million for the quarter ended June 30, 2012. In addition, we have seen a significant decline in past due loans since December 31, 2011. Also see the discussion below under “Allowance for Loan Losses.”
Noninterest income increased $364,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2012 compared to the quarter ended June 30, 2011. The increase is primarily due to an increase of $427,000 in gains on sale of investment securities which were sold to recognize the gain. Noninterest income increased $1,624,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. The increase is primarily due to an increase of $1,727,000 in gains on sale of investment securities which were sold to recognize the gain.
Total noninterest expenses decreased $945,000, or 28.0%, for the quarter ended June 30, 2012, to $2,433,000 compared to $3,378,000 for the quarter ended June 30, 2011. The primary cause of decreased noninterest expense for the three months ended June 30, 2012 relates to a decrease in other real estate owned and foreclosure expenses. Salaries and employee benefits, the largest component of noninterest expenses, decreased $6,000 for the three months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. This is due to the reduction in certain employee benefit expenses including stock option expense. Professional expenses, director’s fees, postage and supplies and marketing expenses have all declined as the result of continued budget control. Other real estate owned and foreclosure expenses decreased $722,000 primarily as a result of reduced valuation adjustments. The prior year period had $665,000 in valuation adjustments compared to $67,000 in the current period.
Total noninterest expenses decreased $1,469,000, or 22.1%, for the six months ended June 30, 2012, to $5,176,000 compared to $6,645,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2011. The primary cause of decreased noninterest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2012 relates to a decrease in other real estate owned and foreclosure expenses. Salaries and employee benefits, the largest component of noninterest expenses, decreased $26,000 for the six months ended June 30, 2012 compared to the same period in 2011. This is due to the reduction in certain employee benefit expenses including stock option expense. Professional expenses, director’s fees, postage and supplies and marketing expenses have all declined as the result of continued budget control. Other real estate owned and foreclosure expenses decreased $1,396,000 primarily as a result of reduced valuation adjustments. The prior year period had $1,321,000 in valuation adjustments compared to $178,000 in the current period. There was a $141,000 Federal Home Loan bank prepayment penalty in the six months ended June 30, 2012 that was incurred as part of a security sale and balance sheet restructuring transaction. There was no similar prepayment penalty in the six months ended June 30, 2011.
The Company has a net operating loss carry-forward for federal tax purposes and therefore there was no federal income tax expense for the three and six months ended June 30, 2012 or during the same period in 2011. The Bank, however, does have state tax expense in the three and six months ended June 30, 2012 due to net income at the bank level. See “- Critical Accounting Policies - Deferred Tax Asset” above. In evaluating whether the full benefit of the net deferred tax asset will be realized, both positive and negative evidence was considered including recent earnings trends, projected earnings and asset quality. As of June 30, 2012, management concluded that the negative evidence outweighed any positive evidence in determining realization of any deferred tax temporary differences and has recorded a full valuation allowance on its net deferred tax assets. The Company will continue to monitor deferred tax assets closely to evaluate future realization of the full benefit of the net deferred tax asset and the potential need to reduce the valuation allowance. Significant positive trends in credit quality and pre-tax income from operations could impact the level of valuation allowances deemed necessary on deferred tax assets in the future.
Outstanding loans represented the largest component of earning assets at 55.9% of total earning assets as of June 30, 2012. Gross loans totaled $203,409,000 as of June 30, 2012, a decline of $23,393,000, or 10.3%, from gross loans of $226,802,000 as of December 31, 2011. As a result of the adverse economic environment and a desire to improve capital ratios, management has intentionally slowed loan growth and enhanced underwriting requirements. Adjustable rate loans totaled 62.7% of the loan portfolio as of June 30, 2012, which allows the Company to be in a favorable position as interest rates rise. The Company’s loan portfolio consists primarily of real estate mortgage loans, commercial loans and consumer loans with concentrations in commercial real estate, including construction and land development loans. Substantially all of these loans are to borrowers located in South Carolina, with the majority being in the Company’s local market area.
