Of the $87.0 million in advances outstanding at June 30, 2013, $6.0 million bearing a weighted-average interest rate of 3.52% are callable by the FHLB at its option and in its sole discretion only if the level of a specific index were to exceed a pre-determined maximum rate. In the event the FHLB calls these advances, the Company will evaluate its liquidity and interest rate sensitivity position at that time and determine whether to replace the called advances with new borrowings.
On July 22, 2011, the Bank restructured $23,250,000 of Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston borrowings. Prior to this restructuring, these borrowings had a weighted average cost of 4.44% and a weighted average maturity term of 10.58 months. After this restructuring, the weighted average cost was reduced by 1.31% to 3.03% and the weighted average maturity term was extended to 48.69 months. Based on comments by the Federal Reserve, the Bank does not currently believe that interest rates will increase in the next couple of years. However, in an effort to decrease the Bank’s interest rate risk from rising interest rates, the Bank took advantage of the Federal Home Loan Bank of Boston’s program to further restructure outstanding borrowings. In September 2012, the Company restructured $8.6 million of FHLB borrowings. After the restructuring, the weighted average cost of these borrowings was reduced by 1.00% to 2.74%.
The Company recognizes the need to assist the communities it serves with economic development initiatives. These initiatives focus on creating or retaining jobs for lower income workers, benefits for lower income families, supporting small business and funding affordable housing programs. To assist in funding these initiatives, the Company has participated in FHLB’s Community Development Advance program. The Company continues to originate loans that qualify under this program.
The Company had no overnight repurchase agreements as of June 30, 2013. As of June 30, 2012, the Company had $7.3 million of overnight repurchase agreements with business customers with a weighted average rate of 0.10%. These repurchase agreements were collateralized by residential mortgage-backed securities.
The following table sets forth certain information concerning balances and interest rates on the Company’s repurchase agreements at the dates and for the years indicated:
Personnel
As of June 30, 2013, the Company had 107 full-time and 11 part-time employees, none of whom is represented by a collective bargaining unit. The Company considers its relationship with its employees to be good.
Subsidiary Activities and Portfolio Management Services
Hampden Bancorp, Inc. conducts its principal business activities through its wholly-owned subsidiary, Hampden Bank. Hampden Bank has three operating subsidiaries, Hampden Investment Corporation, Hampden Investment Corporation II and Hampden Insurance Agency.
Hampden Investment Corporation. Hampden Investment Corporation (“HIC”) is a Massachusetts securities corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Hampden Bank. HIC is an investment company that engages in buying, selling and holding securities on its own behalf. At June 30, 2013, HIC had total assets of $107.4 million consisting primarily of mortgage backed securities. HIC’s net income for the years ending June 30, 2013 and June 30, 2012 was $1.3 million and $1.4 million, respectively. As a Massachusetts securities corporation, HIC has a lower state income tax rate compared to other corporations.
Hampden Investment Corporation II. Hampden Investment Corporation II (“HIC II”) has applied for Massachusetts securities corporation and a wholly owned subsidiary of Hampden Bank. HIC II is an investment company that engages in buying, selling and holding securities on its own behalf. At June 30, 2013, HIC II had total assets of $2.0 million consisting primarily of mortgage backed securities. HIC’s net income for the year ending June 30, 2013 was $16,000. At June 30, 2012, HIC II had no assets. Once a Massachusetts securities corporation, HIC II will have a lower state income tax rate compared to other corporations.
Hampden Insurance Agency. Hampden Insurance Agency (“HIA”) is an inactive insurance agency. As of June 30, 2013 and 2012, HIA had no assets.
Hampden Bancorp, Inc.’s subsidiary, in addition to Hampden Bank, is described below.
Hampden LS, Inc. Hampden Bancorp, Inc. contributed funds to a subsidiary, Hampden LS, Inc. to enable it to make a 15-year loan to the employee stock ownership plan to allow it to purchase shares of the Company common stock as part of the completion of the initial public offering. On January 16, 2007, at the completion of the initial public offering, the Employee Stock Ownership Plan, purchased 635,990 shares, or 8% of the 7,949,879 shares outstanding from the initial public offering.
