005 and 2004 respectively. This represents 34.8% of income before taxes in 2006, 33.5% in 2005, and 27.4% in 2004. The effective tax rate is higher in 2006 than in 2005 and 2004 because pre-tax income increased at a greater rate than savings from tax advantaged investments.
Tax-exempt interest income is generated primarily by the Company’s investments in state, county and municipal bonds, which provided $0.2 million in federal tax-exempt income in 2006 and 2005, and $0.3 million in 2004. Although not reflected in the investment portfolio, the Company also has total investments of $11.7 million in low-income housing limited partnerships as of December 31, 2006. These investments have generated tax credits for the past few years, with about $1.0 million in credits available for the 2006 tax year and $1.0 million in tax credits realized in 2005. The investments are expected to generate an additional $7.2 million in aggregate tax credits from 2007 through 2016; however, the credits are dependent upon the occupancy level of the housing projects and income of the tenants and cannot be projected with certainty.
Some items of income and expense are recognized in different years for tax purposes than when applying generally accepted accounting principles, leading to timing differences between the Company’s actual tax liability and the amount accrued for this liability based on book income. These temporary differences comprise the “deferred” portion of the Company’s tax expense, which is accumulated on the Company’s books as a deferred tax asset or deferred tax liability until such time as it reverses. At the end of 2006, the Company had a net deferred tax asset of $11.2 million.
Financial Condition
As of December 31, 2006, total assets were $1.04 billion, a decrease of 8% from $1.13 billion at year-end 2005. Total securities available-for-sale (at fair value) were $172.3 million, a decrease of 13% from $198.5 million at year-end 2005. The total loan portfolio (excluding loans held for sale) was $725.8 million, an increase of 5% from $688.8 million at year-end 2005. Total deposits were $846.6 million, a decrease of 10% from $939.8 million at year-end 2005. Securities sold under agreement to repurchase decreased $10.9 million, or 33%, to $21.8 million at December 31, 2006, from $32.7 million at year-end 2005.
Securities Portfolio
The following table reflects the amortized cost and fair market values for the total portfolio for each category of securities for the past three years.
Investment Portfolio
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Securities available-for-sale (at fair value) | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | 5,963 | | $ | 6,920 | | $ | 5,942 |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 59,396 | | | 82,041 | | | 90,308 |
Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 90,186 | | | 91,868 | | | 107,735 |
Municipals - Tax Exempt | | | 8,142 | | | 8,268 | | | 9,206 |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | 8,611 | | | 9,398 | | | 19,618 |
Total | | $ | 172,298 | | $ | 198,495 | | $ | 232,809 |
| | | | | | | | | |
The following table summarizes the amounts and distribution of the Company’s securities and the weighted average yields as of December 31, 2006:
| | Maturity |
| | | | | | After One and | | After Five and | | | | | | | | | |
| | Within One Year | | Within Five Years | | Within TenYears | | After Ten Years | | Total | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Yield | | Amount | | Yield | | Amount | | Yield | | Amount | | Yield | | Amount | | Yield | |
Securities available-for-sale (at fair value): | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | 5,963 | | | 3.50% | | $ | - | | | - | | $ | - | | | - | | $ | - | | | - | | $ | 5,963 | | | 3.50 | % |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 27,385 | | | 4.96% | | | 32,011 | | | 4.79% | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 59,396 | | | 4.87 | % |
Mortgage Backed Securities | | | - | | | - | | | 2,028 | | | 3.46% | | | 7,256 | | | 4.41% | | | 80,902 | | | 4.44% | | | 90,186 | | | 4.41 | % |
Municipals - non-taxable | | | 4,086 | | | 2.76% | | | 4,056 | | | 3.14% | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 8,142 | | | 2.95 | % |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 5,353 | | | 5.64% | | | 3,258 | | | 2.82% | | | 8,611 | | | 4.57 | % |
Total | | $ | 37,434 | | | 4.49% | | $ | 38,095 | | | 4.54 | | $ | 12,609 | | | 4.93% | | $ | 84,160 | | | 4.38% | | $ | 172,298 | | | 4.48 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
The investment securities portfolio is the second largest component of the Company’s interest earning assets, and the structure and composition of this portfolio is important to any analysis of the financial condition of the Company. The investment portfolio serves the following purposes: (i) it can be readily reduced in size to provide liquidity for loan balance increases or deposit balance decreases; (ii) it provides a source of pledged assets for securing certain deposits and borrowed funds, as may be required by law or by specific agreement with a depositor or lender; (iii) it can be used as an interest rate risk management tool, since it provides a large base of assets, the maturity and interest rate characteristics of which can be changed more readily than the loan portfolio to better match changes in the deposit base and other funding sources of the Company; (iv) it is an alternative interest-earning use of funds when loan demand is weak or when deposits grow more rapidly than loans; and (v) it can enhance the Company’s tax position by providing partially tax exempt income.
The Company uses two portfolio classifications for its securities: “Held-to-maturity”, and “Available-for-sale”. Accounting rules also allow for a trading portfolio classification, but the Company has no securities that would be classified as such. The held-to-maturity portfolio can consist only of securities that the Company has both the intent and ability to hold until maturity, to be sold only in the event of concerns with an issuer’s credit worthiness, a change in tax law that eliminates their tax exempt status, or other infrequent situations as permitted by generally accepted accounting principles. Since the Company does not have a trading portfolio, the available-for-sale portfolio is comprised of all securities not included as “held-to-maturity”. Even though management currently has the intent and the ability to hold the Company’s securities for the foreseeable future, they are all currently classified as available-for-sale to allow flexibility with regard to the active management of the Company’s investment portfolio. FASB Statement 115 requires available-for-sale securities to be marked to market with an offset to accumulated other comprehensive income, a component of shareholders’ equity. Monthly adjustments are made to reflect changes in the market value of the Company’s available-for-sale securities.
The Company’s investment portfolio is currently composed primarily of: (i) U.S. Treasury and Agency issues for liquidity and pledging; (ii) mortgage-backed securities, which in many instances can also be used for pledging, and which generally enhance the yield of the portfolio; (iii) state, county and municipal obligations, which provide tax free income and limited pledging potential; and (iv) collateralized mortgage obligations, which generally enhance the yield of the portfolio. The amortized cost of securities pledged as collateral for repurchase agreements, public deposits and for other purposes as required or permitted by law was $53.7 million and $64.4 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
Except for obligations of the U.S. government or U.S. government agencies, no securities of a single issuer exceeded 10% of shareholders’ equity at December 31, 2006. The Company has not used interest rate swaps or other derivative instruments to hedge fixed rate loans or to otherwise mitigate interest rate risk.
In 2006, the investment portfolio declined by $26.2 million, or 13%, and decreased to 16.6% of total assets at the end of 2006 from 17.6% at the end of 2005. While the overall change is not significant, certain components of the investment portfolio changed. U.S. Treasury and U.S. Agency securities decreased to 38% of the portfolio at the end of 2006 from 45% at the end of 2005. The decrease was primarily due to maturities of U.S. Agency securities during 2006. Municipal securities, mortgage-backed securities and collateralized mortgage obligations remained fairly constant in the portfolio in 2006 compared to 2005.
U.S. Treasury and U.S. Agency securities increased to 45% of the portfolio at the end of 2005 from 41% at the end of 2004. Municipal securities and mortgage backed securities remained fairly constant in the portfolio at the end of 2005 and 2004. Collateralized mortgage obligations decreased to 5% of the portfolio in 2005 from 8% in 2004, primarily due to maturity. Higher interest rates at December 31, 2005 resulted in lower fair values for the period.
Loans
The Company’s loans represent the largest portion of invested assets, substantially greater than the securities portfolio or any other asset category, and the quality and diversification of the loan portfolio is an important consideration when reviewing the Company’s financial condition.
Gross loans (including loans held for sale) represented 72% of total assets at December 31, 2006, as compared to 67% of at December 31, 2005. The ratio of net loans to deposits increased to 85% at the end of 2006 from 72% at the end of 2005. Demand for loans remains relatively strong in many areas within the Company’s markets and competition continues to intensify. To help ensure that we remain competitive, we make every effort to be flexible and creative in our approach to structuring loans.
The Selected Financial Data table in Item 6 above reflects the amount of loans outstanding at December 31st for each year from 2002 through 2006, net of deferred fees and origination costs and the allowance for loan losses. The Loan Distribution table that follows sets forth the Company’s gross loans outstanding and the percentage distribution in each category at the dates indicated. The amounts shown in the table do not reflect any deferred loan fees or deferred origination costs, nor is the allowance deducted.
Loan Distribution
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | % to Total | | 2005 | | % to Total | | 2004 | | % to Total | | 2003 | | % to Total | | 2002 | | % to Total | |
Commercial | | $ | 300,611 | | | 42% | | $ | 256,713 | | | 37% | | $ | 300,452 | | | 41% | | $ | 281,561 | | | 43% | | $ | 263,144 | | | 39 | % |
Real estate - mortgage | | | 239,041 | | | 33% | | | 237,566 | | | 35% | | | 250,984 | | | 35% | | | 227,474 | | | 35% | | | 210,121 | | | 31 | % |
Real estate - land and construction | | | 143,834 | | | 20% | | | 149,851 | | | 22% | | | 118,290 | | | 16% | | | 101,082 | | | 15% | | | 147,822 | | | 22 | % |
Home equity | | | 38,976 | | | 5% | | | 41,772 | | | 6% | | | 52,170 | | | 7% | | | 49,434 | | | 7% | | | 49,853 | | | 7 | % |
Consumer | | | 2,422 | | | 0% | | | 1,721 | | | 0% | | | 2,908 | | | 1% | | | 1,743 | | | 0% | | | 2,850 | | | 1 | % |
Total loans | | | 724,884 | | | 100% | | | 687,623 | | | 100% | | | 724,804 | | | 100% | | | 661,294 | | | 100% | | | 673,790 | | | 100 | % |
Deferred loan costs, net | | | 870 | | | | | | 1,155 | | | | | | 726 | | | | | | 863 | | | | | | 117 | | | | |
Allowance for loan losses | | | (9,279) | | | | | | (10,224) | | | | | | (12,497) | | | | | | (13,451) | | | | | | (13,227) | | | | |
Loans, net | | $ | 716,475 | | | | | $ | 678,554 | | | | | $ | 713,033 | | | | | $ | 648,706 | | | | | $ | 660,680 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total loans (excluding of loans held for sale) were $725.8 million at December 31, 2006, an increase of 5% from $688.8 million at December 31, 2005, and a decrease of 5% from $725.5 million at December 31, 2004. The Company’s allowance for loan losses was $9.3 million, or 1.28% of total loans, for 2006 as compared to $10.2 million, or 1.48% of total loans, for 2005, $12.5 million, or 1.72% of total loans, for 2004. As of December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, the Company had $4.3 million, $3.7 million, and $1.3 million, respectively, in nonperforming assets.
Total loan balances (including deferred loan cost, net) increased by $51.8 million, or 8%, from the end of 2002 to the end of 2006. The Company’s loan portfolio concentrated in commercial, primarily manufacturing, wholesale, and services and real estate, with the balance in land development and construction and home equity and consumer loans. The loan portfolio mix over the past five years has remained relatively the same.
The change in the Company’s loan portfolio in 2006 from 2005 is primarily due to the increase in the commercial loan portfolio and commercial real estate mortgage loan portfolio, partially offset by a decrease in the real estate land and construction loan portfolio. The Company does not have any concentrations by industry or group of industries in its loan portfolio, however, 58% and 63% of its net loans were secured by real property as of December 31, 2006 and 2005. While no specific industry concentration is considered significant, the Company’s lending operations are located in areas that are dependent on the technology and real estate industries and their supporting companies. In the fourth quarter of 2005, the Company entered into negotiations for the sale of its Capital Group loan portfolio consisting primarily of “factoring” type loans. In contemplation of the sale, $32 million, net of the respective allowance loan loss, was moved from commercial loans into loans held-for-sale. Primarily as a result of this reclassification, gross loans decreased 5% to $688.8 million at December 31, 2005, compared to $725.5 million at December 31, 2004. The sale of the Capital Group loan portfolio was completed in 2006, resulting in a gain of $0.7 million. In 2005, commercial real estate mortgages decreased as mortgage loans matured or were paid off. The increase in real estate land and construction loans is due to increased market demand for this type of financing.
The Company’s commercial loans are made for working capital, financing the purchase of equipment or for other business purposes. Such loans include loans with maturities ranging from thirty days to one year and “term loans,” with maturities normally ranging from one to five years. Short-term business loans are generally intended to finance current transactions and typically provide for periodic principal payments, with interest payable monthly. Term loans normally provide for floating interest rates, with monthly payments of both principal and interest. The Company’s commercial loans are centered in locally-oriented commercial activities in markets where the Company has a physical presence, and this segment of the portfolio has struggled for growth as these markets have become more competitive and business activity has moderated.
The Company is an active participant in the Small Business Administration (“SBA”) and U.S. Department of Agriculture guaranteed lending programs, and has been approved by the SBA as a lender under the Preferred Lender Program. The Company regularly makes SBA-guaranteed loans; however, the guaranteed portion of these loans may be sold in the secondary market depending on market conditions. Once it is determined that they will be sold, these loans are classified as held for sale and carried at the lower of cost or market. In the event of the sale of the guaranteed portion of an SBA loan, the Company retains the servicing rights for the sold portion. As of December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004, $188.8 million, $179.8 million and $166.8 million, respectively, in SBA and U.S. Department of Agriculture loans were serviced by the Company for others.
As of December 31, 2006, real estate mortgage loans of $238.1 million consist of adjustable and fixed rate loans secured by commercial property, and loans secured by first mortgages on 1-4 family residential properties of $0.9 million. Home equity lines of credit are secured by junior deeds of trust on 1-4 family residential properties totaling $39.0 million. Properties securing the real estate mortgage loans are primarily located in the Company’s market area. While no specific industry concentration is considered significant, the Company’s lending operations are located in market areas that are dependent on the technology and real estate industries and their supporting companies. Real estate values in portions of Santa Clara County and neighboring San Mateo County are among the highest in the country at present. The Company’s borrowers could be adversely impacted by a downturn in these sectors of the economy, which could reduce the demand for loans and adversely impact the borrowers’ ability to repay their loans.
The Company’s real estate term loans consist primarily of loans made based on the borrower’s cash flow and are secured by deeds of trust on commercial and residential property to provide a secondary source of repayment. The Company restricts real estate term loans to no more than 80% of the property’s appraised value or the purchase price of the property, depending on the type of property and its utilization. The Company offers both fixed and floating rate loans. Maturities on such loans are generally restricted between five and ten years (with amortization ranging from fifteen to twenty-five years and a balloon payment due at maturity); however, SBA and certain other real estate loans that are easily sold in the secondary market may be granted for longer maturities.
The Company’s real estate land and construction loans are primarily short term interim loans to finance the construction of commercial and single family residential properties. The Company utilizes underwriting guidelines to assess the likelihood of repayment from sources such as sale of the property or permanent mortgage financing prior to making the construction loan.
The Company makes consumer loans for the purpose of financing automobiles, various types of consumer goods, and other personal purposes. Additionally, the Company makes home equity lines of credit available to its clientele. Consumer loans generally provide for the monthly payment of principal and interest. Most of the Company’s consumer loans are secured by the personal property being purchased or, in the instances of home equity loans or lines, real property.
With certain exceptions, state chartered banks are permitted to make extensions of credit to any one borrowing entity up to 15% of the bank’s capital and reserves for unsecured loans and up to 25% of the bank’s capital and reserves for secured loans. For HBC, these lending limits were $22.9 million and $38.1 million at December 31, 2006.
Loan Maturities
The following table presents the maturity distribution of the Company’s loans as of December 31, 2006. The table shows the distribution of such loans between those loans with predetermined (fixed) interest rates and those with variable (floating) interest rates. Floating rates generally fluctuate with changes in the prime rate as reflected in the western edition of The Wall Street Journal. As of December 31, 2006, approximately 77% of the Company’s loan portfolio consisted of floating interest rate loans.
Loan Maturities
| | | | Over One | | | | |
| | Due in | | Year But | | | | |
| | One Year | | Less than | | Over | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | or Less | | Five Years | | Five Years | | Total |
Commercial | | $ | 283,469 | | $ | 13,567 | | $ | 3,575 | | $ | 300,611 |
Real estate - mortgage | | | 97,935 | | | 81,260 | | | 59,846 | | | 239,041 |
Real estate - land and construction | | | 143,763 | | | 71 | | | - | | | 143,834 |
Home equity | | | 30,163 | | | - | | | 8,813 | | | 38,976 |
Consumer | | | 2,306 | | | 116 | | | - | | | 2,422 |
Total loans | | $ | 557,636 | | $ | 95,014 | | $ | 72,234 | | $ | 724,884 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Loans with variable interest rates | | $ | 526,642 | | $ | 23,108 | | $ | 8,890 | | $ | 558,640 |
Loans with fixed interest rates | | | 30,994 | | | 71,906 | | | 63,344 | | | 166,244 |
Total loans | | $ | 557,636 | | $ | 95,014 | | $ | 72,234 | | $ | 724,884 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming Assets
Financial institutions generally have a certain level of exposure to asset quality risk, and could potentially receive less than a full return of principal and interest if a debtor becomes unable or unwilling to repay. Since loans are the most significant assets of the Company and generate the largest portion of its revenues, the Company’s management of asset quality risk is focused primarily on loan quality. Banks have generally suffered their most severe earnings declines as a result of customers’ inability to generate sufficient cash flow to service their debts, or as a result of the downturns in national and regional economies which have brought about declines in overall property values. In addition, certain debt securities that the Company may purchase have the potential of declining in value if the obligor’s financial capacity to repay deteriorates.
To help minimize credit quality concerns, we have established a sound approach to credit that includes well-defined goals and objectives and well-documented credit policies and procedures. The policies and procedures identify market segments, set goals for portfolio growth or contraction, and establish limits on industry and geographic credit concentrations. In addition, these policies establish the Company’s underwriting standards and the methods of monitoring ongoing credit quality. The Company’s internal credit risk controls are centered in underwriting practices, credit granting procedures, training, risk management techniques, and familiarity with loan and lease customers as well as the relative diversity and geographic concentration of our loan portfolio.
The Company’s credit risk may also be affected by external factors such as the level of interest rates, employment, general economic conditions, real estate values, and trends in particular industries or geographic markets. As a multi-community independent bank serving a specific geographic area, the Company must contend with the unpredictable changes of both the general California and, particularly, primary local markets. The Company’s asset quality has suffered in the past from the impact of national and regional economic recessions, consumer bankruptcies, and depressed real estate values.