Given the negative asset and credit quality trends within the loan portfolio since 2008, management continues to work aggressively to identify and quantify potential losses and execute plans to reduce problem assets. The analyses included internal and external loan reviews that required detailed, written summaries of the loans reviewed and vetting of the risk rating, accrual status and collateral valuation of the loans by the loan officers, credit administration and an external loan review firm.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses at June 30, 2012 was $6,315,000, or 3.10% of gross loans outstanding, compared to $6,747,000 or 2.97% of gross loans outstanding at December 31, 2011. The net increase of .13% in the allowance ratio was primarily a result of reduced loan portfolio balances. The allowance at June 30, 2012 includes an allocation of $1,815,000 related to specifically identified impaired loans compared to $2,168,000 at December 31, 2011.
Internal reviews and evaluations of the Company’s loan portfolio for the purpose of identifying potential problem loans, external reviews by federal and state banking examiners, management’s consideration of current economic conditions, historical loan losses and other relevant risk factors are used in evaluating the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses. The level of loan loss reserves is monitored on an on-going basis. The evaluation is inherently subjective as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant change. Despite efforts to provide accurate estimates. actual losses will undoubtedly vary from the estimates. Also, there is a possibility that charge-offs in future periods will exceed the allowance for loan losses as estimated at any point in time. If delinquencies and defaults increase, additional loan loss provisions may be required which would adversely affect the Company’s results of operations and financial condition.
At June 30, 2012, the Company had $13,579,000 in non-performing assets, comprised of non-accruing loans of $6,826,000 and $6,753,000 in OREO. This compares to $10,449,000 in non-accruing loans and $6,469,000 in OREO at December 31, 2011. Non-performing loans consisted of $6,340,000 in real estate loans, $403,000 in commercial loans and $83,000 in consumer loans at June 30, 2012. The nonperforming real estate loans have had appraisals within the past twelve months to support the loan balances.
Net charge-offs for the first six months of 2012 and 2011 were approximately $432,000 and $2,557,000, respectively. The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of non-performing loans was 92.5% and 64.6% as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
Troubled debt restructured loans (“TDRs”), which are included in the impaired loan totals, were $8,895,000 and $12,050,000 at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. TDRs on non-accrual were $4,064,000 and $6,975,000 at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The decrease in TDRs was a result of principal reductions through payments, charge-offs and transfers to other real estate owned.
Potential problem loans, which are not included in non-performing or impaired loans, amounted to approximately $23,175,000, or 11.4% of total loans outstanding at June 30, 2012 compared to $24,314,000, or 10.7% of totals loans outstanding at December 31, 2011. Potential problem loans represent those loans with a well-defined weakness and where information about possible credit problems of borrowers or the performance of construction or development projects has caused management to have concerns about the borrower’s ability to comply with present repayment terms.
Securities
The investment portfolio is an important contributor to the earnings of the Company. The Company strives to maintain a portfolio that provides necessary liquidity for the Company while maximizing income consistent with the ability of the Company’s capital structure to accept nominal amounts of investment risk. During years when loan demand has not been strong, the Company has utilized the investment portfolio as a means for investing “excess” funds for higher yields, instead of accepting low overnight investment rates. The investment portfolio also provides securities that can be pledged against borrowings as a source of funding for loans. It is management’s intent to maintain a significant percentage of the Company’s earning assets in the loan portfolio as loan demand allows.
As of June 30, 2012, investment securities totaled $142,148,000 or 40.2% of total earning assets. Investment securities increased $12,291,000, or 9.5%, from $129,857,000 as of December 31, 2011, due to the call of five securities totaling $5,349,000, the sale of securities totaling $51,377,000, and cash inflows from principal payments on mortgage backed securities, offset by the purchase of $46,730,000 in mortgage backed securities, $9,296,000 in municipal securities and $26,443,000 in U.S. government and other agency obligations.
30
Cash and Cash Equivalents
The Company’s cash and cash equivalents were $13,574,000 at June 30, 2012, compared to $6,863,000 at December 31, 2011, an increase of $6,711,000. Balances in due from bank accounts vary depending on the settlement of cash letters and other transactions.