REGULATION AND SUPERVISION
General
Hampden Bancorp, Inc. is a Delaware corporation and registered bank holding company. Hampden Bancorp, Inc. is regulated as a bank holding company by the Federal Reserve Board. Hampden Bank is a Massachusetts-charted stock savings bank. Hampden Bank is the wholly-owned subsidiary of Hampden Bancorp, Inc. Hampden Bank’s deposits are insured up to applicable limits by the FDIC and by DIF of Massachusetts for amounts in excess of the FDIC insurance limits. Hampden Bank is subject to extensive regulation by the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks, as its chartering agency, and by the FDIC, as its deposit insurer. Hampden Bank is required to file reports with, and is periodically examined by, the FDIC and the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks concerning its activities and financial condition and must obtain regulatory approvals prior to entering into certain transactions, including, but not limited to, mergers with or acquisitions of other financial institutions. This regulation and supervision establishes a comprehensive framework of activities in which an institution can engage and is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and, for purposes of the FDIC, the protection of the insurance fund. The regulatory structure also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes. Any change in such regulatory requirements and policies, whether by the Massachusetts legislature, the FDIC or Congress, could have a material adverse impact on Hampden Bancorp, Hampden Bank and their operations. Hampden Bank is a member of the FHLB. As further described below under “The Dodd-Frank Act”, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) is significantly changing the bank regulatory structure and affect the lending, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies.
Certain regulatory requirements applicable to Hampden Bank and to Hampden Bancorp, Inc. are referred to below. The description of statutory provisions and regulations applicable to savings institutions and their holding companies set forth below does not purport to be a complete description of such statutes and regulations and their effects on Hampden Bank and Hampden Bancorp, Inc. and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the actual laws and regulations.
The Dodd-Frank Act
The Dodd-Frank Act is significantly changing the bank regulatory structure and affecting the lending, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated the Office of Thrift Supervision and requires that federal savings associations be regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the primary federal regulator for national banks). The Dodd-Frank Act also authorizes the Federal Reserve Board to supervise and regulate all savings and loan holding companies.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires the Federal Reserve Board to set minimum capital levels for bank holding companies that are as stringent as those required for insured depository institutions, and the components of Tier 1 capital would be restricted to capital instruments that are currently considered to be Tier 1 capital for insured depository institutions. In addition, the proceeds of trust preferred securities are excluded from Tier 1 capital unless such securities were issued prior to May 19, 2010 by bank or savings and loan holding companies with less than $15 billion of assets. The legislation also establishes a floor for capital of insured depository institutions that cannot be lower than the standards in effect on July 21, 2010, and directs the federal banking regulators to implement new leverage and capital requirements within 18 months. These new leverage and capital requirements must take into account off-balance sheet activities and other risks, including risks relating to securitized products and derivatives.
The Dodd-Frank Act also creates a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with broad powers to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has broad rulemaking authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to all banks and savings institutions, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has examination and enforcement authority over all banks and savings institutions with more than $10 billion in assets. Banks and savings institutions with $10 billion or less in assets will be examined by their applicable bank regulators. The new legislation also weakens the federal preemption available for national banks and federal savings associations, and gives the state attorneys general the ability to enforce applicable federal consumer protection laws.
The Dodd Frank Act also broadens the base for FDIC insurance assessments. The FDIC has promulgated rules under which assessments are based on the average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital of a financial institution. The Dodd-Frank Act also permanently increases the maximum amount of deposit insurance for banks, savings institutions and credit unions to $250,000 per depositor, retroactive to January 1, 2008, and non-interest bearing transaction accounts have unlimited deposit insurance through December 31, 2012. Lastly, the Dodd-Frank Act will increase stockholder influence over boards of directors by requiring companies to give stockholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation and so-called “golden parachute” payments. The legislation also directs the Federal Reserve Board to promulgate rules prohibiting excessive compensation paid to bank holding company executives, regardless of whether the company is publicly traded.