Non-performing assets are comprised of the following: Loans for which the Company is no longer accruing interest; loans 90 days or more past due and still accruing interest (although they are generally placed on non-accrual when they become 90 days past due unless they are both well secured and in the process of collcetion); loans restructured where the terms of repayment have been renegotiated, resulting in a deferral of interest or principal; and other real estate owned (“OREO”). Management’s classification of a loan as “non-accrual” is an indication that there is reasonable doubt as to the full recovery of principal or interest on the loan. At that point, the Company stops accruing interest income, reverses any uncollected interest that had been accrued as income, and begins recognizing interest income only as cash interest payments are received as long as the collection of all outstanding principal is not in doubt. The loans may or may not be collateralized, and collection efforts are continuously pursued. Loans may be restructured by management when a borrower has experienced some change in financial status causing an inability to meet the original repayment terms and where the Company believes the borrower will eventually overcome those circumstances and make full restitution. OREO consists of properties acquired by foreclosure or similar means that management is offering or will offer for sale.
The following table provides information with respect to components of the Company’s non-performing assets at the dates indicated.
Non-performing Assets
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | | 2002 | |
Nonaccrual loans | | $ | 3,866 | | $ | 3,672 | | $ | 1,028 | | $ | 3,972 | | $ | 4,571 | |
Loans 90 days past due and still accruing | | | 451 | | | - | | | 302 | | | 608 | | | - | |
Total nonperforming loans | | | 4,317 | | | 3,672 | | | 1,330 | | | 4,580 | | | 4,571 | |
Other real estate owned | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | |
Total nonperforming assets | | $ | 4,317 | | $ | 3,672 | | $ | 1,330 | | $ | 4,580 | | $ | 4,571 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Nonperforming assets as a percentage of | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
loans plus other real estate owned | | | 0.60 | % | | 0.53 | % | | 0.18 | % | | 0.69 | % | | 0.68 | % |
The balance of nonperforming assets at the end of 2006 represents an increase of $0.6 million, or 18%, from year-end 2005 levels. Nonperforming assets increased by $2.3 million, or 176%, in 2005 as compared to 2004. The ratio of nonperforming assets to total gross loans plus OREO also increased to 0.60% at the end of 2006 from 0.53% at the end of 2005. The main changes during 2006 were in Land and Construction loans.
In 2005, the nonperforming loan changes were primarily in commercial and industrial loans which increased by $1.6 million.
While the current level of non-performing assets is relatively low, we recognize that an increase in the dollar amount of non-accrual loans is possible in the normal course of business as we expand our lending activities. We also expect occasional foreclosures as a last resort in the resolution of some problem loans.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses is an estimate of the losses in our loan portfolio. The allowance is based on two basic principles of accounting: (1) Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“Statement”) No. 5 “Accounting for Contingencies,” which requires that losses be accrued when they are probable of occurring and estimable and (2) Statement No. 114, “Accounting by Creditors for Impairment of a Loan,” which requires that losses be accrued based on the differences between the impaired loan balance and value of collateral, if the loan is collateral dependent, or present value of future cash flows or values that are observable in the secondary market.
Management conducts a critical evaluation of the loan portfolio monthly. This evaluation includes periodic loan by loan review for certain loans to evaluate the level of impairment, as well as detailed reviews of other loans (either individually or in pools) based on an assessment of the following factors: past loan loss experience, known and inherent risks in the portfolio, adverse situations that may affect the borrower’s ability to repay, collateral values, loan volumes and concentrations, size and complexity of the loans, recent loss experience in particular segments of the portfolio, bank regulatory examination and independent loan review results, and current economic conditions in the Company’s marketplace, in particular the state of the technology industry and the real estate market. This process attempts to assess the risk of loss inherent in the portfolio by segregating loans into two categories for purposes of determining an appropriate level of the allowance: Loans graded “Pass through Special Mention” and “Substandard.”
Loans are charged against the allowance when management believes that the uncollectibility of the loan balance is confirmed. The Company’s methodology for assessing the appropriateness of the allowance consists of several key elements, which include the formula allowance and specific allowances.
Specific allowances are established for impaired loans. Management considers a loan to be impaired when it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the original contractual terms of the note agreement. When a loan is considered to be impaired, the amount of impairment is measured based on the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent or on the present value of expected future cash flow.
The formula portion of the allowance is calculated by applying loss factors to pools of outstanding loans. Loss factors are based on the Company's historical loss experience, adjusted for significant factors that, in management's judgment, affect the collectibility of the portfolio as of the evaluation date. The adjustment factors for the formula allowance may include existing general economic and business conditions affecting the key lending areas of the Company, in particular the real estate market, credit quality trends, collateral values, loan volumes and concentrations, the technology industry and specific industry conditions within portfolio segments, recent loss experience in particular segments of the portfolio, duration of the current business cycle, and bank regulatory examination results. The evaluation of the inherent loss with respect to these conditions is subject to a higher degree of uncertainty.
Loans that demonstrate a weakness, for which there is a possibility of loss if the weakness is not corrected, are categorized as “classified.” Classified loans include all loans considered as substandard, doubtful, and loss and may result from problems specific to a borrower’s business or from economic downturns that affect the borrower’s ability to repay or that cause a decline in the value of the underlying collateral (particularly real estate). The principal balance of classified loans, which include all loans internally graded as substandard, doubtful, and loss, was $24.5 million, $16.3 million, and $35.6 million, respectively, at December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004. At December 31, 2006 and 2005, all of the Company’s classified loans were graded as substandard.
In adjusting the historical loss factors applied to the respective segments of the loan portfolio, management considered the following factors:
· | Levels and trends in delinquencies, non-accruals, charge offs and recoveries |
· | Trends in volume and loan terms |
· | Lending policy or procedural changes |
· | Experience, ability, and depth of lending management and staff |
· | National and local economic trends and conditions |
· | Concentrations of Credit |
There can be no assurance that the adverse impact of any of these conditions on HBC will not be in excess of the current level of estimated losses.
It is the policy of management to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level adequate for risks inherent in the loan portfolio. On an ongoing basis, we have engaged outside firms to independently assess our methodology and perform independent credit reviews of our loan portfolio. The Company’s credit review consultants, the FRB and the DFI also review the allowance for loan losses as an integral part of the examination process. Based on information currently available to analyze loan loss delinquency and a history of actual charge-offs, management believes that the loan loss allowance is adequate. However, the loan portfolio can be adversely affected if California economic conditions and the real estate market in the Company’s market area were to weaken. Also, any weakness of a prolonged nature in the technology industry would have a negative impact on the local market. The effect of such events, although uncertain at this time, could result in an increase in the level of nonperforming loans and increased loan losses, which could adversely affect the Company’s future growth and profitability. No assurance of the ultimate level of credit losses can be given with any certainty.
The following table summarizes the Company’s loan loss experience, as well as provisions and charges to the allowance for loan losses and certain pertinent ratios for the periods indicated:
Allowance for Loan Losses
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | | 2002 |
Balance, beginning of year | | $ | 10,224 | | $ | 12,497 | | $ | 13,451 | | $ | 13,227 | | $ | 11,154 |
Charge-offs: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial | | | (291) | | | (3,273) | | | (2,901) | | | (2,906) | | | (936) |
Real estate - mortgage | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Real estate - land and construction | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Home equity | | | (540) | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Consumer | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Total charge-offs | | | (831) | | | (3,273) | | | (2,901) | | | (2,906) | | | (936) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Recoveries: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Commercial | | | 389 | | | 1,358 | | | 1,562 | | | 230 | | | 346 |
Real estate - mortgage | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Real estate - land and construction | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Home equity | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Consumer | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - |
Total recoveries | | | 389 | | | 1,358 | | | 1,562 | | | 230 | | | 346 |
Net charge-offs | | | (442) | | | (1,915) | | | (1,339) | | | (2,676) | | | (590) |
Provision for loan losses | | | (503) | | | 313 | | | 666 | | | 2,900 | | | 2,663 |
Reclassification of allowance for loan losses | | | - | | | (671) | (1) | | - | | | - | | | - |
Reclassification to other liabilities | | | - | | | - | | | (281) | (2) | | - | | | - |
Balance, end of year | | $ | 9,279 | | $ | 10,224 | | $ | 12,497 | | $ | 13,451 | | $ | 13,227 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
RATIOS: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Net charge-offs to average loans * | | | 0.06% | | | 0.28% | | | 0.19% | | | 0.41 | | | 0.09% |
Allowance for loan losses to average loans * | | | 1.32% | | | 1.47% | | | 1.80% | | | 2.07% | | | 2.07% |
Allowance for loan losses to total loans * | | | 1.28% | | | 1.48% | | | 1.72% | | | 2.03% | | | 1.96% |
Allowance for loan losses to nonperforming loans | | | 215% | | | 278% | | | 940% | | | 294% | | | 289% |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
* Average loans and total loans exclude loans held for sale
(1) | The Company reclassified $0.7 million of the allowance allocated to $32 million of commercial asset based loans that were reclassified to loans held-for-sale as of December 31, 2005. Thus, the carrying value of these loans held-for-sale includes an allowance for loan losses of $0.7 million. |
(2) | The Company reclassified estimated losses on unused commitments of $0.3 million to other liabilities as of December 31, 2004. |
The Company’s allowance for loan losses has steadily decreased from 2003 through 2006. This trend has been attributable primarily to decreases in classified loan balances. The Company’s allowance for loan losses decreased $0.9 million in 2006 as compared to 2005. The Company had a credit provision of $0.5 million in 2006, compared to a loss provision of $0.3 million in 2005.
Net loans charged-off reflect the realization of losses in the portfolio that were recognized previously though provisions for loan losses. Net charge-offs were $0.4 million, $1.9 million, and $1.3 million in 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively. The decrease in net loan charge-offs in 2006 was primarily due to continued improvement in credit quality. The increase in net loan charge-offs in 2005 was primarily due to a $2.0 million charge-off from one commercial loan, partially offset by recoveries. Historical net loan charge-offs are not necessarily indicative of the amount of net charge-offs that the Company will realize in the future.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company’s unallocated allowance was $1.4 million, compared to $1.1 million as of December 31, 2005. The unallocated component of the allowance is maintained to cover uncertainties that could affect management's estimate of probable losses and also reflects the margin of imprecision inherent in the underlying assumptions used in the methodologies for estimating losses on specific problem loans and pools of other loans. The unallocated allowance increased from 2004 to 2005, as the Company updated its allowance methodology. If the same methodology used at year end 2005 was applied as of December 31, 2004, the unallocated allowance would be more comparable. The unallocated amount is reviewed periodically based on trends in credit losses, the results of credit reviews and overall economic trends.
The following table provides a summary of the allocation of the allowance for loan and lease losses for specific categories at the dates indicated. The allocation presented should not be interpreted as an indication that charges to the allowance for loan and lease losses will be incurred in these amounts or proportions, or that the portion of the allowance allocated to each category represents the total amounts available for charge-offs that may occur within these categories.
Allocation of Loan Loss Allowance
| | December 31, |
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | 2003 | | 2002 | |
| | | | Percent | | | | Percent | | | | Percent | | | | Percent | | | | Percent | |
| | | | of Loans | | | | of Loans | | | | of Loans | | | | of Loans | | | | of Loans | |
| | | | in each | | | | in each | | | | in each | | | | in each | | | | in each | |
| | | | category | | | | category | | | | category | | | | category | | | | category | |
| | | | to total | | | | to total | | | | to total | | | | to total | | | | to total | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Allowance | | loans | | Allowance | | loans | | Allowance | | loans | | Allowance | | loans | | Allowance | | loans | |
Commercial | | $ | 4,872 | | | 42% | | $ | 4,199 | | | 37% | | $ | 8,691 | | | 41% | | $ | 9,667 | | | 43% | | $ | 6,349 | | | 39 | % |
Real estate - mortgage | | | 1,507 | | | 33% | | | 2,631 | | | 35% | | | 1,498 | | | 35% | | | 1,846 | | | 35% | | | 2,041 | | | 31 | % |
Real estate - land and construction | | | 1,243 | | | 20% | | | 1,914 | | | 22% | | | 1,711 | | | 16% | | | 1,714 | | | 15% | | | 3,574 | | | 22 | % |
Home equity | | | 244 | | | 5% | | | 300 | | | 6% | | | 173 | | | 7% | | | 157 | | | 7% | | | 370 | | | 7 | % |
Consumer | | | 24 | | | 0% | | | 33 | | | 0% | | | 38 | | | 1% | | | 37 | | | 0% | | | 47 | | | 1 | % |
Unallocated | | | 1,389 | | | 0% | | | 1,147 | | | 0% | | | 386 | | | 0% | | | 30 | | | 0% | | | 846 | | | 0 | % |
Total | | $ | 9,279 | | | 100% | | $ | 10,224 | | | 100% | | $ | 12,497 | | | 100% | | $ | 13,451 | | | 100% | | $ | 13,227 | | | 100 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deposits
The composition and cost of the Company’s deposit base are important components in analyzing the Company’s net interest margin and balance sheet liquidity characteristics, both of which are discussed in greater detail in other sections herein. Our net interest margin is improved to the extent that growth in deposits can be concentrated in historically lower-cost deposits such as non-interest-bearing demand, NOW accounts, savings accounts and money market deposit accounts. The Company’s liquidity is impacted by the volatility of deposits or other funding instruments, or in other words by the propensity of that money to leave the institution for rate-related or other reasons. Potentially, the most volatile deposits in a financial institution are jumbo certificates of deposit, meaning time deposits with balances that equal or exceed $100,000, as customers with balances of that magnitude are typically more rate-sensitive than customers with smaller balances.
The following table summarizes the distribution of deposits and the percentage of distribution in each category of deposits for the periods indicated:
Deposits
| | Years Ended December 31, | |
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Balance | | % to Total | | Balance | | % to Total | | Balance | | % to Total | |
Demand, noninterest bearing | | $ | 231,841 | | | 27% | | $ | 248,009 | | | 26% | | $ | 277,451 | | | 30 | % |
Demand, interest bearing | | | 133,413 | | | 16% | | | 157,330 | | | 17% | | | 120,890 | | | 13 | % |
Savings and money market | | | 307,266 | | | 36% | | | 353,798 | | | 38% | | | 357,318 | | | 39 | % |
Time deposits, under $100 | | | 31,097 | | | 4% | | | 35,209 | | | 4% | | | 38,295 | | | 4 | % |
Time deposits, $100 and over | | | 111,017 | | | 13% | | | 109,373 | | | 12% | | | 104,719 | | | 12 | % |
Brokered deposits, $100 and over | | | 31,959 | | | 4% | | | 36,040 | | | 4% | | | 19,862 | | | 2 | % |
Total deposits | | $ | 846,593 | | | 100% | | $ | 939,759 | | | 100% | | $ | 918,535 | | | 100 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total deposits were $846.6 million at December 31, 2006, a decrease of $93.2 million, or 10%, compared to $939.8 million at December 31, 2005. At December 31, 2006, noninterest bearing demand deposits decreased $16.2 million, or 7%, from December 31, 2005 primarily due to decreases in title and escrow companies’ accounts. Interest bearing demand deposits decreased $23.9 million, or 15%, primarily because the Company reduced certain high yield accounts; savings and money market deposits decreased $46.5 million, or 13%; time deposits decreased $2.5 million, or 2%; and brokered deposits decreased $4.1 million, or 11%.
As of December 31, 2006, the Company had a deposit mix of 36% in savings and money market accounts, 21% in time deposits, 16% in interest bearing demand accounts, and 27% in noninterest bearing demand deposits. On December 31, 2006, approximately $2.4 million, or less than 1%, of deposits were from public sources, and approximately $108.2 million, or 13%, of deposits were from real estate exchange company and title company accounts. As of December 31, 2005, the Company had a deposit mix of 38% in savings and money market accounts, 19% in time deposits, 17% in interest bearing demand accounts, and 26% in noninterest bearing demand deposits. On December 31, 2005, approximately $2.4 million, or less than 1%, of deposits were from public sources, and approximately $129.5 million, or 14%, of deposits were from real estate exchange company and title company accounts.
The Company obtains deposits from a cross-section of the communities it serves. The Company’s business is not seasonal in nature. The Company had brokered deposits totaling approximately $32.0 million, and $36.0 million at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. These brokered deposits generally mature within one to three years. Brokered deposits are generally less desirable because of higher interest rates. The Company is not dependent upon funds from sources outside the United States.
The following table indicates the maturity schedule of the Company’s time deposits of $100,000 or more as of December 31, 2006:
Deposit Maturity Distribution
(Dollars in thousands) | | Balance | | % of Total | |
Three months or less | | $ | 56,886 | | | 40 | % |
Over three months through six months | | | 33,809 | | | 23 | % |
Over six months through twelve months | | | 28,258 | | | 20 | % |
Over twelve months | | | 24,023 | | | 17 | % |
Total | | $ | 142,976 | | | 100 | % |
| | | | | | | |
The Company focuses primarily on providing and servicing business deposit accounts that are frequently over $100,000 in average balance per account. As a result, certain types of business clients that the Company serves typically carry average deposits in excess of $100,000. The account activity for some account types and client types necessitates appropriate liquidity management practices by the Company to ensure its ability to fund deposit withdrawals.
Return on Equity and Assets
The following table indicates the ratios for return on average assets and average equity, dividend payout, and average equity to average assets for 2006, 2005, and 2004:
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Return on average assets | | | 1.57 | % | | 1.27 | % | | 0.80 | % |
Return on average equity | | | 14.62 | % | | 13.73 | % | | 9.04 | % |
Dividend payout ratio | | | 13.65 | % | | - | | | - | |
Average equity to average assets ratio | | | 10.75 | % | | 9.25 | % | | 8.80 | % |
Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the normal course of business, the Company makes commitments to extend credit to its customers as long as there are no violations of any conditions established in contractual arrangements. These commitments are obligations that represent a potential credit risk to the Company, yet are not reflected in any form within the Company’s consolidated balance sheets. Total unused commitments to extend credit were $322.2 million at December 31, 2006, as compared to $334.1 million at December 31, 2005. Unused commitments represented 45% and 49% of outstanding gross loans at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
The effect on the Company’s revenues, expenses, cash flows and liquidity from the unused portion of the commitments to provide credit cannot be reasonably predicted, because there is no certainty that the lines of credit will ever be fully utilized. For more information regarding the Company’s off-balance sheet arrangements, see Note 12 to the financial statements located elsewhere herein.