Deposits
The Company receives its primary source of funding for loans and investments from its deposit accounts. Total deposits increased to $281,906,000 as of June 30, 2012 compared to $281,701,000 as of December 31, 2011. A decrease of $9,670,000 in retail and wholesale certificates of deposit was offset by an increase of $7,497,000 in savings and NOW accounts and an increase of $2,378,000 in demand deposits. Total core deposits, defined as all deposits excluding time deposits of $100,000 or more and brokered deposits have decreased by $1,035,000 in the six months ended June 30, 2012. This was primarily due to management’s efforts to reduce non-brokered online certificates.
At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, interest bearing deposits comprised 86.4% and 87.1% of total deposits, respectively. Included in the interest bearing total were brokered deposits of $3,173,000, or 1.1%, and $3,245,000, or 1.2%, of total deposits at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Company takes into consideration liquidity needs, direction and level of interest rates and market conditions when pricing deposits. The reduction in brokered deposits was primarily the result of management’s efforts to raise core deposits and reduce alternative funding, coupled with the use of cash inflows from the investment and loan portfolios.
Borrowings
The Company’s borrowings are comprised of federal funds purchased, repurchase agreements, long-term advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta, and junior subordinated debentures. At June 30, 2012, total borrowings were $69,341,000, compared with $77,857,000 as of December 31, 2011. There were no federal funds purchased at June 30, 2012. There was $2,516,000 in federal funds purchased at December 31, 2011. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, long term repurchase agreements were $15,000,000. Notes payable to the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta totaled $43,000,000 and $49,000,000 as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The weighted average rate of interest for the Company’s portfolio of Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta advances was 3.25% and 3.23% as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The weighted average remaining maturity for Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta advances was 2.14 years and 2.44 years as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively.
In October 2004 and December 2006, the Company issued $6,186,000 and $5,155,000 of junior subordinated debentures to its wholly-owned capital trusts, Greer Capital Trust I and Greer Capital Trust II, respectively, to fully and unconditionally guarantee the trust preferred securities issued by the capital trusts.
The junior subordinated debentures issued in October 2004 mature in October 2034. Interest payments are due quarterly to Greer Capital Trust I at the three-month LIBOR plus 220 basis points.
The junior subordinated debentures issued in December 2006 mature in December 2036. Interest payments are due quarterly to Greer Capital Trust II at the three-month LIBOR plus 173 basis points.
Although the interest does continue to accrue, both junior subordinated debentures allow deferral of interest payments for up to five years. Due to the financial condition of the Company, on January 3, 2011, the Company elected to defer interest payments on the two junior subordinated debentures beginning with the January 2011 payments. As a condition of deferring the interest payments, the Company is prohibited from paying dividends on its common stock or the Company’s preferred stock.
In accordance with ASC 810, Trust I and Trust II (the “Trusts”) are not consolidated with the Company. Accordingly, the Company does not report the securities issued by the Trusts as liabilities, and instead reports as liabilities the junior subordinated debentures issued by the Company and held by each Trust. However, the Company has fully and unconditionally guaranteed the repayment of the variable rate trust preferred securities. These trust preferred securities currently qualify as Tier 1 capital for regulatory capital requirements of the Company.
Off-Balance Sheet Financial Instruments
The Company has certain off-balance-sheet instruments in the form of contractual commitments to extend credit to customers and standby letters of credit. The commitments to extend credit are legally binding and have set expiration dates and are at predetermined interest rates. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Bank to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party, which are issued primarily to support public and private borrowing arrangements. The underwriting criteria for these commitments are the same as for loans in the loan portfolio. Collateral is also obtained, if necessary, based on the credit evaluation of each borrower. Although many of the commitments will expire unused,
31
management believes there are adequate resources to fund these commitments. Both of these products are commonly needed by commercial banking customers and are offered by the Bank to serve its commercial customer base. At June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, the Company’s commitments to extend credit totaled $31,282,000 and $26,472,000, respectively.