It is difficult to predict at this time what impact the new legislation and implementing regulations will have on community banks such as Hampden Bank, including the lending and credit practices of such banks. Moreover, many of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act are not yet in effect, and the legislation requires various federal agencies to promulgate numerous and extensive implementing regulations over the next several years. Although the substance and scope of these regulations cannot be determined at this time, it is expected that the legislation and implementing regulations, will increase our operating and compliance costs.
Massachusetts Bank Regulation
General. As a Massachusetts-chartered savings bank, Hampden Bank is subject to supervision, regulation and examination by the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks and to various Massachusetts statutes and regulations which govern, among other things, investment powers, lending and deposit-taking activities, borrowings, maintenance of retained earnings and reserve accounts, distribution of earnings and payment of dividends. In addition, Hampden Bank is subject to Massachusetts consumer protection and civil rights laws and regulations. The approval of the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks or the Board of Bank Incorporation is required for a Massachusetts-chartered bank to establish or close branches, merge with other financial institutions, organize a holding company, issue stock and undertake certain other activities. In response to Massachusetts laws enacted in the last few years, the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks adopted rules that generally allow Massachusetts banks to engage in activities permissible for federally chartered banks or banks chartered by another state. The Commissioner also has adopted procedures reducing regulatory burdens and expense and expediting branching by well-capitalized and well-managed banks.
Investment Activities. In general, Massachusetts-chartered savings banks may invest in preferred and common stock of any corporation organized under the laws of the United States or any state provided such investments do not involve control of any corporation and do not, in the aggregate, exceed 4.0% of the bank’s deposits. Massachusetts-chartered savings banks may in addition invest an amount equal to 1.0% of their deposits in stocks of Massachusetts corporations or companies with substantial employment in Massachusetts which have pledged to the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks that such monies will be used for further development within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts. However, these powers are constrained by federal law. See “—Federal Bank Regulation—Investment Activities” for federal restrictions on equity investments.
Loans-to-One-Borrower Limitations. Massachusetts banking law grants broad lending authority. However, with certain limited exceptions, total obligations of one borrower to a bank may not exceed 20.0% of the total of the bank’s capital.
Loans to a Bank’s Insiders. The Massachusetts banking laws prohibit any executive officer, director or trustee from borrowing, otherwise becoming indebted, or becoming liable for a loan or other extension of credit by such bank to any other person, except for any of the following loans or extensions of credit: (i) loans or extension of credit, secured or unsecured, to an officer of the bank in an amount not exceeding $100,000; (ii) loans or extensions of credit intended or secured for educational purposes to an officer of the bank in an amount not exceeding $200,000; (iii) loans or extensions of credit secured by a mortgage on residential real estate to be occupied in whole or in part by the officer to whom the loan or extension of credit is made, in an amount not exceeding $750,000; and (iv) loans or extensions of credit to a director or trustee of the bank who is not also an officer of the bank in an amount permissible under the bank’s loan to one borrower limit.
The loans listed above require approval of the majority of the members of the Company’s Board of Directors, excluding any member involved in the loan or extension of credit. No such loan or extension of credit may be granted with an interest rate or other terms that are preferential in comparison to loans granted to persons not affiliated with the savings bank.
Dividends. A Massachusetts stock bank may declare from net profits cash dividends not more frequently than quarterly and non-cash dividends at any time. No dividends may be declared, credited or paid if the bank’s capital stock is impaired. The approval of the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks is required if the total of all dividends declared in any calendar year exceeds the total of its net profits for that year combined with its retained net profits of the preceding two years. Net profits for this purpose means the remainder of all earnings from current operations plus actual recoveries on loans and investments and other assets after deducting from the total thereof all current operating expenses, actual losses, accrued dividends on preferred stock, if any, and all federal and state taxes.