The following table presents the Company’s commitments to fund as of December 31, 2006, 2005, and 2004:
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Commitments to extend credit | | $ | 310,200 | | $ | 328,031 | | $ | 313,036 |
Standby letters of credit | | | 12,020 | | | 6,104 | | | 5,256 |
| | $ | 322,220 | | $ | 334,135 | | $ | 318,292 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Allowance for Off-Balance Sheet Credit Losses
The allowance for unfunded commitments is based on management’s estimate of the amount required to reflect the probable inherent losses on outstanding letters of credit and unused loan credit commitments. Adequacy of the allowance is determined using a systematic methodology similar to the one that analyzes the allowance for loan losses. Management must also estimate the likelihood that these commitments would be funded and become loans. This is done by evaluating the historical utilization of each type of unfunded commitment and estimating the likelihood that the current utilization rates on lines available at the balance sheet date could change in the future. The allowance for unfunded commitments is included in other liabilities on the balance sheet. See table below for activity in 2006 and 2005.
| | For the Year Ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Balance at beginning of period | | $ | 203 | | $ | 281 |
Provision for credit losses | | | 274 | | | (78) |
Balance at end of period | | $ | 477 | | $ | 203 |
| | | | | | |
Contractual Obligations
The contractual obligations of the Company, summarized by type of obligation and contractual maturity, at December 31, 2006, are as follows:
| | Less Than | | One to | | Three to | | After | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | One Year | | Three Years | | Five Years | | Five Years | | Total |
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase | | $ | 10,900 | | $ | 10,900 | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | 21,800 |
Notes payable to subsidiary grantor trusts | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 23,702 | | | 23,702 |
Operating leases | | | 2,027 | | | 2,832 | | | 2,922 | | | 4,978 | | | 12,759 |
Time deposits | | | 147,741 | | | 26,267 | | | 65 | | | - | | | 174,073 |
Total debt and operating leases | | $ | 160,668 | | $ | 39,999 | | $ | 2,987 | | $ | 28,680 | | $ | 232,334 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
In addition to those obligations listed above, in the normal course of business, the Company will make cash distributions for the payment of interest on interest bearing deposit accounts and debt obligations, payments for quarterly income tax estimates and contributions to certain employee benefit plans.
Liquidity and Asset/Liability Management
Liquidity refers to the Company’s ability to maintain cash flows sufficient to fund operations, and to meet obligations and other commitments in a timely and cost-effective fashion. At various times the Company requires funds to meet short-term cash requirements brought about by loan growth or deposit outflows, the purchase of assets, or liability repayments. To manage liquidity needs properly, cash inflows must be timed to coincide with anticipated outflows or sufficient liquidity resources must be available to meet varying demands. The Company manages liquidity in such a fashion as to be able to meet unexpected sudden changes in levels of its assets or deposit liabilities without maintaining excessive amounts of on-balance sheet liquidity. Excess balance sheet liquidity can negatively impact the interest margin.
An integral part of the Company’s ability to manage its liquidity position appropriately is the Company’s large base of core deposits, which are generated by offering traditional banking services in its service area and which have, historically, been a stable source of funds. In addition to core deposits, the Company has the ability to raise deposits through various deposit brokers if required for liquidity purposes. The Company’s net loan to deposit ratio increased to 86% at end of 2006 from 73% at the end of 2005, due to a decrease in deposits during 2006.
To meet liquidity needs, the Company maintains a portion of its funds in cash deposits at other banks, in Federal funds sold and in securities available for sale. The primary liquidity ratio is composed of net cash, non-pledged securities, and other marketable assets, divided by total deposits and short-term liabilities minus liabilities secured by investments or other marketable assets. As of December 31, 2006, the Company’s primary liquidity ratio was 13.64%, comprised of $75.5 million in securities available for sale of maturities of up to five years, less $10.9 million of securities that were pledged to secure public and certain other deposits as required by law and contract, Federal funds sold of $15.1 million, and $34.3 million cash and due from banks, as a percentage of total unsecured deposits of $835.7 million.
As of December 31, 2005, the Company’s primary liquidity ratio was 20.16%, comprised of $99.7 million in securities available for sale of maturities of up to five years, less $10.8 million of securities that were pledged to secure public and certain other deposits as required by law and contract, Federal funds sold of $62.9 million and $35.6 million in cash and due from banks, as a percentage of total unsecured deposits of $929.0 million.
The following table summarizes the Company’s borrowings under its Federal funds purchased, security repurchase arrangements and lines of credit for the periods indicated:
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Average balance during the year | | $ | 25,429 | | $ | 40,748 | | $ | 43,109 |
Average interest rate during the year | | | 2.46% | | | 2.26% | | | 2.07% |
Maximum month-end balance | | $ | 32,700 | | $ | 57,800 | | $ | 48,600 |
Average rate at December 31, | | | 2.56% | | | 2.34% | | | 2.21% |
Capital Resources
At December 31, 2006, the Company had total shareholders’ equity of $122.8 million, which included $62.4 million in common stock and $62.5 million in retained earnings.
The Company paid cash dividends totaling $2.4 million, or $0.20 per share in 2006. In the first quarter of 2007, the Company increased its quarterly dividend from $0.05 per share to $0.06 per share. The Company anticipates paying future dividends within the range of typical peer payout ratios provided, however, that no assurance can be given that earnings and/or growth expectations in any given year will justify the payment of such a dividend.
On February 7, 2006, the Board of Directors authorized the repurchase of up to $10 million of common stock through June 30, 2007. Shares may be repurchased in open market purchases or in privately negotiated transactions as permitted under applicable rules and regulations. The repurchase program may be modified, suspended or terminated by the Board of Directors at any time without notice. The extent to which the Company repurchases its shares and the timing of such repurchases will depend upon market conditions and other corporate considerations.
The Company uses a variety of measures to evaluate capital adequacy. Management reviews various capital measurements on a regular basis and takes appropriate action to ensure that such measurements are within established internal and external guidelines. The external guidelines, which are issued by the Federal Reserve Board and the FDIC, establish a risk-adjusted ratio relating capital to different categories of assets and off-balance sheet exposures. There are two categories of capital under the Federal Reserve Board and FDIC guidelines: Tier 1 and Tier 2 Capital. Our Tier 1 Capital currently includes common shareholders’ equity and the proceeds from the issuance of trust preferred securities (trust preferred securities are counted only up to a maximum of 25% of Tier 1 capital), less intangible assets, and add the unrealized net losses (after tax adjustments) on securities available for sale and accumulated net losses on cash flow hedges, which are carried at fair market value. Our Tier 2 Capital includes the amount of trust preferred securities not includible in Tier 1 Capital, and the allowances for loan losses and off balance sheet credit losses.
The following table summarizes risk-based capital, risk-weighted assets, and risk-based capital ratios of the Company:
| | | | | | | | | |
| | December 31, | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | | | |
Capital components: | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 147,600 | | $ | 133,715 | | $ | 121,096 | | | | |
Tier 2 Capital | | | 9,756 | | | 10,427 | | | 11,623 | | | | |
Total risk-based capital | | $ | 157,356 | | $ | 144,142 | | $ | 132,719 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Risk-weighted assets | | $ | 855,715 | | $ | 941,567 | | $ | 929,241 | | | | |
Average assets (regulatory purposes) | | $ | 1,087,502 | | $ | 1,157,704 | | $ | 1,112,526 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Minimum | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | Regulatory | |
Capital ratios: | | | | | | | | | | | | Requirements | |
Total risk-based capital | | | 18.4 | % | | 15.3 | % | | 14.3 | % | | 8.00 | % |
Tier 1 risk-based capital | | | 17.3 | % | | 14.2 | % | | 13.0 | % | | 4.00 | % |
Leverage (1) | | | 13.6 | % | | 11.6 | % | | 10.9 | % | | 4.00 | % |
(1) Tier 1 capital divided by average assets (excluding goodwill).
The table above presents the capital ratios of the Company computed in accordance with applicable regulatory guidelines and compared to the standards for minimum capital adequacy requirements under the FDIC’s prompt corrective action authority as of December 31, 2006. The risk-based and leverage capital ratios are defined in Item 1 - “Business - Supervision and Regulation - HBC” on page 8.
At December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, the Company’s capital met all minimum regulatory requirements. As of December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004, management believes that HBC was considered “well capitalized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action.
Mandatory Redeemable Cumulative Trust Preferred Securities.
To enhance regulatory capital and to provide liquidity, the Company, through unconsolidated subsidiary grantor trusts, issued the following mandatorily redeemable cumulative trust preferred securities of subsidiary grantor trusts: In the first quarter of 2000, the Company issued $7 million aggregate principal amount of 10.875% subordinated debentures due on March 8, 2030 to a subsidiary trust, which in turn issued a similar amount of trust preferred securities. In the third quarter of 2000, the Company issued $7 million aggregate principal amount of 10.60% subordinated debentures due on September 7, 2030 to a subsidiary trust, which in turn issued a similar amount of trust preferred securities. In the third quarter of 2001, the Company issued $5 million aggregate principal amount of Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Debentures due on July 31, 2031 to a subsidiary trust, which in turn issued a similar amount of trust preferred securities. In the third quarter of 2002, the Company issued $4 million aggregate principal amount of Floating Rate Junior Subordinated Deferrable Interest Debentures due on September 26, 2032 to a subsidiary trust, which in turn issued a similar amount of trust preferred securities. Under applicable regulatory guidelines, the trust preferred securities currently qualify as Tier I capital. The subsidiary trusts are not consolidated in the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the subordinated debt payable to the subsidiary grantor trusts is recorded as debt of the Company to the related trusts. See Footnote 6 the Consolidated Financial Statements.
Market Risk
Market risk is the risk of loss to future earnings, to fair values, or to future cash flows that may result from changes in the price of a financial instrument. The value of a financial instrument may change as a result of changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, commodity prices, equity prices and other market changes that affect market risk sensitive instruments. Market risk is attributed to all market risk sensitive financial instruments, including securities, loans, deposits and borrowings, as well as the Company’s role as a financial intermediary in customer-related transactions. The objective of market risk management is to avoid excessive exposure of the Company’s earnings and equity to loss and to reduce the volatility inherent in certain financial instruments.
Interest Rate Management
Market risk arises from changes in interest rates, exchange rates, commodity prices and equity prices. The Company’s market risk exposure is primarily that of interest rate risk, and it has established policies and procedures to monitor and limit earnings and balance sheet exposure to changes in interest rates. The Company does not engage in the trading of financial instruments, nor does the Company have exposure to currency exchange rates.
The principal objective of interest rate risk management (often referred to as “asset/liability management”) is to manage the financial components of the Company in a manner that will optimize the risk/reward equation for earnings and capital in relation to changing interest rates. The Company’s exposure to market risk is reviewed on a regular basis by the Asset/Liability Committee (“ALCO”). Interest rate risk is the potential of economic losses due to future interest rate changes. These economic losses can be reflected as a loss of future net interest income and/or a loss of current fair market values. The objective is to measure the effect on net interest income and to adjust the balance sheet to minimize the inherent risk while at the same time maximizing income. Management realizes certain risks are inherent, and that the goal is to identify and accept the risks. Management uses two methodologies to manage interest rate risk: (i) a standard GAP analysis; and (ii) an interest rate shock simulation model.
The planning of asset and liability maturities is an integral part of the management of an institution’s net interest margin. To the extent maturities of assets and liabilities do not match in a changing interest rate environment, net interest margin may change over time. Even with perfectly matched repricing of assets and liabilities, risks remain in the form of prepayment of loans or securities or in the form of delays in the adjustment of rates of interest applying to either earning assets with floating rates or to interest bearing liabilities. The Company has generally been able to control its exposure to changing interest rates by maintaining primarily floating interest rate loans and a majority of its time certificates with relatively short maturities.
Interest rate changes do not affect all categories of assets and liabilities equally or at the same time. Varying interest rate environments can create unexpected changes in prepayment levels of assets and liabilities, which may have a significant effect on the net interest margin and are not reflected in the interest sensitivity analysis table. Because of these factors, an interest sensitivity gap report may not provide a complete assessment of the exposure to changes in interest rates.
The Company uses modeling software for asset/liability management in order to simulate the effects of potential interest rate changes on the Company’s net interest margin, and to calculate the estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments under different interest rate scenarios. The program imports current balances, interest rates, maturity dates and repricing information for individual financial instruments, and incorporates assumptions on the characteristics of embedded options along with pricing and duration for new volumes to project the effects of a given interest rate change on the Company’s interest income and interest expense. Rate scenarios consisting of key rate and yield curve projections are run against the Company’s investment, loan, deposit and borrowed funds portfolios. These rate projections can be shocked (an immediate and parallel change in all base rates, up or down), ramped (an incremental increase or decrease in rates over a specified time period), based on current trends and econometric models or economic conditions stable (unchanged from current actual levels).
The Company applies a market value (“MV”) methodology to gauge its interest rate risk exposure as derived from its simulation model. Generally, MV is the discounted present value of the difference between incoming cash flows on interest earning assets and other investments and outgoing cash flows on interest bearing liabilities and other liabilities. The application of the methodology attempts to quantify interest rate risk as the change in the MV which would result from a theoretical 200 basis point (1 basis point equals 0.01%) change in market interest rates. Both a 200 basis point increase and a 200 basis point decrease in market rates are considered.
At December 31, 2006, it was estimated that the Company’s MV would increase 17.16% in the event of a 200 basis point increase in market interest rates. The Company’s MV at the same date would decrease 24.76% in the event of a 200 basis point decrease in market interest rates.
Presented below, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, is an analysis of the Company’s interest rate risk as measured by changes in MV for instantaneous and sustained parallel shifts of 200 basis points in market interest rates:
| | 2006 | | 2005 |
| | $ Change | | % Change | | Market Value as a % of | | $ Change | | % Change | | Market Value as a % of |
| | in Market | | in Market | | Present Value of Assets | | in Market | | in Market | | Present Value of Assets |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Value | | Value | | MV Ratio | | Change (bp) | | Value | | Value | | MV Ratio | | Change (bp) |
Change in rates | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
+ 200 bp | | $ | 31,607 | | | 17.16 | % | | 21.1 | % | | 309 | | $ | 41,217 | | | 23.41 | % | | 19.6 | % | | 371 |
0 bp | | $ | - | | | 0.00 | % | | 18.0 | % | | 0 | | $ | - | | | 0.00 | % | | 15.9 | % | | 0 |
- 200 bp | | $ | (45,606) | | | -24.76 | % | | 13.6 | % | | (446) | | $ | (61,175) | | | -34.74 | % | | 10.4 | % | | (551) |
Management believes that the MV methodology overcomes three shortcomings of the typical maturity gap methodology. First, it does not use arbitrary repricing intervals and accounts for all expected future cash flows. Second, because the MV method projects cash flows of each financial instrument under different interest rate environments, it can incorporate the effect of embedded options on an institution’s interest rate risk exposure. Third, it allows interest rates on different instruments to change by varying amounts in response to a change in market interest rates, resulting in more accurate estimates of cash flows.
However, as with any method of gauging interest rate risk, there are certain shortcomings inherent to the MV methodology. The model assumes interest rate changes are instantaneous parallel shifts in the yield curve. In reality, rate changes are rarely instantaneous. The use of the simplifying assumption that short-term and long-term rates change by the same degree may also misstate historic rate patterns, which rarely show parallel yield curve shifts. Further, the model assumes that certain assets and liabilities of similar maturity or period to repricing will react in the same way to changes in rates. In reality, certain types of financial instruments may react in advance of changes in market rates, while the reaction of other types of financial instruments may lag behind the change in general market rates. Additionally, the MV methodology does not reflect the full impact of annual and lifetime restrictions on changes in rates for certain assets, such as adjustable rate loans. When interest rates change, actual loan prepayments and actual early withdrawals from certificates may deviate significantly from the assumptions used in the model. Finally, this methodology does not measure or reflect the impact that higher rates may have on adjustable-rate loan clients’ ability to service their debt. All of these factors are considered in monitoring the Company’s exposure to interest rate risk.
General
The Company’s consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”). The financial information contained within our consolidated financial statements is, to a significant extent, based on approximate measures of the financial effects of transactions and events that have already occurred. A variety of factors could affect the ultimate value that is obtained either when earning income, recognizing an expense, recovering an asset or relieving a liability. In certain instances, we use a discount factor and prepayment assumptions to determine the present value of assets and liabilities. A change in the discount factor or prepayment speeds could increase or decrease the values of those assets and liabilities which would result in either a beneficial or adverse impact to our financial results. We use historical loss factors as one factor in determining the inherent loss that may be present in our loan portfolio. Actual losses could differ significantly from the historical factors that we use. The Company adopted Statement 123R on January 1, 2006, and elected the modified prospective method, under which prior periods are not revised for comparative purposes. Other estimates that we use are related to the expected useful lives of our depreciable assets. In addition, GAAP itself may change from one previously acceptable method to another method, although the economics of our transactions would be the same.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses is an estimate of the losses in our loan portfolio. Our accounting for estimated loan losses is discussed under the heading “Allowance for Loan Losses” beginning on page 37.
Loan Sales and Servicing
The amounts of gains recorded on sales of loans and the initial recording of servicing assets and I/O strips are based on the estimated fair values of the respective components. In recording the initial value of the servicing assets and the fair value of the I/O strips receivable, the Company uses estimates which are made on management’s expectations of future prepayment and discount rates as discussed in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements.
Stock Based Compensation
We grant stock options to purchase our common stock to our employees and directors under the 2004 Plan. We also granted our chief executive officer restricted stock when he joined the Company. Additionally, we have outstanding options that were granted under an option plan from which we no longer make grants. The benefits provided under all of these plans are subject to the provisions of FASB Statement 123(Revised), “Share-Based Payments,” which we adopted effective January 1, 2006. We elected to use the modified prospective application in adopting Statement 123R and therefore have not restated results for prior periods. The valuation provisions of Statement 123R apply to new awards and to awards that are outstanding on the adoption date and subsequently modified or cancelled. Our results of operations for fiscal 2006 were impacted by the recognition of non cash expense related to the fair value of our share-based compensation awards as discussed in Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements.
The determination of fair value of stock-based payment awards on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes model is affected by our stock price, as well as the input of other subjective assumptions. These assumptions include, but are not limited to, the expected term of stock options and our expected stock price volatility over the term of the awards. Our stock options have characteristics significantly different from those of traded options, and changes in the assumptions can materially affect the fair value estimates.
Statement 123R requires forfeitures to be estimated at the time of grant and revised, if necessary, in subsequent periods if actual forfeitures differ from those estimates. If actual forfeitures vary from our estimates, we will recognize the difference in compensation expense in the period the actual forfeitures occur of when options vest.
Our accounting for stock options is disclosed primarily in Notes 1 and 8 to the consolidated financial statements.