Liquidity and Capital Resources
Bank
Liquidity represents the ability of a company to convert assets into cash or cash equivalents without significant loss, and the ability to raise additional funds by increasing liabilities. Liquidity management involves monitoring sources and uses of funds in order to meet day-to-day cash flow requirements while maximizing profits. Liquidity management is made more complicated because different balance sheet components are subject to varying degrees of management control. For example, the timing of maturities in the investment portfolio is fairly predictable and subject to a high degree of control at the time investment decisions are made. However, net deposit inflows and outflows are far less predictable and are not subject to the same degree of control. Liquidity is also a measure of the Company’s ability to provide funds to meet the needs of depositors and borrowers. The Company’s primary goal is to meet these needs at all times. In addition to these basic cash needs, the Company must meet liquidity requirements created by daily operations and regulatory requirements. Liquidity requirements of the Company are met primarily through two categories of funding: core deposits and borrowings. In the first six months of 2012, liquidity needs were met through maintaining core deposits and borrowings.
Core deposits, which are generally the result of stable consumer and commercial banking relationships, are considered to be a relatively stable component of the Company’s mix of liabilities. At June 30, 2012, core deposits totaled approximately $223,464,000, or 79.2%, of the Company’s total deposits, compared to approximately $224,499,000, or 79.7%, of the Company’s total deposits as of December 31, 2011.
Secured and unsecured lines of credit with correspondent banks are also sources of liquidity. At June 30, 2012, the Bank had unsecured and secured federal funds lines of credit with correspondent banks totaling $4,000,000 and $8,000,000, respectively. Approximately $12,000,000 and $9,484,000 was available for use as of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. The Bank also has a collateralized borrowing capacity of 25% of total assets from the FHLB. Outstanding FHLB borrowings totaled $43,000,000 and $49,000,000 at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively. Unused available FHLB borrowings totaled approximately $53,670,000 and $47,450,000 at June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, respectively, and were subject to collateral availability. The Bank has additional borrowing capacity through the Federal Reserve Bank “discount window” and has pledged a portion of its consumer and commercial loan portfolio as collateral for approximately $15,538,000 in unused available credit as of June 30, 2012.
The Company’s liquidity ratio (Cash, federal funds and unpledged securities available for sale divided by total deposits) has increased from 27.8% to 33.0% from December 31, 2011 to June 30, 2012.
In addition to the primary funding sources discussed above, secondary sources of liquidity include sales of investment securities which are not held for pledging purposes.
Management believes that the Company’s available borrowing capacity and efforts to grow deposits are adequate to provide the necessary funding for its banking operations for the remainder of 2012 and for the foreseeable future thereafter. However, management is prepared to take other actions, including potential asset sales, if necessary to maintain appropriate liquidity.
Holding Company
Greer Bancshares Incorporated, the parent holding company (referred to as the “Company”) generally has liquidity needs to pay limited operating expenses and dividends. These liquidity needs include interest on junior subordinated debt and dividends on preferred stock issued as a part of the Troubled Asset Relief Program. Any cash dividends paid to shareholders, as well as the Company’s other liquidity needs, are typically funded by dividends from Greer State Bank, the Company’s banking subsidiary (the “Bank”). However, the Company has not received dividends from the banking subsidiary since August 2010. Subsequently, the Company funded interest payments on its junior subordinated debt and dividends on the TARP preferred stock from $993,000 which was held at the holding company level from the total TARP investment proceeds of $9,993,000. In 2010, the Company also received funds from the sale of a parcel of land for $590,000 before selling costs which had been held for future expansion. The Company had approximately $170,000 in cash remaining as of June 30, 2012 to meet short term liquidity needs. This amount is considered adequate to meet the short term liquidity needs of the Company with the deferral of debenture interest payments noted above and suspension of dividend payments noted below.
On January 6, 2011, the Company gave notice to the U.S. Treasury Department that the Company was suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the cumulative perpetual preferred stock issued as part of the Troubled Assets Relief Program (“TARP”), beginning with the February 15, 2011 dividend. The Company’s failure to pay a total of six such dividends, whether or
32
not consecutive, gives the U.S. Treasury Department the right to elect two directors to the Company’s board of directors. That right would continue until the Company pays all due but unpaid dividends. As of June 30, 2012 the Company has failed to pay six such dividends. As a result, the U.S. Treasury Department has the right to elect two of the Company’s directors; however, the U.S. Treasury Department has not acted upon their right to elect two directors. As of June 30, 2012 there was $816,975 in non-declared TARP dividends as well as $68,081 in declared but not paid TARP dividends.