Regulatory Enforcement Authority. Any Massachusetts bank that does not operate in accordance with the regulations, policies and directives of the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks may be subject to sanctions for non-compliance, including seizure of the property and business of the bank and suspension or revocation of its charter. The Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks may under certain circumstances suspend or remove officers or directors who have violated the law, conducted the bank’s business in a manner which is unsafe, unsound or contrary to the depositors interests or been negligent in the performance of their duties. In addition, upon finding that a bank has engaged in an unfair or deceptive act or practice, the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks may issue an order to cease and desist and impose a fine on the bank concerned. Finally, Massachusetts consumer protection and civil rights statutes applicable to Hampden Bank permit private individual and class action law suits and provide for the rescission of consumer transactions, including loans, and the recovery of statutory and punitive damage and attorney’s fees in the case of certain violations of those statutes.
Depositors Insurance Fund of Massachusetts. All Massachusetts-chartered savings banks are required to be members of the DIF, a corporation that insures savings bank deposits in excess of federal deposit insurance coverage. The DIF is authorized to charge savings banks an annual assessment of up to 1/50th of 1.0% of a savings bank’s deposit balances in excess of amounts insured by the FDIC.
Protection of Personal Information: Massachusetts has adopted regulatory requirements intended to protect personal information. The requirements, which became effective March 1, 2010, are similar to existing federal laws such as the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act, discussed below under “— Federal Regulations — Privacy Requirements”, that require organizations to establish written information security programs to prevent identity theft. However, unlike federal regulations, the Massachusetts regulation also contains technology system requirements, especially for the encryption of personal information sent over wireless or public networks or stored on portable devices.
Federal Bank Regulation
Capital Requirements. Under FDIC regulations, federally insured state-chartered banks that are not members of the Federal Reserve System (“state non-member banks”), such as Hampden Bank, are required to comply with minimum leverage capital requirements. For an institution determined by the FDIC to not be anticipating or experiencing significant growth and to be, in general, a strong banking organization rated composite 1 under Uniform Financial Institutions Ranking System established by the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council, the minimum capital leverage requirement is a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3.0%. For all other institutions, the minimum leverage capital ratio is not less than 4.0%. Tier 1 capital is the sum of common stockholder’s equity, noncumulative perpetual preferred stock (including any related retained earnings) and minority investments in certain subsidiaries, less intangible assets (except for certain servicing rights and credit card relationships) and certain other specified items.
The FDIC regulations require state non-member banks to maintain certain levels of regulatory capital in relation to regulatory risk-weighted assets. The ratio of regulatory capital to regulatory risk-weighted assets is referred to as a bank’s “risk-based capital ratio.” Risk-based capital ratios are determined by allocating assets and specified off-balance sheet items (including recourse obligations, direct credit substitutes and residual interests) to four risk-weighted categories ranging from 0.0% to 100.0%, with higher levels of capital being required for the categories perceived as representing greater risk. For example, under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s risk-weighting system, cash and securities backed by the full faith and credit of the U.S. government are given a 0.0% risk weight, loans secured by one- to four-family residential properties generally have a 50.0% risk weight, and commercial loans have a risk weighting of 100.0%.
State non-member banks must maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.0%, of which at least one-half must be Tier 1 capital. Total capital consists of Tier 1 capital plus Tier 2 or supplementary capital items, which include allowances for loan losses in an amount of up to 1.25% of risk-weighted assets, cumulative preferred stock and certain other capital instruments, and a portion of the net unrealized gain on equity securities. The includable amount of Tier 2 capital cannot exceed the amount of the institution’s Tier 1 capital. Banks that engage in specified levels of trading activities are subject to adjustments in their risk based capital calculation to ensure the maintenance of sufficient capital to support market risk. Further, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, along with the other federal banking agencies, has adopted a regulation providing that the agencies will take into account the exposure of a bank’s capital and economic value to changes in interest rate risk in assessing a bank’s capital adequacy. The FDIC also has authority to establish individual minimum capital requirements in appropriate cases upon determination that an institution’s capital level is, or is likely to become, inadequate in light of the particular circumstances.