ITEM 7A - QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
As a financial institution, the Company’s primary component of market risk is interest rate volatility. Fluctuations in interest rates will ultimately impact both the level of income and expense recorded on most of the Company’s assets and liabilities, and the market value of all interest-earning assets, other than those which have a short term to maturity. Based upon the nature of the Company’s operations, the Company is not subject to foreign exchange or commodity price risk. The Company has no market risk sensitive instruments held for trading purposes. As of December 31, 2006, the Company does not use interest rate derivatives to hedge its interest rate risk.
The information concerning quantitative and qualitative disclosure or market risk called for by Item 305 of Regulation S-K is included as part of Item above. See page 44.
ITEM 8 - FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
The financial statements and reports of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firms are set forth on pages 52 through 86.
None
The Company has carried out an evaluation, under the supervision and with the participation of the Company’s management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as of December 31, 2006. As defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), disclosure controls and procedures are controls and procedures designed to reasonably assure that information required to be disclosed in our reports filed or submitted under the Exchange Act are recorded, processed, summarized and reported on a timely basis. Disclosure controls are also designed to reasonably assure that such information is accumulated and communicated to our management, including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate, to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure. Based upon their evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded the Company’s disclosure controls were effective as of December 31, 2006, the period covered by this report on Form 10K.
Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting
Management of the Company is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. As defined in Rule 13a-15(f) under the Exchange Act, internal control over financial reporting is a process designed by, or under the supervision of, a company’s principal executive and principal financial officers and effected by a company’s board of directors, management and other personnel, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. It includes those policies and procedures that:
· | Pertain to the maintenance of records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of a company; |
· | Provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of a company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and the board of directors of the company; and |
· | Provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of a company’s assets that could have a material effect on its financial statements. |
Because of the inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
The Company’s management has used the criteria established in “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (“COSO”) to evaluate the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting. Management has selected the COSO framework for its evaluation as it is a control framework recognized by the SEC and the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, that is free from bias, permits reasonably consistent qualitative and quantitative measurement of the Company’s internal controls, is sufficiently complete so that relevant controls are not omitted and is relevant to an evaluation of internal controls over financial reporting.
Based on our assessment, management has concluded that our internal control over financial reporting, based on criteria established in “Internal Control-Integrated Framework” issued by COSO was effective as of December 31, 2006.
The Company’s independent registered public accounting firm has issued an attestation report on the management’s assessment of the Company’s internal controls over financial reporting.
Inherent Limitations on Effectiveness of Controls
The Company’s management, including the CEO and CFO, does not expect that our disclosure controls or our internal control over financial reporting will prevent or detect all error and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. The design of a control system must reflect the fact that there are resource constraints, and the benefits of controls must be considered relative to their costs. Further, because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud, if any, within the company have been detected. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Controls can also be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people, or by management override of the controls. The design of any system of controls is based in part on certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events, and there can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions. Projections of any evaluation of controls effectiveness to future periods are subject to risks. Over time, controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions or deterioration in the degree of compliance with policies or procedures.
None
PART III
We have adopted a code of ethics that applies to our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and to all of our other officers, directors, employees and agents. The code of ethics is available at the Corporate Governance section of the Investor Relations page on our website at www.heritagecommercecorp.com. We intend to disclose future amendments to, or waivers from, certain provisions of our code of ethics on the above website within four business days following the date of such amendment or waiver.
ITEM 11 - EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
ITEM 12 - SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS
ITEM 13 - CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS
ITEM 14 - PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
Information required by this item will be contained in our Definitive Proxy Statement for our 2007 Annual Meeting of Shareholders, to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A, with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of December 31, 2006. Such information is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
(a)(1) FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The Financial Statements of the Company and the independent auditors’ reports are set forth on pages 52 through 86.
(a)(2) FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
All schedules to the Financial Statements are omitted because of the absence of the conditions under which they are required or because the required information is included in the Financial Statements or accompanying notes.
(a)(3) EXHIBITS
The exhibit list required by this Item is incorporated by reference to the Exhibit Index included in this report.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Company has duly caused this report on Form 10-K to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
| Heritage Commerce Corp |
DATE: March 16, 2007 | BY: /s/ Walter T. Kaczmarek Walter T. Kaczmarek Chief Executive Officer |
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the date indicated:
Signature | Title | Date |
/s/ FRANK BISCEGLIA Frank Bisceglia | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ JAMES BLAIR James Blair | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ JACK CONNER Jack Conner | Director and Chairman of the Board | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ WILLIAM DEL BIAGGIO, JR. William Del Biaggio, Jr. | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ WALTER T. KACZMAREK Walter T. Kaczmarek | Director and Chief Executive Officer and President (Principle Executive Officer) | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ LAWRENCE D. MCGOVERN Lawrence D. McGovern | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ ROBERT MOLES Robert Moles | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ LON NORMANDIN Lon Normandin | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ JACK PECKHAM Jack Peckham | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ HUMPHREY POLANEN Humphrey Polanen | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ CHARLES TOENISKOETTER Charles Toeniskoetter | Director | March 16, 2007 |
/s/ RANSON WEBSTER Ranson Webster | Director | March 16, 2007 |
INDEX TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
DECEMBER 31, 2006
| Page |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2006 and 2005 | 52 |
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for 2004 | 53 |
Consolidated Balance Sheets as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 | 54 |
Consolidated Income Statements for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 | 55 |
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 | 56 |
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the years ended December 31, 2006, 2005 and 2004 | 57 |
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements | 58 |
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
Board of Directors
Heritage Commerce Corp
San Jose, California
We have audited the accompanying consolidated balance sheets of Heritage Commerce Corp as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated income statements, statements of changes in shareholders’ equity and statements of cash flows for the years then ended. We also have audited management’s assessment, included in Management’s Annual Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting in Item 9A of Form 10-K, that Heritage Commerce Corp maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Heritage Commerce Corp’s management is responsible for these financial statements, for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements, an opinion on management’s assessment, and an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement and whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit of financial statements included examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, and evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. Our audit of internal control over financial reporting included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, evaluating management’s assessment, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinions.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, the consolidated financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of Heritage Commerce Corp as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the years then ended in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America. Also in our opinion, management’s assessment that Heritage Commerce Corp maintained effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, is fairly stated, in all material respects, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO). Furthermore, in our opinion, Heritage Commerce Corp maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, based on criteria established in Internal Control—Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO).
/s/ Crowe Chizek and Company LLP
Oak Brook, Illinois
March 15, 2007
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Heritage Commerce Corp:
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of income, changes in shareholders’ equity, and cash flows of Heritage Commerce Corp and subsidiary (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2004. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company’s management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, such consolidated financial statements present fairly, in all material respects, the results of operations and cash flows of Heritage Commerce Corp and subsidiary for the year ended December 31, 2004, in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
San Francisco, California
March 30, 2005
HERITAGE COMMERCE CORP | | | | |
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS | | | | |
| | December 31, | | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Assets | | | | | | |
Cash and due from banks | | $ | 34,285 | | $ | 35,560 |
Federal funds sold | | | 15,100 | | | 62,900 |
Total cash and cash equivalents | | | 49,385 | | | 98,460 |
Securities available for sale, at fair value | | | 172,298 | | | 198,495 |
Loans held for sale, at lower of cost or market | | | 17,234 | | | 70,147 |
Loans, net of deferred costs | | | 725,754 | | | 688,778 |
Allowance for loan losses | | | (9,279 | ) | | (10,224) |
Loans, net | | | 716,475 | | | 678,554 |
Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank stock, at cost | | | 6,113 | | | 5,859 |
Company owned life insurance | | | 36,174 | | | 34,735 |
Premises and equipment, net | | | 2,539 | | | 2,541 |
Accrued interest receivable and other assets | | | 36,920 | | | 41,718 |
Total assets | | $ | 1,037,138 | | $ | 1,130,509 |
| | | | | | |
Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity | | | | | | |
Liabilities: | | | | | | |
Deposits | | | | | | |
Demand, noninterest bearing | | $ | 231,841 | | $ | 248,009 |
Demand, interest bearing | | | 133,413 | | | 157,330 |
Savings and money market | | | 307,266 | | | 353,798 |
Time deposits, under $100 | | | 31,097 | | | 35,209 |
Time deposits, $100 and over | | | 111,017 | | | 109,373 |
Brokered deposits, $100 and over | | | 31,959 | | | 36,040 |
Total deposits | | | 846,593 | | | 939,759 |
Notes payable to subsidiary grantor trusts | | | 23,702 | | | 23,702 |
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase | | | 21,800 | | | 32,700 |
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities | | | 22,223 | | | 22,731 |
Total liabilities | | | 914,318 | | | 1,018,892 |
| | | | | | |
Shareholders' equity: | | | | | | |
Preferred stock, no par value; 10,000,000 | | | | | | |
shares authorized; none outstanding | | | - | | | - |
Common Stock, no par value; 30,000,000 shares authorized; | | | | | | |
shares outstanding: 11,656,943 in 2006 and 11,807,649 in 2005 | | | 62,363 | | | 67,602 |
Retained earnings | | | 62,452 | | | 47,539 |
Unearned restricted stock award | | | - | | | (803) |
Accumulated other comprehensive loss | | | (1,995 | ) | | (2,721) |
Total shareholders' equity | | | 122,820 | | | 111,617 |
Total liabilities and shareholders' equity | | $ | 1,037,138 | | $ | 1,130,509 |
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | |
See notes to consolidated financial statements |
HERITAGE COMMERCE CORP | | | | | | |
CONSOLIDATED INCOME STATEMENTS | | | | | | |
| | Years Ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Interest income: | | | | | | | | | |
Loans, including fees | | $ | 61,859 | | $ | 54,643 | | $ | 43,593 |
Securities, taxable | | | 7,614 | | | 7,042 | | | 6,418 |
Securities, non-taxable | | | 182 | | | 205 | | | 297 |
Interest bearing deposits in other financial institutions | | | 132 | | | 97 | | | 14 |
Federal funds sold | | | 3,170 | | | 1,769 | | | 363 |
Total interest income | | | 72,957 | | | 63,756 | | | 50,685 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Interest expense: | | | | | | | | | |
Deposits | | | 19,588 | | | 12,849 | | | 6,798 |
Notes payable to subsidiary grantor trusts | | | 2,310 | | | 2,136 | | | 1,958 |
Repurchase agreements and other | | | 627 | | | 922 | | | 892 |
Total interest expense | | | 22,525 | | | 15,907 | | | 9,648 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Net interest income before provison for loan losses | | | 50,432 | | | 47,849 | | | 41,037 |
Provision for loan losses | | | (503) | | | 313 | | | 666 |
Net interest income after provision for loan losses | | | 50,935 | | | 47,536 | | | 40,371 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Noninterest income: | | | | | | | | | |
Gain on sale of loans | | | 4,008 | | | 2,871 | | | 3,052 |
Servicing income | | | 1,860 | | | 1,838 | | | 1,498 |
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance | | | 1,439 | | | 1,236 | | | 1,031 |
Service charges and fees on deposit accounts | | | 1,335 | | | 1,468 | | | 1,799 |
Gain on sale of leased equipment | | | 0 | | | 299 | | | 0 |
Equipment leasing | | | 0 | | | 131 | | | 871 |
Gain on sales of securities available-for-sale | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 476 |
Mortgage brokerage fees | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 168 |
Other | | | 1,198 | | | 1,580 | | | 1,649 |
Total noninterest income | | | 9,840 | | | 9,423 | | | 10,544 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Noninterest expense: | | | | | | | | | |
Salaries and employee benefits | | | 19,414 | | | 19,845 | | | 20,189 |
Occupancy | | | 3,110 | | | 3,254 | | | 3,670 |
Professional fees | | | 1,688 | | | 1,617 | | | 2,656 |
Advertising and promotion | | | 1,064 | | | 985 | | | 1,090 |
Client services | | | 1,000 | | | 1,404 | | | 1,044 |
Low income housing investment losses and writedowns | | | 995 | | | 957 | | | 878 |
Data processing | | | 806 | | | 661 | | | 722 |
Furniture and equipment | | | 517 | | | 734 | | | 921 |
Retirement plan expense | | | 352 | | | 619 | | | 306 |
Operational losses | | | 9 | | | 37 | | | 2,219 |
Amortization of leased equipment | | | 0 | | | 334 | | | 1,016 |
Other | | | 5,313 | | | 4,786 | | | 4,527 |
Total noninterest expense | | | 34,268 | | | 35,233 | | | 39,238 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Income before income taxes | | | 26,507 | | | 21,726 | | | 11,677 |
Income tax expense | | | 9,237 | | | 7,280 | | | 3,199 |
Net income | | $ | 17,270 | | $ | 14,446 | | $ | 8,478 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Earnings per share: | | | | | | | | | |
Basic | | $ | 1.47 | | $ | 1.22 | | $ | 0.73 |
Diluted | | $ | 1.44 | | $ | 1.19 | | $ | 0.71 |
| | | | | | | | | |
See notes to consolidated financial statements | |
HERITAGE COMMERCE CORP |
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS' EQUITY |
YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2006, 2005, AND 2004 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Common Stock | | Unearned Restricted | | Unallocated ESOP | | Accumlated Other Comprehensive | | Retained | | Total Shareholders' | | Comprehensive | |
(Dollars in thousands, except shares) | | Shares | | Amount | | Stock Award | | Shares | | Income (Loss) | | Earnings | | Equity | | Income | |
Balance, January 1, 2004 | | | 11,381,037 | | $ | 65,234 | | $ | - | | $ | (443 | ) | $ | 79 | | $ | 24,615 | | $ | 89,485 | | | | |
Net Income | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 8,478 | | | 8,478 | | $ | 8,478 | |
Net change in unrealized gain/loss on securities | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
available-for-sale and Interest-Only strips, net | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
of reclassification adjustment and deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (684 | ) | | - | | | (684 | ) | | (684 | ) |
Increase in pension liability, net of deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (1,125 | ) | | - | | | (1,125 | ) | | (1,125 | ) |
Total comprehensive income | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 6,669 | |
ESOP shares released | | | - | | | 296 | | | - | | | 250 | | | - | | | - | | | 546 | | | | |
Common stock repurchased | | | (263,728 | ) | | (4,214 | ) | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (4,214 | ) | | | |
Stock options exercised, including related tax benefits | | | 552,528 | | | 6,093 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 6,093 | | | | |
Balance, December 31, 2004 | | | 11,669,837 | | | 67,409 | | | - | | | (193 | ) | | (1,730 | ) | | 33,093 | | | 98,579 | | | | |
Net Income | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 14,446 | | | 14,446 | | $ | 14,446 | |
Net change in unrealized gain/loss on securities | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
available-for-sale and Interest-Only strips, net | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
of reclassification adjustment and deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (664 | ) | | - | | | (664 | ) | | (664 | ) |
Increase in pension liability, net of deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (327 | ) | | - | | | (327 | ) | | (327 | ) |
Total comprehensive income | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 13,455 | |
ESOP shares released | | | - | | | 284 | | | - | | | 193 | | | - | | | - | | | 477 | | | | |
Restricted stock award | | | 51,000 | | | 926 | | | (926 | ) | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | | |
Amortization of restricted stock award | | | - | | | - | | | 123 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 123 | | | | |
Redemption payment on commom stock | | | - | | | (12 | ) | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (12 | ) | | | |
Common stock repurchased | | | (300,160 | ) | | (5,732 | ) | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (5,732 | ) | | | |
Stock options exercised, including related tax benefits | | | 386,972 | | | 4,727 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 4,727 | | | | |
Balance, December 31, 2005 | | | 11,807,649 | | | 67,602 | | | (803 | ) | | - | | | (2,721 | ) | | 47,539 | | | 111,617 | | | | |
Net Income | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 17,270 | | | 17,270 | | $ | 17,270 | |
Net change in unrealized gain/loss on securities | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
available-for-sale and Interest-Only strips, net | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
of reclassification adjustment and deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 377 | | | - | | | 377 | | | 377 | |
Decrease in pension liability, net of deferred income taxes | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 349 | | | - | | | 349 | | | 349 | |
Total comprehensive income | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | $ | 17,996 | |
Reclassification of unearned restricted stock award upon adoption | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
of Statement 123 (revised 2004) | | | - | | | (803 | ) | | 803 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | | |
Amortization of restricted stock award | | | - | | | 154 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 154 | | | | |
Cash dividend declared on common stock, $0.20 per share | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (2,357 | ) | | (2,357 | ) | | | |
Common stock repurchased | | | (330,300 | ) | | (7,888 | ) | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | (7,888 | ) | | | |
Stock option expense | | | - | | | 780 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 780 | | | | |
Stock options exercised, including related tax benefits | | | 179,594 | | | 2,518 | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | - | | | 2,518 | | | | |
Balance, December 31, 2006 | | | 11,656,943 | | $ | 62,363 | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | (1,995 | ) | $ | 62,452 | | $ | 122,820 | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
See notes to consolidated financial statements |
HERITAGE COMMERCE CORP |
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS |
| | Years ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES: | | | | | | | | | |
Net income | | $ | 17,270 | | $ | 14,446 | | $ | 8,478 |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by | | | | | | | | | |
operating activities: | | | | | | | | | |
Net gain/loss on disposals of property and equipment | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | (17) |
Depreciation and amortization | | | 662 | | | 988 | | | 1,366 |
Provision for loan losses | | | (503 | ) | | 313 | | | 666 |
Gain on sale of leased equipment | | | 0 | | | (299 | ) | | 0 |
Gain on sales of securities available-for-sale | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | (476) |
Deferred income tax benefit | | | (319 | ) | | (360 | ) | | (1,163) |
Non-cash compensation expense related to ESOP plan | | | 0 | | | 477 | | | 546 |
Stock option expense | | | 780 | | | 0 | | | 0 |
Amortization of restricted stock award | | | 154 | | | 123 | | | 0 |
Amortization (accretion) of discounts and premiums on securities | | | (1,087 | ) | | 928 | | | 1,090 |
Gain on sale of loans | | | (4,008 | ) | | (2,871 | ) | | (3,052) |
Proceeds from sales of loans held for sale | | | 96,749 | | | 51,176 | | | 57,647 |
Originations of loans held for sale | | | (65,839 | ) | | (78,227 | ) | | (74,898) |
Maturities of loans held for sale | | | 26,011 | | | 26,510 | | | 13,763 |
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance | | | (1,439 | ) | | (1,236 | ) | | (1,031) |
Effect of changes in: | | | | | | | | | |
Accrued interest receivable and other assets | | | 4,270 | | | (7,181 | ) | | (3,948) |
Accrued interest payable and other liabilities | | | 1,562 | | | 4,909 | | | 4,540 |
Net cash provided by operating activities | | | 74,263 | | | 9,696 | | | 3,511 |
| | | | | | | | | |
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES: | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in loans (including purchase of $10,306 in 2006) | | | (37,418 | ) | | 4,609 | | | (64,712) |
Purchases of securities available-for-sale | | | (64,018 | ) | | (26,087 | ) | | (127,662) |
Maturities/Paydowns/Calls of securities available-for-sale | | | 92,274 | | | 57,707 | | | 23,270 |
Proceeds from sales of securities available-for-sale | | | 0 | | | 0 | | | 22,641 |
Sale of leased equipment | | | 0 | | | 687 | | | 0 |
Purchases of company owned life insurance | | | 0 | | | (7,196 | ) | | 0 |
Purchase of premises and equipment | | | (660 | ) | | (346 | ) | | (532) |
Purchase of restricted stock and other investments | | | (254 | ) | | (1,164 | ) | | (2,191) |
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities | | | (10,076 | ) | | 28,210 | | | (149,186) |
| | | | | | | | | |
CASH FLOWS FROM FINANCING ACTIVITIES: | | | | | | | | | |
Net change in deposits | | | (93,166 | ) | | 21,224 | | | 83,125 |
Payment of other liability | | | (1,469 | ) | | (2,299 | ) | | 0 |
Exercise of stock options | | | 2,518 | | | 4,727 | | | 6,093 |
Common stock repurchased | | | (7,888 | ) | | (5,744 | ) | | (4,214) |
Payment of cash dividend | | | (2,357 | ) | | 0 | | | 0 |
Net change in other borrowings | | | (10,900 | ) | | (15,100 | ) | | 4,200 |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | | | (113,262 | ) | | 2,808 | | | 89,204 |
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents | | | (49,075 | ) | | 40,714 | | | (56,471) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year | | | 98,460 | | | 57,746 | | | 114,217 |
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year | | $ | 49,385 | | $ | 98,460 | | $ | 57,746 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Supplemental disclosures of cash flow information: | | | | | | | | | |
Cash paid during the year for: | | | | | | | | | |
Interest | | $ | 22,285 | | $ | 15,291 | | $ | 9,493 |
Income taxes | | $ | 4,781 | | $ | 13,828 | | $ | 3,080 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Supplemental schedule of non-cash investing activity: | | | | | | | | | |
Transfer of commerical loans to loans held-for-sale | | $ | 0 | | $ | 32,057 | | $ | 0 |
Transfer of commercial loan held for sale to commercial loans | | $ | 0 | | $ | 2,500 | | $ | 0 |
| | | | | | | | | |
See notes to consolidated financial statements |
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
Description of Business and Basis of Presentation
Heritage Commerce Corp (the “Company”) operates as a bank holding company. Effective January 1, 2003, Heritage Bank East Bay (“HBEB”), Heritage Bank South Valley (“HBSV”), and Bank of Los Altos (“BLA”) were merged into Heritage Bank of Commerce (“HBC” or “the Bank”). HBC is a California state chartered bank which offers a full range of commercial and personal banking services to residents and the business/professional community in Santa Clara and Alameda counties, California. HBC was incorporated on November 23, 1993 and commenced operations on June 8, 1994.