On May 3, 2012, Treasury announced additional details on its strategy for winding down the remaining bank and bank holding company investments made through TARP, and one such strategy is utilizing an auction to sell pools of several recipient companies’ TARP securities to third parties. Treasury has indicated that it expects a single winning bidder to purchase all of the TARP securities included in a pool. By letter dated as of June 19, 2012, Treasury informed the Company that Treasury is considering including the Company’s TARP preferred stock as part of a series of pooled auctions. Treasury has also indicated that a TARP recipient may, with regulatory approval, opt out of the pool auction process and either make its own bid to repurchase all of its remaining TARP securities or designate a single outside investor (or single group of investors) to make such a bid. TARP recipients have until August 6, 2012 to submit such a bid or request an extension of the bid deadline to October 9, 2012. The Company has filed a request and was granted an extension of the bid deadline to October 9, 2012. However, the Company has not yet determined whether it will submit a bid or take no action and potentiallyallow its TARP securities to be included in a pool for auction. If the Company’s TARP preferred stock is sold by Treasury to a third party investor, the Company’s understanding is that a purchaser of the Company’s TARP preferred stock would assume the right, which Treasury currently possesses, to elect two directors to the Company’s board of directors until the Company pays all due but unpaid quarterly dividends on the TARP preferred stock.
Dividends
Under South Carolina banking law, the Bank is authorized to pay cash dividends up to 100% of net income in any calendar year without obtaining the prior approval of the South Carolina Board of Financial Institutions (the “S.C. Bank Board”) provided that the Bank received a composite rating of one or two at the last federal or state regulatory examination. Otherwise, the Bank must obtain approval from the S.C. Bank Board prior to the payment of any cash dividends. In addition, under the FDIC Improvement Act, the Bank may not pay a dividend if, after paying the dividend, the Bank would be undercapitalized.
The Bank’s ability to pay dividends is also restricted by the Consent Order entered into by the Bank with the FDIC and the S.C. Bank Board on March 1, 2011. The Consent Order is discussed under “- Consent Order” below. Pursuant to the Consent Order, the Bank may not pay any dividends to the Company without the prior written approval of the FDIC and the S.C. Bank Board.
On June 23, 2010, the Company entered into an informal Memorandum of Understanding (the “FRB MOU”) with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond (the “FRB”). Among other things, the FRB MOU required the Company to seek permission prior to paying any dividends or trust preferred interest. As discussed under “- Liquidity and Capital Resources” above, on January 3, 2011, the Company elected to defer interest payments on the two junior subordinated debentures beginning with the January 2011 payments. As a condition of deferring the interest payments, the Company is prohibited from paying dividends on its common stock or the Company’s preferred stock. Also, on January 6, 2011, the Company gave notice to the U.S. Treasury that the Company was suspending the payment of regular quarterly cash dividends on the cumulative perpetual preferred stock issued as a part of the TARP program beginning with the February 15, 2011 dividend. The decision to elect the deferral of interest payments and to suspend the dividends payments was made in consultation with the FRB. On July 7, 2011, the Company and the FRB entered into a Written Agreement which superseded the FRB MOU. The Written Agreement with the FRB is discussed below.
It is currently anticipated that neither the Company nor the Bank will pay any dividends until a substantial improvement in earnings has been achieved.
Written Agreement with Federal Reserve
On July 7, 2011, the Company entered into a Written Agreement (the “Written Agreement”) with the FRB. The Written Agreement is intended to enhance the ability of the Company to serve as a source of strength to the Bank. The Written Agreement’s requirements are in addition to those of the Consent Order entered into by the Bank with the FDIC and the S.C. Bank Board.