Standards for Safety and Soundness. As required by statute, the federal banking agencies adopted final regulations and Interagency Guidelines Establishing Standards for Safety and Soundness to implement safety and soundness standards. The guidelines set forth the safety and soundness standards that the federal banking agencies use to identify and address problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. The guidelines address internal controls and information systems, internal audit system, credit underwriting, loan documentation, interest rate exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings and compensation, fees and benefits. Most recently, the agencies have established standards for safeguarding customer information. If the appropriate federal banking agency determines that an institution fails to meet any standard prescribed by the guidelines, the agency may require the institution to submit to the agency an acceptable plan to achieve compliance with the standard.
Investment Activities. Since the enactment of the FDIC Improvement Act, all state-chartered Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation-insured banks, including savings banks, have generally been limited in their investment activities to principal and equity investments of the type and in the amount authorized for national banks, notwithstanding state law. FDIC Improvement Act and the FDIC regulations permit exceptions to these limitations. For example, state chartered banks may, with FDIC approval, continue to exercise state authority to invest in common or preferred stocks listed on a national securities exchange or the NASDAQ Global Market and in the shares of an investment company registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended. The maximum permissible investment is 100.0% of Tier 1 Capital, as specified by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s regulations, or the maximum amount permitted by Massachusetts law, whichever is less. Hampden Bank received approval from the FDIC to retain and acquire such equity instruments equal to the lesser of 100% of Hampden Banks’ Tier 1 capital or the maximum permissible amount specified by Massachusetts law. Any such grandfathered authority may be terminated upon the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation’s determination that such investments pose a safety and soundness risk or upon the occurrence of certain events such as the savings bank’s conversion to a different charter. In addition, the FDIC is authorized to permit such institutions to engage in state authorized activities or investments not permissible for national banks (other than non-subsidiary equity investments) if they meet all applicable capital requirements and it is determined that such activities or investments do not pose a significant risk to Hampden Bank Insurance Fund. The FDIC has adopted regulations governing the procedures for institutions seeking approval to engage in such activities or investments. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 specifies that a non-member bank may control a subsidiary that engages in activities as principal that would only be permitted for a national bank to conduct in a “financial subsidiary” if a bank meets specified conditions and deducts its investment in the subsidiary for regulatory capital purposes.
Prompt Corrective Regulatory Action. Federal law requires, among other things, that federal bank regulatory authorities take “prompt corrective action” with respect to banks that do not meet minimum capital requirements. For these purposes, the law establishes five capital categories: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. As of June 30, 2013, the most recent notification from the FDIC categorized Hampden Bank 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 Hampden Bank’s category.
The FDIC has adopted regulations to implement the prompt corrective action legislation. An institution is deemed to be “well capitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0% or greater and a leverage ratio of 5.0% or greater. An institution is “adequately capitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.0% or greater, and generally a leverage ratio of 4.0% or greater. An institution is “undercapitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 8.0%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4.0%, or generally a leverage ratio of less than 4.0%. An institution is deemed to be “significantly undercapitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 6.0%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 3.0%, or a leverage ratio of less than 3.0%. An institution is considered to be “critically undercapitalized” if it has a ratio of tangible equity (as defined in the regulations) to total assets that is equal to or less than 2.0%.
“Undercapitalized” banks must adhere to growth, capital distribution (including dividend) and other limitations and are required to submit a capital restoration plan. A bank’s compliance with such a plan is required to be guaranteed by any company that controls the undercapitalized institution in an amount equal to the lesser of 5.0% of the institution’s total assets when deemed undercapitalized or the amount necessary to achieve the status of adequately capitalized. If an “undercapitalized” bank fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it is ”significantly undercapitalized.” “Significantly undercapitalized” banks must comply with one or more of a number of additional restrictions, including but not limited to an order by the FDIC to sell sufficient voting stock to become adequately capitalized, requirements to reduce total assets, cease receipt of deposits from correspondent banks or dismiss directors or officers, and restrictions on interest rates paid on deposits, compensation of executive officers and capital distributions by the parent holding company. “Critically undercapitalized” institutions are subject to additional measures including, subject to a narrow exception, the appointment of a receiver or conservator within 270 days after it obtains such status.