The consolidated financial statements include the accounts of the Company and its subsidiary bank. All inter- company accounts and transactions have been eliminated.
The Company also has four other subsidiaries, Heritage Capital Trust I and Heritage Statutory Trust I, formed in 2000, Heritage Statutory Trust II, formed in 2001, and Heritage Statutory Trust III, formed in 2002, which are Delaware statutory business trusts formed for the exclusive purpose of issuing trust preferred securities. These subsidiary trusts are not consolidated in the Company’s consolidated financial statements and the subordinated debt payable to subsidiary grantor trusts is recorded as debt of the Company to the related trusts.
Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. The allowance for loan losses, loan servicing rights, defined benefit pension obligation, interest-only strip receivables and the fair values of financial instruments are particularly subject to change.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents include cash on hand, amounts due from banks, and Federal funds sold. Generally, Federal funds are sold and purchased for one-day periods.
Cash Flows
Net cash flows are reported for customer loan and deposit transactions, and Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements.
Securities
The Company classifies its securities as either available-for-sale or held-to-maturity at the time of purchase. Securities available-for-sale are recorded at fair value with a corresponding recognition of the net unrealized holding gain or loss, net of deferred income taxes, as a net amount within accumulated other comprehensive income (loss), which is a separate component of shareholders’ equity. Securities held-to-maturity are recorded at amortized cost and are based on the Company’s positive intent and ability to hold the securities to maturity. As of December 31, 2006 and 2005, all the Company’s securities were classified as available-for-sale securities.
A decline in the market value of any available-for-sale or held-to-maturity security below amortized cost that is deemed other than temporary results in a charge to earnings and the corresponding establishment of a new cost basis for the security. In estimating other-than-temporary losses, management considers (1) the length of time and extent that fair value has been less than cost, (2) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and (3) the Company’s ability and intent to hold the security for a period sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value.
Interest income includes amortization of purchase premiums or discount. Premiums and discounts are amortized, or accreted, over the life of the related security as an adjustment to income using a method that approximates the interest method. Realized gains and losses are recorded on the trade date and determined using the specific identification method for determining the cost of securities sold.
Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) and Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”) Stock
The Bank is a member of the FHLB system. Members are required to own a certain amount of stock based on the level of borrowings and other factors, and may invest in additional amounts. The FHLB stock is carried at cost, classified as a restricted security, and periodically evaluated for impairment. Because this stock is viewed as a long term investment, impairment is based on ultimate recovery of par value. Both cash and stock dividends are reported as income. The Bank is also member of the FRB. FRB stock is classified as a restricted security, and cash dividends are reported as income.
Loans Held for Sale
The Company holds for sale the guaranteed portion of certain loans guaranteed by the Small Business Administration or the U.S. Department of Agriculture (collectively referred to as “SBA loans”). These loans are carried at the lower of cost or market, based on the aggregate value of the portfolio. Net unrealized losses, if any, are recorded as a valuation allowance and charged to earnings.
Gains or losses on SBA loans held for sale are recognized upon completion of the sale, and are based on the difference between the net sales proceeds and the relative fair value of the guaranteed portion of the loan sold compared to the relative fair value of the unguaranteed portion.
SBA loans are sold with servicing retained. The servicing assets that result from the sale of SBA loans consist of servicing rights and interest-only strip receivables.
The Company accounts for the sale and servicing of SBA loans based on the financial and servicing assets it controls and liabilities it has incurred, derecognizing financial assets when control has been surrendered, and derecognizing liabilities when extinguished. Servicing rights are measured at their fair value and are amortized in proportion to and over the period of net servicing income and are assessed for impairment on an ongoing basis. Impairment is determined by stratifying the servicing rights based on interest rates and terms. Any servicing assets in excess of the contractually specified servicing fees are reclassified at fair value as an interest-only (I/O) strip receivable and treated like an available for sale security. Fair value is determined using prices for similar assets with similar characteristics, when available, or based upon discounted cash flows using market-based assumptions. Impairment is recognized through a valuation allowance. The servicing rights, net of any required valuation allowance, and I/O strip receivable are included in other assets.
Loans
Loans that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or maturity or payoff are stated at the principal amount outstanding net of deferred loan origination fees and costs. The majority of the Company’s loans are at variable interest rates. Interest on loans is accrued on the unpaid principal balance and is credited to income using the effective yield interest method.
Generally, if a loan is classified as non-accrual, the accrual of interest is discontinued, any accrued and unpaid interest is reversed, and the amortization of deferred loan fees and costs is discontinued. Loans are classified as non-accrual when the payment of principal or interest is 90 days past due, unless the amount is well secured and in the process of collection. Any interest or principal payments received on nonaccrual loans are applied toward reduction of principal. Nonaccrual loans generally are not returned to performing status until the obligation is brought current, the loan has performed in accordance with the contract terms for a reasonable period of time, and the ultimate collectibility of the total contractual principal and interest is no longer in doubt.
Non-refundable loan fees and direct origination costs are deferred and recognized over the expected lives of the related loans using the effective yield interest method.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The Company maintains an allowance for loan losses to absorb probable losses incurred in the loan portfolio. The allowance is based on ongoing, quarterly assessments of the probable estimated losses. Loans are charged against the allowance when management believes that the uncollectibility of a loan balance is confirmed. The allowance is increased by the provision for loan losses, which is charged against current period operating results, and decreased by loan charge-offs, net of recoveries. The Company’s methodology for assessing the appropriateness of the allowance consists of several key elements, which include the formula allowance and specific allowances.
The formula allowance is calculated by applying loss factors to pools of outstanding loans. Loss factors are based on the Company’s historical loss experience, adjusted for significant factors that, in management’s judgment, affect the collectibility of the portfolio as of the evaluation date. The adjustment factors for the formula allowance may include existing general economic and business conditions affecting the key lending areas of the Company, in particular the technology industry and the real estate market, credit quality trends, collateral values, loan volumes and concentrations, specific industry conditions within portfolio segments, recent loss experience in particular segments of the portfolio, duration of the current business cycle, and bank regulatory examination results. The evaluation of the inherent loss with respect to these conditions is subject to a higher degree of uncertainty.
Specific allowances are established for impaired loans, but the entire allowance is available for any loan, that in management’s judgment, should be charged off. Management considers a loan to be impaired when it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the original contractual terms of the note agreement. When a loan is considered to be impaired, the amount of impairment is measured based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the note’s effective interest rate, or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Commercial, land and construction and commercial real estate loans are individually evaluated for impairment. Large groups of smaller balance homogeneous loans, such as consumer and residential real estate loans, are collectively evaluated for impairment and, accordingly, they are not separately identified for impairment disclosures.
Loss Contingencies
Loss contingencies, including claims and legal actions arising in the ordinary course of business, are recorded as liabilities when the likelihood of loss is probable and an amount or range of loss can be reasonably estimated. Management does not believe there now are such matters that will have a material effect on the financial statements.
Company Owned Life Insurance
The Company has purchased life insurance policies on certain directors and officers. Company owned life insurance is recorded at its cash surrender value or the amount that can be realized.
Premises and Equipment
Premises and equipment are stated at cost. Depreciation and amortization are computed on a straight-line basis over the lesser of the respective lease terms or estimated useful lives of five to fifteen years. The Company evaluates the recoverability of long-lived assets on an on-going basis.
Equipment under Operating Leases to Others
Equipment under operating leases where the Company was the lessor were carried at cost less accumulated depreciation based on the terms of the leases. This equipment represented a pool of electronic testing equipment available for short-term rentals purchased in 2002 from a third party, who serviced the leases. At December 31, 2004, the Company had $2,807,000 in equipment and $2,085,000 in accumulated depreciation related to these leases. Depreciation expense was $1,016,000 and rental revenue on the leases was $871,000 in 2004. The Company regularly evaluates this equipment for impairment. In 2004, the Company recorded a write-off on the electronic test equipment of $2,193,000 due to an impairment. In 2005, the Company sold all the electronic test equipment and recognized a gain on sale of $299,000.
Termination Benefits
In 2004, the Company recorded certain termination benefits related to the elimination of certain full time positions and the resignation of the former CEO. The Company recorded severance expense of $1,283,000 and special termination benefit expense of $765,000 recognized in salaries and employee benefits.
Income Taxes
The Company files consolidated Federal and combined state income tax returns. Income tax expense is the total of the current year income tax payable or refundable and the change in deferred tax assets and liabilities. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are the expected future tax amounts for the temporary differences between carrying amounts and tax basis of assets and liabilities, computed using enacted tax rates. A valuation allowance, if needed, reduces deferred tax assets to the amount expected to be realized.
Earnings per Share
Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing net income by the weighted average common shares outstanding. Diluted earnings per share reflects potential dilution from outstanding stock options, using the treasury stock method. There were 167,763, 25,225 and 14,336 stock options for 2006, 2005, and 2004 that were considered to be antidilutive and excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per share. For each of the years presented, net income is the same for basic and diluted earnings per share. Reconciliation of weighted average shares used in computing basic and diluted earnings per share is as follows:
| | Year ended December 31, |
| | | 2006 | | | 2005 | | | 2004 |
Weighted average common shares outstanding - used in computing basic earnings per share | | | 11,725,671 | | | 11,795,635 | | | 11,559,155 |
Dilutive effect of stock options outstanding,using the treasury stock method | | | 230,762 | | | 311,595 | | | 427,701 |
Shares used in computing diluted earnings per share | | | 11,956,433 | | | 12,107,230 | | | 11,986,856 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Stock-Based Compensation
Prior to 2006, the Company accounted for stock-based awards to employees using the intrinsic value method in accordance with Accounting Principles Board (“APB”) Opinion No. 25, “Accounting for Stock Issued to Employees.” No compensation expense was recognized in the financial statements for stock option arrangements, as the Company’s stock option plan provides for the issuance of options at a price of no less than the fair market value at the date of the grant.
Statement of Financial Accounting Standards (“Statement”) No. 123, “Accounting for Stock-Based Compensation,” required the disclosure of pro forma net income and earnings per share had the Company adopted the fair value method at the grant date of all stock options. Under Statement 123, the fair value of stock-based awards to employees is calculated through the use of option pricing models, even though such models were developed to estimate the fair value of freely tradable, fully transferable options without vesting restrictions, which differ significantly from the Company’s stock option awards. Those models also require subjective assumptions, which affect the calculated values.
In December 2004, the FASB issued Statement 123 (revised 2004), “Share-Based Payment”. This Statement requires that compensation costs related to share-based payment transactions be recognized in the financial statements. Measurement of the cost of employee service is based on the grant-date fair value of the equity or liability instruments issued. That cost is recognized over the period during which an employee is required to provide service in exchange for the award. Additionally, liability awards will be remeasured each reporting period. Statement 123R replaces Statement 123, and supersedes APB Opinion 25. On April 14, 2005, the SEC issued rule 2005-57, which allowed companies to delay implementation of Statement 123R to the beginning of 2006.
The Company adopted Statement 123R on January 1, 2006, which has resulted in an increase in noninterest expense of $780,000 in 2006. The income tax benefit recognized in the income statement for stock option expense was $108,000 in 2006. Adoption of Statement 123R reduced net income by $672,000 in 2006, and decreased basic and diluted earnings per share by approximately $0.05 each. Operating and financing cash flows were not significantly affected by the adoption of Statement 123R. The Company elected the modified prospective method, under which prior periods are not revised for comparative purposes. The following table presents the Company’s pro forma net income and earnings per common share for 2005 and 2004 as if the Company had applied the requirements of Statement 123:
| | Year ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands, except per share data) | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Net income as reported | | $ | 14,446 | | $ | 8,478 |
Less: Compensation expense for stock options determined | | | | | | |
under fair value method | | | (438 | ) | | (445) |
Pro forma net income | | $ | 14,008 | | $ | 8,033 |
| | | | | | |
Net income per common share - basic | | | | | | |
As reported | | $ | 1.22 | | $ | 0.73 |
Pro forma | | $ | 1.19 | | $ | 0.69 |
Net income per common share - diluted | | | | | | |
As reported | | $ | 1.19 | | $ | 0.71 |
Pro forma | | $ | 1.16 | | $ | 0.67 |
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income includes net income and other comprehensive income, which represents the changes in net assets during the period from non-owner sources. The Company’s sources of other comprehensive income are unrealized gains and losses on securities available-for-sale and I/O strips, which are treated like available-for-sale securities, and the liability related to the Company’s supplemental retirement plan. The items in other comprehensive income are presented net of deferred income tax effects. Reclassification adjustments result from gains or losses on securities that were realized and included in net income of the current period that also had been included in other comprehensive income as unrealized holding gains and losses.
The following is a summary of the components of other comprehensive income (loss):
| | Year ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Net unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale of securities and I/O strips | | | | | | | | | |
during the year, including reclassification adjustment of the net realized security | | | | | | | | | |
gain of $346, net of tax of $130, in 2004 that was recognized in income | | $ | 650 | | $ | (1,212) | | $ | (929) |
Less: Deferred income tax on unrealized gains (losses) on | | | | | | | | | |
available-for-sale of securities and I/O strips | | | (273) | | | 548 | | | 245 |
Net unrealized gains (losses) on available-for-sale | | | | | | | | | |
securities and I/O strips, net of deferred income tax | | | 377 | | | (664) | | | (684) |
Pension liability adjustment during the year | | | 601 | | | (563) | | | (1,940) |
Less: Deferred income tax on pension liability adjustment | | | (252) | | | 236 | | | 815 |
Pension liability adjustment, net of deferred income tax | | | 349 | | | (327) | | | (1,125) |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | | $ | 726 | | $ | (991) | | $ | (1,809) |
| | | | | | | | | |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) consisted of the following items, net of deferred tax, at year-end.
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Unrealized net losses on securities available-for-sale and I/O strips | | $ | (892) | | $ | (1,269) |
Pension liability | | | (1,103) | | | (1,452) |
Accumulated other comprehensive income (loss) | | $ | (1,995) | | $ | (2,721) |
| | | | | | |
Segment Reporting
HBC is an independent community business bank with nine branch offices, which offer similar products to customers located in Santa Clara, Alameda, and Contra Costa counties of California. No customer accounts for more than 10 percent of revenue for HBC or the Company. Management evaluates the Company’s performance as a whole and does not allocate resources based on the performance of different lending or transaction activities. Accordingly, the Company and its subsidiary bank all operate as one business segment.
Reclassifications
Certain amounts in the 2005 and 2004 financial statements have been reclassified to conform to the 2006 presentation.
Adoption of Other New Accounting Standards
In September 2006, FASB issued Statement 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans - an amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106 and 132(R). This Statement requires an employer to recognize the overfunded or underfunded status of a defined benefit postretirement plan (other than a multiemployer plan) as an asset or liability in its balance sheet, beginning with year end 2006, and to recognize changes in the funded status in the year in which the changes occur through comprehensive income beginning in 2007. Additionally, defined benefit plan assets and obligations are to be measured as of the date of the employer’s fiscal year-end. Adoption of Statement 158 did not significantly change the method the Company used to account for its benefit plan since the Company’s supplemental retirement plan has no assets and the liability for benefits was previously measured as of each December 31 and recorded on the Company’s balance sheet.
In September 2006, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) released Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 108, Considering the Effects of Prior Year Misstatements when Quantifying Misstatements in Current Year Financial Statements (SAB 108), which is effective for fiscal years ending on or after November 15, 2006. SAB 108 provides guidance on how the effects of prior-year uncorrected financial statement misstatements should be considered in quantifying a current year misstatement. SAB 108 requires public companies to quantify misstatements using both an income statement (rollover) and balance sheet (iron curtain) approach and evaluate whether either approach results in a misstatement that, when all relevant quantitative and qualitative factors are considered, is material. If prior year errors that had been previously considered immaterial now are considered material based on either approach, no restatement is required so long as management properly applied its previous approach and all relevant facts and circumstances were considered. Adjustments considered immaterial in prior years under the method previously used, but now considered material under the dual approach required by SAB 108, are to be recorded upon initial adoption of SAB 108. The adoption of SAB 108 had no effect on the Company’s financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2006.