Pursuant to the Written Agreement, the Company is required to:
·
take steps to ensure that the Bank complies with the Consent Order;
·
not, without the prior written approval of the FRB, (i) declare or pay any dividends, (ii) receive dividends or any form of payment from the Bank representing a reduction in capital, (iii) make any distributions of interest, principal
33
or other sums on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities, (iv) incur, increase or guarantee any debt, or (v) purchase or redeem any shares of its stock;
·
within 60 days of July 7, 2011, submit to the FRB a written statement of planned sources and uses of cash (which the Company has timely submitted);
·
comply with notice provisions of laws and regulations regarding the appointment of any new directors or senior executive officers;
·
comply with certain banking laws and regulations restricting indemnification of and severance payments to executives and employees; and
·
submit quarterly progress reports to the FRB.
Given its strategy of seeking to improve the Company’s and Bank’s capital positions, as well as the capital requirements and restrictions contained in the Consent Order, the Company has no plans to pay dividends or engage in any of the other restricted capital and financing activities described above. As previously disclosed, the Boards and management of the Company and the Bank have proactively taken steps to comply with the requirements of the Consent Order. The Company and the Bank believe that these steps will help the Company and the Bank address the concerns underlying the Consent Order and the Written Agreement.
Management does not believe that the Written Agreement will have a significant impact on the Bank’s lending and deposit operations, which will continue to be conducted in the usual and customary manner. As of June 30, 2012, the Company was compliant with all of the Written Agreement requirements and timelines.
Consent Order
On March 1, 2011, the Bank entered into the Consent Order with the FDIC and the S.C. Bank Board. As previously disclosed, the Consent Order seeks to enhance the Bank’s existing practices and procedures in the areas of credit risk management, liquidity and funds management, interest rate risk management, capital levels and Board oversight.
With respect to capital, the Consent Order requires the Bank to achieve by August 1, 2011 and thereafter maintain a Tier 1 capital to average assets (leverage) ratio of at least 8% and a total risk-based capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10%. The Consent Order results in the Bank being deemed “adequately capitalized” irrespective of the fact that ratios indicate “well-capitalized” status under the applicable banking regulations. If the Bank is unable to achieve the required capital ratios within the specified time frames, or otherwise fails to adhere to the Consent Order, further regulatory actions could be taken. Further, the ability to operate as a going concern could be negatively impacted.
Management has researched available options for raising additional capital and improving the capital ratios. While there is not a ready market for bank capital investments, the minimum capital ratios required by the Consent Order have been attained through the reduction of total assets and recognition of gains on the sale of securities. Continued success of the plan is conditioned, among other things, upon retention of profits, which is in turn contingent upon expense control and decreased loan loss provisions in the future.
As of June 30, 2012, the Bank was compliant with all of the Consent Order requirements. Tier One Capital Ratio was 8.10% and Total Risk Based Capital Ratio was 14.07% as of June 30, 2012.
Regulatory Capital
The Federal Reserve Board and bank regulatory agencies require bank holding companies and financial institutions to maintain capital at adequate levels based on a percentage of assets and off-balance-sheet exposures, adjusted for risk weights ranging from 0% to 100%. Under the risk-based standard, capital is classified into two tiers. Tier 1 capital of the Company consists of equity minus unrealized gains plus unrealized losses on securities available for sale and less a disallowed portion of our deferred tax assets. In addition to Tier 1 capital requirements, Tier 2 capital consists of the allowance for loan losses subject to certain limitations. A bank holding company’s qualifying capital base for purposes of its risk-based capital ratio consists of the sum of its Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. The regulatory minimum requirements are 4% for Tier 1 and 8% for total risk-based capital. The Company and the Bank are also required to maintain capital at a minimum level based on average assets, which is known as the leverage ratio. Only the strongest bank holding companies and banks are allowed to maintain capital at the minimum requirement, which is 4%. All others are subject to maintaining ratios 100 to 200 basis points above the minimum requirement.