Newly Issued but not yet Effective Accounting Standards
In February, 2006, FASB issued Statement 155, Accounting for Certain Hybrid Instruments. This standard amended the guidance in Statement 133, Accounting for Derivative Instruments and Hedging Activities, and Statement 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities. Statement 155 permits fair value remeasurement for any hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded derivative that otherwise would require bifurcation and clarifies which interest-only and principal-only strips are not subject to the requirements of Statement 133. Statement 155 is effective for all financial instruments acquired or issued after the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In March, 2006, FASB issued Statement 156, Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets - An Amendment of FASB Statement No. 140. This standard amends the guidance in Statement 140, with respect to the accounting for separately recognized servicing assets and servicing liabilities. Among other requirements, Statement 156 requires an entity to recognize a servicing asset or servicing liability each time it undertakes an obligation to service a financial asset by entering into a servicing contract in certain situations, including a transfer of loans with servicing retained that meets the requirements for sale accounting. Statement 156 is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In June 2006, FASB issued FASB Interpretation (“FIN”) 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes. This Interpretation clarifies the accounting for uncertainty in income taxes recognized in an enterprise’s financial statements in accordance with Statement 109, Accounting for Income Taxes. This Interpretation prescribes a recognition threshold and measurement attribute for the financial statement recognition and measurement of a tax position taken or expected to be taken in a tax return. This Interpretation also provides guidance on derecognition, classification, interest and penalties, accounting in interim periods, disclosure, and transition. This Interpretation is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In September 2006, the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force finalized Issue No. 06-4, Accounting for Deferred Compensation and Postretirement Benefit Aspects of Endorsement Split-Dollar Life Insurance Arrangements. This issue requires that a liability be recorded during the service period when a split-dollar life insurance agreement continues after participants’ employment or retirement. The required accrued liability will be based on either the post-employment benefit cost for the continuing life insurance or based on the future death benefit depending on the contractual terms of the underlying agreement. This issue is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2007. Adoption of EITF Issue 06-4 is not expected to have a material effect on the Company’s financial statements. In 2005, the Company began recognizing the cost of continuing life insurance coverage under split-dollar arrangements. The recorded liability for split-dollar life insurance coverage was $1,221,000 and 1,050,000 at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively.
In September 2006, the FASB Emerging Issues Task Force finalized Issue No. 06-5, Accounting for Purchases of Life Insurance - Determining the Amount That Could Be Realized in Accordance with FASB Technical Bulletin No. 85-4 (Accounting for Purchases of Life Insurance). This issue requires that a policyholder consider contractual terms of a life insurance policy in determining the amount that could be realized under the insurance contract. It also requires that if the contract provides for a greater surrender value if all individual policies in a group are surrendered at the same time, that the surrender value be determined based on the assumption that policies will be surrendered on an individual basis. Lastly, the issue discusses whether the cash surrender value should be discounted when the policyholder is contractually limited in its ability to surrender a policy. This issue is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2006. The adoption of this issue is not expected to have a material impact on the financial statements.
In September 2006, FASB issued Statement 157, Fair Value Measurements. This Statement defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. This Statement applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, FASB having previously concluded in those accounting pronouncements that fair value is the relevant measurement attribute. This Statement is effective for financial statements issued for fiscal years beginning after November 15, 2007, and interim periods within those fiscal years. The adoption of this standard is not expected to have a material impact on the Company’s financial statements.
In February 2007, FASB issued Statement 159, The Fair Value Option for Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities. This statement provides companies with an option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. The Standard’s objective is to reduce both complexity in accounting for financial instruments and the volatility in earnings caused by measuring related assets and liabilities differently. The standard requires companies to provide additional information that will help investors and other users of financial statements to more easily understand the effect of the company’s choice to use fair value on its earnings. It also requires entities to display the fair value of those assets and liabilities for which the company has chosen to use fair value on the face of the balance sheet. The new Statement does not eliminate disclosure requirements included in other accounting standards, including requirements for disclosures about fair value measurements included in Statements 157, Fair Value Measurements, and 107, Disclosures about Fair Value of Financial Instruments. This Statement is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after November 15, 2007. The Company has not completed its evaluation of Statement 159’s effects on its financial statements.
(2) Securities
The amortized cost and estimated fair value of securities at year-end were as follows:
| | | | Gross | | Gross | | Estimated |
2006 | | Amortized | | Unrealized | | Unrealized | | Fair |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Cost | | Gains | | Losses | | Value |
Securities available-for-sale: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | 6,000 | | $ | - | | $ | (37) | | $ | 5,963 |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 59,610 | | | 27 | | | (241) | | | 59,396 |
Municipals - Tax Exempt | | | 8,299 | | | - | | | (157) | | | 8,142 |
Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 93,150 | | | 74 | | | (3,038) | | | 90,186 |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | 8,683 | | | 76 | | | (148) | | | 8,611 |
Total securities available-for-sale | | $ | 175,742 | | $ | 177 | | $ | (3,621) | | $ | 172,298 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | Gross | | Gross | | Estimated |
2005 | | Amortized | | Unrealized | | Unrealized | | Fair |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Cost | | Gains | | Losses | | Value |
Securities available-for-sale: | | | | | | | | | | | | |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | 7,000 | | $ | - | | $ | (80) | | $ | 6,920 |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 82,759 | | | 6 | | | (724) | | | 82,041 |
Municipals - Tax Exempt | | | 8,480 | | | - | | | (212) | | | 8,268 |
Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 95,009 | | | 78 | | | (3,219) | | | 91,868 |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | 9,663 | | | - | | | (265) | | | 9,398 |
Total securities available-for-sale | | $ | 202,911 | | $ | 84 | | $ | (4,500) | | $ | 198,495 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Securities classified as U.S. Government Agencies as of December 31, 2006 were issued by the Federal National Mortgage Association, Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation, and the Federal Home Loan Bank.
At year end 2006 and 2005, there were no holdings of securities of any one issuer, other than the U.S. Government and its agencies, in an amount greater than 10% of shareholders’ equity.
Securities with unrealized losses at year end, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, are as follows:
| | Less Than 12 Months | | 12 Months or More | | Total |
2006 | | Fair | | Unrealized | | Fair | | Unrealized | | Fair | | Unrealized |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Value | | Losses | | Value | | Losses | | Value | | Losses |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | - | | $ | - | | $ | 5,963 | | $ | (37) | | $ | 5,963 | | $ | (37) |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 35,078 | | | (87 | ) | | 11,456 | | | (154) | | | 46,534 | | | (241) |
Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 11,691 | | | (65 | ) | | 68,421 | | | (2,973) | | | 80,112 | | | (3,038) |
Municipals - Tax Exempt | | | - | | | - | | | 8,142 | | | (157) | | | 8,142 | | | (157) |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | - | | | - | | | 3,257 | | | (148) | | | 3,257 | | | (148) |
Total | | $ | 46,769 | | $ | (152 | ) | $ | 97,239 | | $ | (3,469) | | $ | 144,008 | | $ | (3,621) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | Less Than 12 Months | | 12 Months or More | | Total |
2005 | | Fair | | Unrealized | | Fair | | Unrealized | | Fair | | Unrealized |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Value | | Losses | | Value | | Losses | | Value | | Losses |
U.S. Treasury | | $ | 5,924 | | $ | (76) | | $ | 996 | | $ | (4) | | $ | 6,920 | | $ | (80) |
U.S. Government Agencies | | | 8,094 | | | (2) | | | 69,990 | | | (722) | | | 78,084 | | | (724) |
Mortgage-Backed Securities | | | 25,354 | | | (584) | | | 57,362 | | | (2,635) | | | 82,716 | | | (3,219) |
Municipals - Tax Exempt | | | 1,891 | | | (37) | | | 6,227 | | | (175) | | | 8,118 | | | (212) |
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations | | | - | | | - | | | 9,398 | | | (265) | | | 9,398 | | | (265) |
Total | | $ | 41,263 | | $ | (699 | ) | $ | 143,973 | | $ | (3,801) | | $ | 185,236 | | $ | (4,500) |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
At December 31, 2006, the Company held 99 securities, of which 73 had fair values below amortized cost. Fifty-two securities have been carried with an unrealized loss for over 12 months. Unrealized losses were primarily due to higher interest rates. No security sustained a downgrade in credit rating. The issuers are of high credit quality and all principal amounts are expected to be paid when securities mature. The fair value is expected to recover as the securities approach their maturity date and/or market rates decline. Because the Company has the ability and intent to hold these securities until a recovery of fair value, which may be maturity, the Company does not consider these securities to be other-than-temporarily impaired at December 31, 2006 or 2005.
The amortized cost and estimated fair values of securities as of December 31, 2006, by contractual maturity, are shown below. Expected maturities will differ from contractual maturities because borrowers may have the right to call or pre-pay obligations with or without call or pre-payment penalties.
| | Available-for-sale |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amortized Cost | | Estimated Fair Value |
Due within one year | | $ | 37,549 | | $ | 37,434 |
Due after one through five years | | | 38,498 | | | 38,095 |
Due after five through ten years | | | 12,754 | | | 12,609 |
Due after ten years | | | 86,941 | | | 84,160 |
Total | | $ | 175,742 | | $ | 172,298 |
| | | | | | |
Sales of securities available-for-sale resulted in gross realized gains of $0, $0, and $477,000 in 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
Securities with amortized cost of $53,708,000 and $64,445,000 as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 were pledged to secure public and certain other deposits as required by law or contract.
(3) Loans and Loan Servicing
Loans at year-end were as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Loans held for sale | | $ | 17,234 | | $ | 70,147 |
| | | | | | |
Loans held for investment: | | | | | | |
Commercial | | | 300,611 | | | 256,713 |
Real estate - mortgage | | | 239,041 | | | 237,566 |
Real estate - land and construction | | | 143,834 | | | 149,851 |
Home equity | | | 38,976 | | | 41,772 |
Consumer | | | 2,422 | | | 1,721 |
Total loans | | | 724,884 | | | 687,623 |
Deferred loan origination costs and fees, net | | | 870 | | | 1,155 |
Allowance for loan losses | | | (9,279) | | | (10,224) |
Loans, net | | $ | 716,475 | | $ | 678,554 |
| | | | | | |
Real estate mortgage loans are primarily secured by mortgages on commercial property.
During 2006, HBC purchased $10,306,000 of home equity loans from another bank. The premium that HBC paid over the face value of the loans was insignificant. The purchased loans are considered to be of satisfactory credit quality.
Changes in the allowance for loan losses were as follows:
| | | | | | | |
| | Year ended December 31, | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Balance, beginning of year | | $ | 10,224 | | $ | 12,497 | | $ | 13,451 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Loans charged-off | | | (831) | | | (3,273) | | | (2,901) | |
Recoveries | | | 389 | | | 1,358 | | | 1,562 | |
Net loans charged-off | | | (442) | | | (1,915) | | | (1,339) | |
Provision for loan losses | | | (503) | | | 313 | | | 666 | |
Reclassification of allowance for loan losses | | | - | | | (671) | (1) | | - | |
Reclassification to other liabilities | | | - | | | - | | | (281) | (2) |
Balance, end of year | | $ | 9,279 | | $ | 10,224 | | $ | 12,497 | |
| | | | | | | | | | |
(1) | The Company reclassified $671,000 of the allowance allocated to $32 million of commercial asset based loans that were reclassified to loans held-for-sale as of December 31, 2005. Thus, the carrying value of these loans held-for-sale includes an allowance for loan losses of $671,000. |
(2) | The Company reclassified the allowance for loan losses on unused commitments of $281,000 to other liabilities as of December 31, 2004. |
Impaired loans were as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Year-end loans with no allocated allowance for loan losses | | $ | 1,020 | | $ | 1,150 |
Year-end loans with allocated allowance for loan losses | | | 8,011 | | | 14,493 |
Total | | $ | 9,031 | | $ | 15,643 |
| | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Amount of the allowance for loan losses allocated at year-end | | $ | 1,226 | | $ | 2,656 | | $ | 250 |
Average of impaired loans during the year | | $ | 13,551 | | $ | 16,823 | | $ | 1,111 |
Cash basis interest income recognized during impairment | | $ | 28 | | $ | 110 | | $ | 36 |
Interest income during impairment | | $ | 1,012 | | $ | 885 | | $ | 36 |
Nonperforming loans include both smaller dollar balance homogenous loans that are collectively evaluated for impairment and individually classified loans. Nonperforming loans were as follows at year-end:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Loans past due over 90 days still on accrual | | $ | 451 | | $ | - |
Nonaccrual loans | | $ | 3,866 | | $ | 3,672 |
Concentrations of credit risk arise when a number of clients are engaged in similar business activities, or activities in the same geographic region, or have similar features that would cause their ability to meet contractual obligations to be similarly affected by changes in economic conditions. The Company’s loan portfolio is concentrated in commercial (primarily manufacturing, wholesale, and service) and real estate lending, with the balance in consumer loans. While no specific industry concentration is considered significant, the Company’s lending operations are located in the Company’s market areas that are dependent on the technology and real estate industries and their supporting companies. Thus, the Company’s borrowers could be adversely impacted by a downturn in these sectors of the economy which could reduce the demand for loans and adversely impact the borrowers’ ability to repay their loans.
HBC makes loans to executive officers, directors, and their affiliates. The following table presents the loans outstanding to these related parties:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 |
Balance, beginning of year | | $ | 3,012 |
Advances on loans during the year | | | - |
Repayment on loans during the year | | | (3,010) |
Balance, end of year | | $ | 2 |
| | | |
At December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company serviced Small Business Administration and other guaranteed loans which it had sold to the secondary market of approximately $188,844,000 and $179,756,000.
Activity for loan servicing rights follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Beginning of year balance | | $ | 2,171 | | $ | 2,213 |
Additions | | | 1,195 | | | 1,001 |
Amortization | | | (1,212) | | | (1,043) |
End of year balance | | $ | 2,154 | | $ | 2,171 |
| | | | | | |
Loan servicing income is reported net of amortization. There was no valuation allowance as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, as the fair market value of the assets was greater than the carrying value. The estimated fair value of loan servicing rights was $3,562,000 and $3,810,000 at December 31, 2006 and 2005.
Servicing assets represent the servicing spread generated from the sold guaranteed portions of SBA and other guaranteed loans. In recording the initial value of the servicing rights and the fair value of the I/O strip receivable, the Company uses estimates which are based on management’s expectations of future prepayment and discount rates. Management’s estimate of constant prepayment rate (“CPR”) was 17.7% and 15.0% for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. The weighted average discount rate assumption was 9.8% and 9.0% at December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively. These prepayment and discount rates were based on current market conditions and historical performance of the various loan pools. If actual prepayments with respect to sold loans occur more quickly than projected, the carrying value of the servicing rights may have to be adjusted through a charge to earnings. A corresponding decrease in the value of the I/O strip receivable would also be expected.
Management reviews key economic assumptions used in the FASB Statement 140 accounting model to establish the value of the I/O strip on a quarterly basis. The bank has completed a sensitivity analysis to determine the impact on the value of the asset in the event of a 10% and 20% adverse change, independently from any change in another key assumption. This test involved the CPR assumption and the discount rate assumptions. The value of the I/O strip can be adversely impacted by a significant increase in either the prepayment speed of the portfolio or a significant increase in the discount rate.
At December 31, 2006, key economic assumptions and the sensitivity of the current fair value of residual cash flows on the I/O strip to immediate 10 percent and 20 percent adverse changes in those assumptions are as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | | |
Carrying amount/fair value of Interest-Only (I/O) strip | | $ | 4,537 | |
Weighted average life (in years) | | | 4.5 | |
Prepayment speed assumption (annual rate) | | | 17.7 | % |
Impact on fair value of 10% adverse change in prepayment speed (CPR 19.5%) | | $ | (280 | ) |
Impact on fair value of 20% adverse change in prepayment speed (CPR 21.2%) | | $ | (534 | ) |
Residual cash flow discount rate assumption (annual) | | | 9.8 | % |
Impact on fair value of 10% adverse change in discount rate (10.8% discount rate) | | $ | (133 | ) |
Impact on fair value of 20% adverse change in discount rate (11.8% discount rate) | | $ | (259 | ) |
Activity for I/O strip receivables in 2006 and 2005 follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Beginning of year balance | | $ | 4,679 | | $ | 3,954 |
Additions | | | 1,272 | | | 1,398 |
Amortization | | | (1,229) | | | (1,226) |
Unrealized (loss) gain | | | (185) | | | 553 |
End of year balance | | $ | 4,537 | | $ | 4,679 |
| | | | | | |
(4) Premises and Equipment
Premises and equipment at year end were as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | |
Furniture and equipment | | $ | 4,704 | | $ | 4,326 | |
Leasehold improvements | | | 4,420 | | | 4,553 | |
| | | 9,124 | | | 8,879 | |
Accumulated depreciation and amortization | | | (6,585) | | | (6,338) | |
Premises and equipment, net | | $ | 2,539 | | $ | 2,541 | |
| | | | | | | |
Depreciation expense was $662,000, $988,000, and $1,366,000 in 2006, 2005, and 2004, respectively.
(5) Deposits
The following table presents the scheduled maturities of time deposits, including brokered deposits, for the next five years:
(Dollars in thousands) | | December 31, 2006 |
2007 | | $ | 147,741 |
2008 | | | 17,536 |
2009 | | | 8,731 |
2010 | | | 65 |
2011 | | | - |
Total | | $ | 174,073 |
| | | |
Deposits from executive officers, directors, and their affiliates were $3,582,000 at December 31, 2006.
(6) Borrowing Arrangements
FHLB Borrowings & Available Lines of Credit
The Company maintains a collateralized line of credit with the Federal Home Loan Bank (“the FHLB”) of San Francisco. Under this line, the Company can borrow from the FHLB on a short-term (typically overnight) or long-term (over one year) basis. As of December 31, 2006, the Company had no borrowings from the FHLB.
At December 31, 2006, the Company has Federal funds purchase arrangements and lines of credit available of $72,000,000.
Information about securities sold under repurchase agreements and short-term borrowings is summarized as follows:
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Average balance during the year | | $ | 25,429 | | $ | 40,748 |
Average interest rate during the year | | | 2.46% | | | 2.26% |
Maximum month-end balance during the year | | $ | 32,700 | | $ | 57,800 |
Average rate at December 31, | | | 2.56% | | | 2.34% |
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase are secured by mortgage-backed securities carried at $27,694,000 and $36,451,000, respectively, at December 31, 2006 and 2005.
The maturity of the Company’s securities sold under agreement to repurchase at December 31, 2006 is as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2007 | | 2008 | | 2009 | | Total | |
Repurchase agreements | | $ | 10,900 | | $ | 10,900 | | $ | - | | $ | 21,800 | |
Notes Payable to Subsidiary Grantor Trusts
The following is a summary of the notes payable to the Company’s subsidiary grantor trusts at December 31:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Subordinated debentures due to Heritage Capital Trust I with | | | | | | |
interest payable semi-anually at 10.875%, redeemable with a | | | | | | |
premium beginning March 8, 2010 and with no premium beginning | | | | | | |
March 8, 2020 and due March 8, 2030 | | $ | 7,217 | | $ | 7,217 |
| | | | | | |
Subordinated debentures due to Heritage Statutory Trust I with | | | | | | |
interest payable semi-anually at 10.6%, redeemable with a | | | | | | |
premium beginning September 7, 2010 and with no premium beginning | | | | | | |
September 7, 2020 and due September 7, 2030 | | | 7,206 | | | 7,206 |
| | | | | | |
Subordinated debentures due to Heritage Statutory Trust II with | | | | | | |
interest payable semi-anually based on 3-month Libor plus 3.58% | | | | | | |
(8.96% at December 31, 2006), redeemable with a premium beginning | | | | | | |
July 31, 2006 and with no premium beginning July 31, 2011 and | | | | | | |
due July 31, 2031 | | | 5,155 | | | 5,155 |
| | | | | | |
Subordinated debentures due to Heritage Statutory Trust III with | | | | | | |
interest payable semi-anually based on 3-month Libor plus 3.40% | | | | | | |
(8.77% at December 31, 2006), redeemable with no premium beginning | | | | | | |
September 26, 2007 and due September 26, 2032 | | | 4,124 | | | 4,124 |
| | | | | | |
Total | | $ | 23,702 | | $ | 23,702 |
| | | | | | |
The Company has guaranteed, on a subordinated basis, distributions and other payments due on the trust preferred securities issued by the subsidiary grantor trusts.
(7) Income Taxes
Income tax expense consisted of the following:
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Currently payable tax: | | | | | | | | | |
Federal | | $ | 7,472 | | $ | 5,921 | | $ | 3,439 |
State | | | 2,084 | | | 1,719 | | | 923 |
Total currently payable | | | 9,556 | | | 7,640 | | | 4,362 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Deferred tax (benefit) | | | | | | | | | |
Federal | | | (258 | ) | | (292) | | | (844) |
State | | | (61 | ) | | (68) | | | (319) |
Total deferred tax (benefit) | | | (319 | ) | | (360) | | | (1,163) |
Income tax expense | | $ | 9,237 | | $ | 7,280 | | $ | 3,199 |
| | | | | | | | | |
The effective tax rate differs from the federal statutory rate for the years ended December 31, as follows:
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Statutory Federal income tax rate | | | 35.0 | % | | 35.0 | % | | 35.0 | % |
State income taxes, net of federal tax benefit | | | 5.6 | % | | 4.9 | % | | 7.9 | % |
Low income housing credits | | | -3.9 | % | | -4.3 | % | | -5.3 | % |
Non-taxable interest income | | | -0.2 | % | | -0.3 | % | | -2.6 | % |
Increase in cash surrender value of life insurance | | | -1.9 | % | | -2.0 | % | | -8.8 | % |
Other | | | 0.2 | % | | 0.2 | % | | 1.2 | % |
Effective tax rate | | | 34.8 | % | | 33.5 | % | | 27.4 | % |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Net deferred tax assets at year-end consist of the following:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Deferred tax assets: | | | | | | |
Allowance for loan losses | | $ | 3,901 | | $ | 4,299 |
Deferred compensation | | | 4,183 | | | 3,564 |
Securities available-for-sale and I/O strips | | | 646 | | | 1,057 |
Postretirement benefit obligation | | | 799 | | | 1,051 |
Loans held for sale | | | 389 | | | 951 |
Fixed Assets | | | 924 | | | 934 |
Accrued expenses | | | 524 | | | 650 |
State income taxes | | | 729 | | | 539 |
Other | | | 322 | | | 2 |
Total deferred tax assets | | | 12,417 | | | 13,047 |
| | | | | | |
Deferred tax liabilities: | | | | | | |
FHLB Stock | | | (150) | | | (63) |
Loan fees | | | (606) | | | (924) |
Prepaid expenses | | | (277) | | | (240) |
Other | | | (215) | | | (307) |
Total deferred tax liabilities | | | (1,248) | | | (1,534) |
Net deferred tax assets | | $ | 11,169 | | $ | 11,513 |
| | | | | | |
The Company believes that it is more likely than not, that it will realize the above deferred tax assets in future periods; therefore, no valuation allowance has been provided against its deferred tax assets.
(8) Stock option plan
The Company has a stock option plan (the Plan) for directors, officers, and key employees. The Plan provides for the grant of incentive and non-qualified stock options. The Plan provides that the option price for both incentive and non-qualified stock options will be determined by the Board of Directors at no less than the fair value at the date of grant. Options granted vest on a schedule determined by the Board of Directors at the time of grant. Generally, options vest over four years. All options expire no later than ten years from the date of grant. On May 25, 2006, the Company’s shareholders approved an amendment to the Heritage Commerce Corp 2004 Stock Option Plan by authorizing 550,000 additional shares available for option grants. As of December 31, 2006, there are 418,912 shares available for future grants under the Plan.
Option activity under the Plan is as follows:
| | | | Weighted | | Weighted Average | | Aggregate |
| | Number | | | | Remaining Contractual | | |
Total Stock Options | | of Shares | | Exercise Price | | Life (Years) | | Value |
Outstanding at January 1, 2006 | | | 753,978 | | $ | 12.92 | | | | | | |
Granted | | | 222,400 | | $ | 23.67 | | | | | | |
Exercised | | | (179,594) | | $ | 10.09 | | | | | | |
Forfeited or expired | | | (43,801) | | $ | 16.52 | | | | | | |
Outstanding at December 31, 2006 | | | 752,983 | | $ | 16.56 | | | 7.1 | | $ | 7,587,000 |
Exercisable at December 31, 2006 | | | 406,960 | | $ | 12.76 | | | 5.5 | | $ | 5,648,000 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Information related to the stock option plan during each year follows:
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Intrinsic value of options exercised | | $ | 2,435,000 | | $ | 3,791,000 | | $ | 3,793,000 |
Cash received from option exercise | | $ | 1,812,000 | | $ | 3,641,000 | | $ | 4,316,000 |
Tax benefit realized from option exercises | | $ | 706,000 | | $ | 1,086,000 | | $ | 1,777,000 |
Weighted average fair value of options granted | | $ | 7.57 | | $ | 5.93 | | $ | 5.03 |
As of December 31, 2006, there was $2,407,000 of total unrecognized compensation cost related to nonvested share-based compensation arrangements granted under the Company’s stock option plan. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted-average period of aproximately 2.2 years. The total fair value of options vested during 2006 is approximately $780,000.
The fair value of each option grant is estimated on the date of grant using the Black-Scholes option pricing model that uses the assumptions noted in the following table.
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Expected life in months (1) | | | 84 | | | 84 | | | 84 | |
Volatility (1) | | | 21 | % | | 21 | % | | 22 | % |
Weighted average risk-free interest rate (2) | | | 4.85 | % | | 4.14 | % | | 4.10 | % |
Expected dividends (3) | | | 0.85 | % | | 0 | % | | 0 | % |
(1) | The expected life of employee stock options represents the weighted average period the stock options are expected to remain outstanding. It is estimated based on historical experience. Volatility is based on the historical volatility of the stock price over the same period of the expected life of the option. |
(2) | Based on the U.S. Treasury constant maturity interest rate with a term consistent with the expected life of the option granted. |
(3) | The Company began paying cash dividends on the common stock in 2006. Each grant’s dividend yield is calculated by annualizing the most recent quarterly cash dividend and dividing that amount by the market price of the Company’s common stock as of the grant date. |
Forfeitures for options granted prior to 2006 were recognized as they occurred. Beginning in 2006, the Company estimates the impact of forfeitures based on historical experience, and has concluded that forfeitures have no significant effect on stock option expense. The Company issues new shares of common stock to satisfy stock option exercises.
The Company granted 51,000 restricted shares of its common stock to an executive officer pursuant to the terms of a restricted stock agreement, dated March 17, 2005. The grant price was $18.15. Under the terms of the agreement, the restricted shares will vest 25% per year at the end of years three, four, five and six, provided the executive officer is still with the Company, subject to accelerated vesting upon a change of control, termination without cause, termination by the executive officer for good reason (as defined by the executive employment agreement), death or disability. The fair value of stock award at the grant date was $926,000, which is being amortized to expense over the six-year vesting period on the straight-line method. Amortization expense was $154,000 in 2006 and $123,000 in 2005.
(9) Leases
Operating Leases
The Company leases its premises under non-cancelable operating leases with terms, including renewal options, ranging from five to fifteen years. Future minimum payments under the agreements are as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | |
Year ending December 31, | | |
2007 | | $ | 2,027 |
2008 | | | 1,527 |
2009 | | | 1,305 |
2010 | | | 1,465 |
2011 | | | 1,457 |
Thereafter | | | 4,978 |
Total | | $ | 12,759 |
| | | |
Rent expense under operating leases was $2,375,000, $2,402,000, and $2,610,000, respectively, in 2006, 2005, and 2004.
(10) Benefit Plans
The Company offers a 401(k) savings plan that allows employees to contribute up to a maximum percentage of their compensation, as established by the Internal Revenue Code. The Company has made a discretionary matching contribution of up to $1,500 for each employee’s contributions in 2006, 2005 and 2004. Contribution expense was $279,000, $271,000, and $292,000 in 2006, 2005 and 2004.
The Company sponsors an employee stock ownership plan. The plan allows the Company to purchase shares on the open market and award those shares to employees. To be eligible to receive an award of shares under this plan, an employee must have worked at least 1,000 hours during the year and must be employed by the Company, or its subsidiary, on December 31. Awards under this plan generally vest over four years. During 2006, 2005 and 2004, the Company made contributions of $400,000, $177,000, and $450,000 into the Plan. At December 31, 2006, the ESOP owned approximately 169,000 shares of the Company’s stock.
On September 7, 2001, the ESOP borrowed $1,000,000 from an unaffiliated third party lender to fund the purchase of common stock of the Company. This loan was paid off in June 2005. The loan was collateralized by the shares of the Company’s common stock held by the ESOP.
The Company has a nonqualified deferred compensation plan for its directors (“Deferral Plan”). Under the Deferral Plan, a participating director may defer up to 100% of his monthly board fees into the Deferral Plan for up to ten years. Amounts deferred earn interest. The director may elect a distribution schedule of up to ten years. The Company’s deferred compensation obligation of $484,000 and $417,000 as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 is included in “Accrued interest payable and other liabilities.”
The Company has purchased life insurance policies on the lives of directors who have agreed to participate in the Deferral Plan. It is expected that the earnings on these policies will offset the cost of the program. In addition, the Company will receive death benefit payments upon the death of the director. The proceeds will permit the Company to “complete” the deferral program as the director originally intended if he dies prior to the completion of the deferral program. The disbursement of deferred fees is accelerated at death and commences one month after the director dies.
In the event of the director’s disability prior to attainment of his benefit eligibility date, the director may request that the Board permit him to receive an immediate disability benefit equal to the annualized value of the director’s deferral account.
The Company has a supplemental retirement plan covering key executives and directors (“Plan”). The Plan is a nonqualified defined benefit plan and is unsecured and unfunded and there are no Plan assets. The combined number of active and retired/terminated participants in the Plan was 51 at December 31, 2006. The defined benefit represents a stated amount for key executives and directors that generally vests over nine years and is reduced for early retirement. The Company has purchased insurance on the lives of the directors and executive officers in the plan. If the life insurance contract is terminated by the Company, the Company will have the obligation to pay the retirement and death benefits. The accrued pension obligation was $8,576,000 and $7,279,000 as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, respectively, and is included in “Accrued interest payable and other liabilities”. The Plan had accumulated other comprehensive expense before taxes of $1,902,000 and $2,503,000, respectively, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005. The measurement date of the plan is December 31.
The following table sets forth the nonqualified supplemental retirement defined benefit plan’s status at December 31:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Change in projected benefit obligation | | | | | | | | | |
Projected benefit obligation at beginning of year | | $ | 9,782 | | $ | 7,745 | | $ | 3,962 |
Service cost | | | 799 | | | 826 | | | 473 |
Interest cost | | | 552 | | | 464 | | | 386 |
Actuarial (gain)/loss | | | (422) | | | 842 | | | 2,223 |
Special termination benefits | | | - | | | - | | | 765 |
Benefits paid | | | (233) | | | (95) | | | (64) |
Projected benefit obligation at end of year | | $ | 10,478 | | $ | 9,782 | | $ | 7,745 |
| | | | | | | | | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Unfunded Status | | $ | (10,478 | ) | $ | (9,782 | ) | $ | (7,745 | ) |
Unrecognized net actuarial (gain)/loss | | | 1,902 | | | 2,503 | | | 1,940 | |
Net amount recognized | | $ | (8,576 | ) | $ | (7,279 | ) | $ | (5,805 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Accrued benefit liability | | $ | (10,478 | ) | $ | (9,782 | ) | $ | (7,745 | ) |
Accumulated other comprehensive expense | | | 1,902 | | | 2,503 | | | 1,940 | |
Net amount recognized | | $ | (8,576 | ) | $ | (7,279 | ) | $ | (5,805 | ) |
| | | | | | | | | | |
Weighted-average assumptions as of December 31 | | | | | | | | | | |
Discount rate | | | 5.98 | % | | 5.68 | % | | 5.60 | % |
Rate of compensation increase | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
Expected return on Plan assets | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
The following benefit payments, which reflect anticipated future events, as appropriate, are expected to be paid over the following years:
Year (Dollars in thousands) | | Benefit Payments |
2007 | | $ | 239 |
2008 | | | 338 |
2009 | | | 412 |
2010 | | | 441 |
2011 | | | 553 |
2012 to 2016 | | | 5,226 |
The elements of pension costs for the nonqualified supplemental retirement defined benefit plan were as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Components of net periodic benefits cost | | | | | | | | | |
Service cost | | $ | 799 | | $ | 825 | | $ | 473 |
Interest cost | | | 552 | | | 464 | | | 386 |
Amortization of (gain)/loss | | | 180 | | | 280 | | | 116 |
Net periodic benefit cost | | | 1,531 | | | 1,569 | | | 975 |
Expense due to special termination benefits | | | - | | | - | | | 765 |
Total expense | | $ | 1,531 | | $ | 1,569 | | $ | 1,740 |
| | | | | | | | | |
The net periodic pension cost was determined using the following assumptions:
| | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 | |
Discount rate in determining expense | | | 5.68 | % | | 5.60 | % | | 6.25 | % |
Discount rate in determining benefit obligations at year end | | | 5.98 | % | | 5.68 | % | | 5.60 | % |
Rate of increase in future compensation levels for determining expense | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
Rate of increase in future compensation levels for determining | | | | | | | | | | |
benefit obligations at year end | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
Expected return on Plan assets | | | N/A | | | N/A | | | N/A | |
(11) Disclosures of Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The estimated fair value amounts have been determined by using available market information and appropriate valuation methodologies. However, considerable judgment is required to interpret market data to develop the estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the estimates presented are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that could be realized in a current market exchange. The use of different market assumptions and/or estimation techniques may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts.
The carrying amounts and estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments at year-end were as follows:
| | 2006 | | 2005 |
| | | | Estimated | | | | Estimated |
| | Carrying | | Fair | | Carrying | | Fair |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amounts | | Value | | Amounts | | Value |
Assets | | | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 49,385 | | $ | 49,385 | | $ | 98,460 | | $ | 98,460 |
Securities | | | 172,298 | | | 172,298 | | | 198,495 | | | 198,495 |
Loans, including loans held for sale, net | | | 733,709 | | | 723,302 | | | 748,701 | | | 733,217 |
FHLB and FRB Stock | | | 6,113 | | | 6,113 | | | 5,859 | | | 5,859 |
Accrued interest receivable | | | 4,876 | | | 4,876 | | | 4,383 | | | 4,383 |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Liabilities | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Time deposits | | $ | 174,073 | | $ | 173,953 | | $ | 180,622 | | $ | 180,884 |
Other deposits | | | 672,520 | | | 672,520 | | | 759,137 | | | 759,137 |
Securities sold under agreement to repurchase | | | 21,800 | | | 21,421 | | | 32,700 | | | 31,931 |
Notes payable subsidiary grantor trusts | | | 23,702 | | | 25,820 | | | 23,702 | | | 26,050 |
Accrued interest payable | | | 2,048 | | | 2,048 | | | 1,808 | | | 1,808 |
The following methods and assumptions were used to estimate the fair value in the table, above:
Cash and Cash Equivalents and Accrued Interest Receivable and Payable
The carrying amount approximates fair value because of the short maturities of these instruments.
Securities
Security fair values are based on market prices or dealer quotes and, if no such information is available, on the rate and term of the security and information about the issuer. The carrying amount is the estimated fair value for Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank stock.
Loans
Loans with similar financial characteristics are grouped together for purposes of estimating their fair value. Loans are segregated by type such as commercial, term real estate, residential construction, and consumer. Each loan category is further segmented into fixed and adjustable rate interest terms.
The fair value of performing, fixed rate loans is calculated by discounting scheduled future cash flows using estimated market discount rates that reflect the credit and interest rate risk inherent in the loan. The fair value of variable rate loans approximates the carrying amount as these loans generally reprice within 90 days. The fair value of loans held for sale is based on estimated market values.
Deposits
The fair value of deposits with no stated maturity, such as non-interest bearing demand deposits, savings, and money market accounts, approximates the amount payable on demand. The carrying amount approximates the fair value of time deposits with a remaining maturity of less than 90 days. The fair value of all other time deposits is calculated based on discounting the future cash flows using rates currently offered by the Bank for time deposits with similar remaining maturities.
Notes Payable to Subsidiary Grantor Trusts and Securities Sold Under Agreement to Repurchase
The fair values of notes payable to subsidiary grantor trusts and securities sold under agreement to repurchase were determined based on the current market value for like kind instruments of a similar maturity and structure.