34
The Bank exceeded minimum regulatory capital and Consent Order requirements at June 30, 2012 as set forth in the following table:
(Dollars in thousands)
| | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | �� To meet the |
| | | | | | | requirements of the |
| | | | For Capital | | Consent Order |
| | | Adequacy Purposes | | Dated March 1, 2011 |
Bank: | Actual | | Minimum | | Minimum |
| Amount | Ratio | | Amount | Ratio | | Amount | Ratio |
As of June 30, 2012 | | | | | | | | |
Total risk-based capital | | | | | | | | |
(to risk-weighted assets) | $33,884 | 14.07% | | $19,259 | 8.0% | | $24,074 | 10.0% |
Tier 1 capital | | | | | | | | |
(to risk-weighted assets) | $30,825 | 12.80% | | $ 9,630 | 4.0% | | N/A | N/A |
Tier 1 capital (leverage) | | | | | | | | |
(to average assets) | $30,825 | 8.10% | | $15,227 | 4.0% | | $30,454 | 8.0% |
| | | | | | | | |
As of December 31, 2011 | | | | | | | | |
Total risk-based capital | | | | | | | | |
(to risk-weighted assets) | $30,845 | 11.82% | | $20,876 | 8.0% | | $26,095 | 10.0% |
Tier 1 capital | | | | | | | | |
(to risk-weighted assets) | $27,531 | 10.55% | | $10,438 | 4.0% | | N/A | N/A |
Tier 1 capital (leverage) | | | | | | | | |
(to average assets) | $27,531 | 7.05% | | $15,622 | 4.0% | | $31,244 | 8.0% |
The Company is also subject to certain capital requirements. At June 30, 2012, the Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, Tier 1 capital (leverage) ratio and the total risk-based capital ratio were 11.57%, 7.33% and 14.26%, respectively. At December 31, 2011, the Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, Tier 1 capital ratio and the total risk-based capital ratio were 9.16%, 6.13% and 12.04%, respectively.
Board Involvement
The Board of Directors continues to be very active in providing oversight and supervision to the management of the Bank. In addition to the regular monthly Board meetings, the Board committees are active with Corporate Governance and Loan Committee meeting monthly, Audit Committee meeting quarterly, and Human Resources meeting as needed but usually quarterly. In addition, the Board had previously engaged an investment banking firm, Raymond James, in exploring our strategic options for addressing the Consent Order capital requirements. As of June 30, 2012, the Bank was compliant with all of the Consent Order requirements, and the Board’s Raymond James engagement was a one year engagement that concluded in June 2012.
The Board of Directors also formed a special Directors Consent Order Compliance Committee in March 2011 to monitor the Bank’s efforts to comply with the requirements of the Consent Order, meeting as needed to address specific issues. This committee reports on its activities each month at the regular Board meeting.
Forward-looking and Cautionary Statements
This report contains “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. Such statements relate to, among other things, future economic performance, plans and objectives of management for future operations, and projections of revenues and other financial items that are based on the beliefs of management, as well as assumptions made by, and information currently available to, management. The words “may,” “will,” “anticipate,” “should,” “would,” “believe,” “contemplate,” “expect,” “estimate,” “continue,” “may,” “appear,” and “intend,” as well as other similar words and expressions, are intended to identify forward-looking statements. Actual results may differ materially from the results discussed in the forward-looking statements. The Company’s operating performance is subject to various risks and uncertainties including, without limitation:
·
significant increases in competitive pressure in the banking and financial services industries;
35
·
reduced earnings due to higher credit losses owing to economic factors, including declining home values, increasing interest rates, increasing unemployment, or changes in payment behavior or other causes;
·
the concentration of our portfolio in real estate based loans and the weakness in the commercial real estate market;
·
increased funding costs due to market illiquidity, increased competition for funding or other regulatory requirements;
·
market risk and inflation;
·
level, composition and re-pricing characteristics of our securities portfolios;
·
availability of wholesale funding;
·
adequacy of capital and future capital needs;
·
our reliance on secondary sources of liquidity such as FHLB advances, federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks and brokered time deposits, to meet our liquidity needs;
·
operating restrictions imposed by our Consent Order, such as limitations on the use of brokered deposits;
·
our inability to meet the requirements set forth in our Consent Order within prescribed time frames;
·
changes in the interest rate environment which could reduce anticipated or actual margins;
·
changes in political conditions or the legislative or regulatory environment, including recently enacted and proposed legislation;
·
adequacy of the level of our allowance for loan losses;
·
the rate of delinquencies and amounts of charge-offs;
·
the rates of loan growth;
·
adverse changes in asset quality and resulting credit risk-related losses and expenses;
·
general economic conditions, either nationally or regionally and especially in our primary service area, becoming less favorable than expected resulting in, among other things, a deterioration in credit quality;
·
changes occurring in business conditions and inflation;
·
changes in technology;
·
changes in monetary and tax policies;
·
loss of consumer confidence and economic disruptions resulting from terrorist activities;
·
changes in the securities markets;
·
ability to generate future taxable income to realize deferred tax assets;
·
ability to have sufficient liquidity at the parent holding company level to pay preferred stock dividends and interest expense on junior subordinated debt; and
·
other risks and uncertainties detailed from time to time in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
For a description of factors which may cause actual results to differ materially from such forward-looking statements, see the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011, and other reports from time to time filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission. Investors are cautioned not to place undue reliance on any forward-looking statements as these statements speak only as of the date when made. The Company undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statements made in this report.