Commitments to Fund Loans/Standby Letters of Credit
The fair values of commitments are estimated using the fees currently charged to enter into similar agreements, taking into account the remaining terms of the agreements and the present creditworthiness of the counterparties. The amounts of and differences between the carrying value of commitments to fund loans or stand by letters of credit and their fair value is not significant and therefore is not included in the table above.
Limitations
Fair value estimates are made at a specific point in time, based on relevant market information about the financial instruments. These estimates do not reflect any premium or discount that could result from offering for sale at one time the entire holdings of a particular financial instrument. Fair value estimates are based on judgments regarding future expected loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various financial instruments, and other factors. These estimates are subjective in nature and involve uncertainties and matters of significant judgment and therefore cannot be determined with precision. Changes in assumptions could significantly affect the estimates.
(12) Commitments and Contingencies
Financial Instruments with Off-Balance Sheet Risk
HBC is a party to financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business to meet the financing needs of its clients. These financial instruments include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit. Those instruments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the balance sheets.
HBC’s exposure to credit loss in the event of non-performance of the other party to the financial instrument for commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit is represented by the contractual amount of those instruments. HBC uses the same credit policies in making commitments and conditional obligations as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. Credit risk is the possibility that a loss may occur because a party to a transaction failed to perform according to the terms of the contract. HBC controls the credit risk of these transactions through credit approvals, limits, and monitoring procedures. Management does not anticipate any significant losses as a result of these transactions.
Commitments to extend credit as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 were as follows:
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Commitments to extend credit | | $ | 310,200 | | $ | 328,031 |
Standby letters of credit | | | 12,020 | | | 6,104 |
| | $ | 322,220 | | $ | 334,135 |
Generally, commitments to extend credit as of December 31, 2006 are at variable rates, typically based on the prime rate (with a margin). Commitments generally expire within one year.
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a client as long as there is no violation of conditions established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or other termination clauses. Since some of the commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amount does not necessarily represent future cash requirements. HBC evaluates each client’s creditworthiness on a case-by-case basis. The amount of collateral obtained, if deemed necessary by HBC upon the extension of credit, is based on management’s credit evaluation of the borrower. Collateral held varies but may include cash, marketable securities, accounts receivable, inventory, property, plant and equipment, income-producing commercial properties, and/or residential properties. Fair value of these instruments is not material.
Standby letters of credit are written with conditional commitments issued by HBC to guaranty the performance of a client to a third party. The credit risk involved in issuing letters of credit is essentially the same as that involved in extending loan facilities to clients.
The Company is required to maintain noninterest bearing reserves. Reserve requirements are based on a percentage of certain deposits. As of December 31, 2006, the Company maintained reserves of $5,246,000 in the form of vault cash and balances at the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco, which satisfied the regulatory requirements.
Claims
The Company is involved in certain legal actions arising from normal business activities. Management, based upon the advice of legal counsel, believes the ultimate resolution of all pending legal actions will not have a material effect on the financial statements of the Company.
(13) Capital Requirements
The Company and its subsidiary bank are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by the federal banking agencies. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory - and possibly additional discretionary - actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have a direct material effect on the Company’s financial statements and operations. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Company and HBC must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance-sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by the regulators about components, risk weightings, and other factors.
Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require the Company and HBC to maintain minimum amounts and ratios (set forth in the table below) of total and Tier I capital (as defined in the regulations) to risk-weighted assets (as defined), and of Tier I capital to average assets (as defined). Management believes that, as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, the Company and HBC meet all capital adequacy guidelines to which they are subject.
The most recent notification from the FDIC as of December 31, 2006 categorized HBC as “well capitalized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. There are no conditions or events since that notification that management believes have changed the Bank’s category.
The Company’s actual and required consolidated capital amounts and ratios are presented in the following table:
| | Actual | | For Capital Adequacy Purposes | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Ratio | | Amount | | Ratio | |
As of December 31, 2006 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Capital | | $ | 157,356 | | | 18.4% | | $ | 68,416 | | | 8.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 147,600 | | | 17.3% | | $ | 34,127 | | | 4.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 147,600 | | | 13.6% | | $ | 43,412 | | | 4.0 | % |
(to average assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2005 | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Capital | | $ | 144,142 | | | 15.3% | | $ | 75,528 | | | 8.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 133,715 | | | 14.2% | | $ | 37,764 | | | 4.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 133,715 | | | 11.6% | | $ | 46,308 | | | 4.0 | % |
(to average assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
HBC’s actual capital and required amounts and ratios are presented in the following table.
| | | | | | | | | | To Be Well-Capitalized Under Prompt | |
| | Actual | | For Capital Adequacy Purposes | | Corrective Action Provisions | |
(Dollars in thousands) | | Amount | | Ratio | | Amount | | Ratio | | Amount | | Ratio | |
As of December 31, 2006 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Capital | | $ | 154,711 | | | 18.1% | | $ | 68,381 | | | 8.0% | | $ | 85,476 | | | 10.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 144,955 | | | 17.0% | | $ | 34,107 | | | 4.0% | | $ | 51,161 | | | 6.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 144,955 | | | 13.4% | | $ | 43,270 | | | 4.0% | | $ | 54,088 | | | 5.0 | % |
(to average assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2005 | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Total Capital | | $ | 142,776 | | | 15.2% | | $ | 75,180 | | | 8.0% | | $ | 93,975 | | | 10.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 132,349 | | | 14.1% | | $ | 37,590 | | | 4.0% | | $ | 56,385 | | | 6.0 | % |
(to risk-weighted assets) | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Tier 1 Capital | | $ | 132,349 | | | 11.3% | | $ | 46,896 | | | 4.0% | | $ | 58,620 | | | 5.0 | % |
Under California law, the holders of common stock are entitled to receive dividends when and as declared by the Board of Directors, out of funds legally available therefore. The California Banking Law provides that a state-licensed bank may not make a cash distribution to its shareholders in excess of the lesser of the following: (i) the bank’s retained earnings, or (ii) the bank’s net income for its last three fiscal years, less the amount of any distributions made by the bank to its shareholders during such period. However, a bank, with the prior approval of the Commissioner, may make a distribution to its shareholders of an amount not to exceed the greater of (i) a bank’s retained earnings, (ii) its net income for its last fiscal year, or (iii) its net income for the current fiscal year. In the event that the Commissioner determines that the shareholders’ equity of a bank is inadequate or that the making of a distribution by a bank would be unsafe or unsound, the Commissioner may order a bank to refrain from making such a proposed distribution. At December 31, 2006, the amount available for such dividends without prior regulatory approval was approximately $36,918,000 for HBC. Similar restrictions apply to the amounts and sum of loan advances and other transfers of funds from HBC to the parent Company.
(14) Parent Company only Condensed Financial Information
The condensed financial statements of Heritage Commerce Corp (parent company only) are as follows:
Condensed Balance Sheets | | |
| | December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 |
Assets | | | | | | |
Cash and cash equivalents | | $ | 2,104 | | $ | 2,776 |
Investment in subsidiary bank | | | 143,175 | | | 131,297 |
Investment in subsidiary trusts | | | 702 | | | 702 |
Other assets | | | 1,131 | | | 1,117 |
Total assets | | $ | 147,112 | | $ | 135,892 |
| | | | | | |
Liabilities and Shareholders' Equity | | | | | | |
Notes payable to subsidiary trusts | | $ | 23,702 | | $ | 23,702 |
Other liabilities | | | 590 | | | 573 |
Shareholders' equity | | | 122,820 | | | 111,617 |
Total liabilities and shareholders' equity | | $ | 147,112 | | $ | 135,892 |
| | | | | | |
Condensed Statements of Income and Comprehensive Income | | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Interest income | | $ | 27 | | $ | 63 | | $ | 97 |
Dividend from subsidiary bank | | | 10,000 | | | - | | | - |
Interest expense | | | (2,310 | ) | | (2,136 | ) | | (1,958) |
Other expenses | | | (1,431 | ) | | (1,130 | ) | | (1,166) |
Income (loss) before equity in undistributed net income of subsidiary bank | | | 6,286 | | | (3,203 | ) | | (3,027) |
Equity in undistributed net income of subsidiary bank | | | 9,666 | | | 16,576 | | | 10,676 |
Income tax benefit | | | 1,318 | | | 1,073 | | | 829 |
Net income | | | 17,270 | | | 14,446 | | | 8,478 |
Other comprehensive income (loss) | | | 726 | | | (991 | ) | | (1,809) |
Comprehensive income | | $ | 17,996 | | $ | 13,455 | | $ | 6,669 |
| | | | | | | | | |
Condensed Statements of Cash Flows | |
| | For the Year Ended December 31, |
(Dollars in thousands) | | 2006 | | 2005 | | 2004 |
Cash flows from operating activities: | | | | | | | | | |
Net Income | | $ | 17,270 | | $ | 14,446 | | $ | 8,478 |
Adjustments to reconcile net income to net cash provided by (used in) operations: | | | | | | | | | |
Amortization of restricted stock award | | | 154 | | | 123 | | | - |
Equity in undistributed net income of subsidiary bank | | | (9,666) | | | (16,576) | | | (10,676) |
Net change in other assets and liabilities | | | 3 | | | (944) | | | 796 |
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities | | | 7,761 | | | (2,951) | | | (1,402) |
| | | | | | | | | |
Cash flows from financing activities: | | | | | | | | | |
Exercise of stock options | | | 1,812 | | | 3,641 | | | 4,316 |
Common stock repurchased | | | (7,888) | | | (5,732 | ) | | (4,214) |
Dividends paid | | | (2,357) | | | - | | | - |
Other, net | | | - | | | (12) | | | 250 |
Net cash provided by (used in) financing activities | | | (8,433) | | | (2,103) | | | 352 |
Net decrease in cash and cash equivalents | | | (672) | | | (5,054) | | | (1,050) |
Cash and cash equivalents, beginning of year | | | 2,776 | | | 7,830 | | | 8,880 |
Cash and cash equivalents, end of year | | $ | 2,104 | | $ | 2,776 | | $ | 7,830 |
| | | | | | | | | |
(15) Quarterly Financial Data (Unaudited)
The following table discloses the Company’s selected unaudited quarterly financial data:
| | For the Quarters Ended | |
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) | | 12/31/06 | | 09/30/06 | | 06/30/06 | | 03/31/06 | |
Interest income | | $ | 18,737 | | $ | 18,568 | | $ | 18,392 | | $ | 17,260 | |
Interest expense | | | 5,936 | | | 5,754 | | | 5,766 | | | 5,069 | |
Net interest income | | | 12,801 | | | 12,814 | | | 12,626 | | | 12,191 | |
Provision for loan losses | | | 100 | | | 0 | | | (114 | ) | | (489 | ) |
Net interest income after provision for loan losses | | | 12,701 | | | 12,814 | | | 12,740 | | | 12,680 | |
Noninterest income | | | 2,390 | | | 2,299 | | | 2,257 | | | 2,894 | |
Noninterest expense | | | 8,703 | | | 8,312 | | | 8,492 | | | 8,761 | |
Income before income taxes | | | 6,388 | | | 6,801 | | | 6,505 | | | 6,813 | |
Income tax expense | | | 2,036 | | | 2,448 | | | 2,316 | | | 2,437 | |
Net income | | $ | 4,352 | | $ | 4,353 | | $ | 4,189 | | $ | 4,376 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Earnings per share | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic | | $ | 0.37 | | $ | 0.37 | | $ | 0.35 | | $ | 0.37 | |
Diluted | | $ | 0.37 | | $ | 0.36 | | $ | 0.35 | | $ | 0.36 | |
| | For the Quarters Ended | |
(Dollars in thousands, except per share amounts) | | 12/31/05 | | 09/30/05 | | 06/30/05 | | 03/31/05 | |
Interest income | | $ | 17,588 | | $ | 16,469 | | $ | 15,299 | | $ | 14,400 | |
Interest expense | | | 4,773 | | | 4,269 | | | 3,668 | | | 3,197 | |
Net interest income | | | 12,815 | | | 12,200 | | | 11,631 | | | 11,203 | |
Provision for loan losses | | | 0 | | | (494 | ) | | 394 | | | 413 | |
Net interest income after provision for loan losses | | | 12,815 | | | 12,694 | | | 11,237 | | | 10,790 | |
Noninterest income | | | 2,204 | | | 2,224 | | | 2,638 | | | 2,357 | |
Noninterest expense | | | 8,567 | | | 8,478 | | | 8,878 | | | 9,310 | |
Income before income taxes | | | 6,452 | | | 6,440 | | | 4,997 | | | 3,837 | |
Income tax expense | | | 2,194 | | | 2,245 | | | 1,657 | | | 1,184 | |
Net income | | $ | 4,258 | | $ | 4,195 | | $ | 3,340 | | $ | 2,653 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Earnings per share | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Basic | | $ | 0.36 | | $ | 0.36 | | $ | 0.28 | | $ | 0.23 | |
Diluted | | $ | 0.35 | | $ | 0.35 | | $ | 0.27 | | $ | 0.22 | |
(16) Subsequent Event (Unaudited)
On February 8, 2007, the Company, HBC and Diablo Valley Bank (“Diablo”) entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “Merger Agreement”), pursuant to which, among other things, Diablo will merge with and into HBC, with HBC surviving the merger (the “Merger”) in a cash and stock transaction valued at approximately $70 million. The Merger Agreement has been unanimously approved by the Boards of Directors of the Company, HBC and Diablo. The Merger is subject to regulatory approval and approval by the Diablo shareholders. The transaction is expected to close during the second or third quarter of 2007.
| | | Incorporated by Reference to Form | |
| | Filed Herewith | Form S-8 | 8-K or 8-A Dated | 10-Q Dated | 10-K Dated | Exhibit No. |
2.1 | Agreement and Plan of Merger, dated February 8, 2007, by and between Heritage Commerce Corp, Heritage Bank of Commerce and Diablo Valley Bank | X | | | | | |
3.1 | Heritage Commerce Corp Restated Articles of Incorporation as Amended effective May 26, 2005 | | | 6/2/05 | | | 3.1 |
3.2 | Heritage Commerce Corp Bylaws as amended to May 26, 2005 | | | 6/2/05 | | | 3.2 |
4.1 | The indenture, dated as of March 23, 2000, between Heritage Commerce Corp, as Issuer, and the Bank of New York, as Trustee | | | | | 4-6-01 (10-K/A Amendment No. 1) | 4.1 |
4.2 | Amended and restated Declaration of Trust, Heritage Capital Trust I, dated as of March 23, 2000 | | | | | 4-6-01 (10-K/A Amendment No. 1) | 4.2 |
4.3 | The indenture, dated as of September 7, 2000, between Heritage Commerce Corp, as Issuer, and State Street Bank and Trust Company, of Connecticut, National Association, as Trustee | | | | | 4-6-01 (10-K/A Amendment No. 1) | 4.3 |
4.4 | Amended and restated Declaration of Trust, Heritage Commerce Corp Statutory Trust I, dated as of September 7, 2000 | | | | | 4-6-01 (10-K/A Amendment No. 1) | 4.4 |
4.5 | The indenture, dated as of July 31, 2001, between Heritage Commerce Corp, as Issuer, and State Street Bank and Trust Company, of Connecticut, National Association, as Trustee | | | | | 3/28/02 | 4.5 |
4.6 | Amended and restated Declaration of Trust, Heritage Statutory Trust II, dated as of July 31, 2001 | 87 | | 3/28/02 | 4.6 |
4.7 | The indenture, dated as of September 26, 2002, between Heritage Commerce Corp, as Issuer, and State Street Bank and Trust Company, of Connecticut, National Association, as Trustee | | | | | 3/28/03 | 4.7 |
4.8 | Amended and restated Declaration of Trust, Heritage Commerce Corp Statutory Trust III, dated as of September 26, 2002 | | | | | 3/28/03 | 4.8 |
10.1 | Real Property Leases for properties located at 150 Almaden Blvd., San Jose. | | | 6/21/05 | | | 10.1 |
10.2 | Heritage Commerce Corp Management Incentive Plan | | | 5/3/05 | | | 10.2 |
10.3 | Employment agreement with Mr. McGovern dated July 16, 1998 * | | | | | 3-31-99 | 10.3 |
10.4 | Agreement between Fiserv Solutions, Inc. and Heritage Commerce Corp dated October 20, 2003 | | | | | 3-12-04 | 10.4 |
10.5 | Employment agreement with Mr. Corsello dated May 11, 2001, with an amendment dated May 11, 2004 * | | | | | 03/31/05 | 10.5 |
10.6 | 1994 Stock Option Plan and Form of Agreement | | 07/17/98 | | | | 10.6 |
10.7 | 2004 Stock Option Plan and Form of Agreement | | 7/16/04 | | | | 10.7 |
10.8 | Employment agreement with Mr. Kaczmarek dated March 17, 2005 * | | | 03/22/05 | | | 10.8 |
10.9 | Restricted stock agreement with Mr. Kaczmarek dated March 17, 2005 | | | 03/22/05 | | | 10.9 |
10.10 | 2004 stock option agreement with Mr. Kaczmarek dated March 17, 2005 | | | 03/22/05 | | | 10.10 |
10.11 | Non-qualified Deferred Compensation Plan | | | | | 03/31/05 | 10.11 |
10.12 | Director Deferred Fee Agreement with James R. Blair dated June 30, 1997 | 88 | | 03/31/05 | 10.12 |
10.13 | Director Deferred Fee Agreement with Jack Peckham dated June 30, 1997 | | | | | 03/31/05 | 10.13 |
10.14 | Purchase Agreement dated January 31, 2006 between Heritage Commerce Corp and County Bank | | | | | 3/28/06 | |
10.15 | Employment agreement with Raymond Parker dated May 16, 2005 * | | | 5/18/05 | | | |
10.16 | Third Amendment to Lease for Registrant’s Principle Office | | | 8/17/05 | | | |
10.17 | Fourth Amendment to Lease for Registrant’s Principle Office | | | 8/17/05 | | | |
10.18 | Fourth Amendment to Sublease for Registrant’s Principle Office | | | 6/21/05 | | | |
10.19 | Employment agreement with Richard Hagarty dated July 27, 2006* | | | 8/1/06 | | | |
21.1 | Subsidiaries of the registrant | X | | | | | |
23.1 | Consent of Deloitte & Touche LLP | X | | | | | |
23.2 | Consent of Crowe Chizek and Company LLP | X | | | | | |
31.1 | Certification of Registrant’s Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | X | | | | | |
31.2 | Certification of Registrant’s Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 | X | | | | | |
32.1 | Certification of Registrant’s Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 | X | | | | | |
32.2 | Certification of Registrant’s Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 | X | | | | | |
* Management contract or compensatory plan or arrangement.