Item 3.
Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk
Not applicable.
Item 4. Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this report, an evaluation was carried out, under the supervision of and with the participation of our management, including our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, of the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer have concluded that the current disclosure controls and procedures are effective as of June 30, 2012. There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting during the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2012 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.
The design of any system of controls and procedures is based in part upon certain assumptions about the likelihood of future events. There can be no assurance that any design will succeed in achieving its stated goals under all potential future conditions, regardless of how remote.
36
PART II-OTHER INFORMATION
Item 1.
Legal Proceedings
The Company is involved in various legal actions arising in the normal course of business. Management believes that these proceedings will not result in a material loss to the Company.
Item 1A. Risk Factors
Information regarding risk factors appears in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Forward-looking and Cautionary Statements,” in Part I-Item 2 of this Form 10-Q. More detailed information concerning our risk factors may be found in Part I-Item 1A of our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Form 10-K”).
There have been no material changes in the risk factors previously disclosed in Part I-Item 1A of our Form 10-K.
Item 2.
Unregistered Sales of Equity Securities and Use of Proceeds
Not applicable
Item 3.
Defaults Upon Senior Securities
Not applicable
Item 5.
Other Information
None
37
| | |
| | |
31.1* | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
31.2* | | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
32* | | Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 USC §1350, as adopted pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
101.INS** | | XBRL Instance Document |
101.SCH** | | XBRL Taxonomy Schema |
101.CAL** | | XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document |
101.LAB** | | XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document |
101.PRE** | | XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document |
| | |
| |
| * Filed herewith.
** Pursuant to Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, exhibits marked with two asterisks (**) are interactive data files and are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and otherwise are not subject to liability. |
38
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned thereunto duly authorized.
GREER BANCSHARES INCORPORATED
| | | | |
| | | | |
Dated: August 14, 2012 | | | | /s/ R. Dennis Hennett |
| | | | R. Dennis Hennett |
| | | | President and Chief Executive Officer |
| | |
Dated: August 14, 2012 | | | | /s/ J. Richard Medlock, Jr. |
| | | | J. Richard Medlock, Jr. |
| | | | Chief Financial Officer |
39
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
| | |
| | |
31.1* | | Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
31.2* | | Certification of the Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Rule 13a-14 of the Securities Act of 1934, as adopted pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
32* | | Certifications of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 USC § 1350, as adopted pursuant to the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. |
101.INS** | | XBRL Instance Document |
101.SCH** | | XBRL Taxonomy Schema |
101.CAL** | | XBRL Taxonomy Calculation Linkbase Document |
101.LAB** | | XBRL Taxonomy Label Linkbase Document |
101.PRE** | | XBRL Taxonomy Presentation Linkbase Document |
| | |
| |
| * Filed herewith.
** Pursuant to Rule 406T of Regulation S-T, exhibits marked with two asterisks (**) are interactive data files and are deemed not filed or part of a registration statement or prospectus for purposes of Sections 11 or 12 of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and otherwise are not subject to liability |
40