Transaction with Affiliates and Regulation W of the Federal Reserve Regulations. Transactions between banks and their affiliates are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act. An affiliate of a bank is any company or entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the bank. In a holding company context, the parent bank holding company and any companies which are controlled by such parent holding company are affiliates of the bank. Generally, Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W (i) limit the extent to which the bank or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10.0% of such institution’s capital stock and retained earnings, and contain an aggregate limit on all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20.0% of such institution’s capital stock and retained earnings and (ii) require that all such transactions be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable, to the institution or subsidiary as those provided to a non-affiliate. The term “covered transaction” includes the making of loans, purchase of assets, issuance of a guarantee and other similar transactions. In addition, loans or other extensions of credit by the financial institution to the affiliate are required to be collateralized in accordance with the requirements set forth in Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act amended several provisions of Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act. The amendments provide that so-called “financial subsidiaries” of banks are treated as affiliates for purposes of Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act, but the amendment provides that (i) the 10.0% capital limit on transactions between the bank and such financial subsidiary as an affiliate is not applicable, and (ii) the investment by the bank in the financial subsidiary does not include retained earnings in the financial subsidiary. Certain anti-evasion provisions have been included that relate to the relationship between any financial subsidiary of a bank and sister companies of the bank: (1) any purchase of, or investment in, the securities of a financial subsidiary by any affiliate of the parent bank is considered a purchase or investment by the bank; or (2) if the Federal Reserve Board determines that such treatment is necessary, any loan made by an affiliate of the parent bank to the financial subsidiary is to be considered a loan made by the parent bank. Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act was further amended by the Dodd-Frank Act to make the 10% capital limit applicable to transactions between a bank and its financial subsidiary, and repeals the retained earnings exclusion. Those amendments will become effective approximately two years after the date of enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act.
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 generally prohibits loans by a company to its executive officers and directors. However, the law contains a specific exception for loans by a depository institution to its executive officers and directors in compliance with federal banking laws. Under such laws, Hampden Bank’s authority to extend credit to executive officers, directors and 10% shareholders (“Insiders”) of Hampden Bancorp, Inc. and Hampden Bank, as well as entities such persons control, is limited. The law limits both the individual and aggregate amount of loans Hampden Bank may make to Insiders based, in part, on Hampden Bank’s capital position and requires certain board approval procedures to be followed. Such loans are required to be made on terms substantially the same as those offered to unaffiliated individuals and not involve more than the normal risk of repayment. There is an exception for loans made pursuant to a benefit or compensation program that is widely available to all employees of the institution and does not give preference to Insiders over other employees. Loans to executive officers are further limited by specific categories. The Dodd-Frank Act also further restricts loans to insiders and expands the types of transactions subject to the various limits, including derivative transactions, repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending or borrowing transactions.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires that the scope of “covered transactions” will be expanded to include derivative transactions to the extent they result in credit exposure to an affiliate and securities borrowing and lending transactions to the extent they result in credit exposure to any affiliate.
Enforcement. The FDIC has extensive enforcement authority over insured state savings banks, including Hampden Bank. This enforcement authority includes, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, issue cease and desist orders and remove directors and officers. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated in response to violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. The FDIC has authority under federal law to appoint a conservator or receiver for an insured bank under limited circumstances. The FDIC is required, with certain exceptions, to appoint a receiver or conservator for an insured state non-member bank if that bank was “critically undercapitalized” on average during the calendar quarter beginning 270 days after the date on which the institution became “critically undercapitalized.” The FDIC may also appoint itself as conservator or receiver for an insured state non-member institution under specific circumstances on the basis of the institution’s financial condition or upon the occurrence of other events, including: (1) insolvency; (2) substantial dissipation of assets or earnings through violations of law or unsafe or unsound practices; (3) existence of an unsafe or unsound condition to transact business; and (4) insufficient capital, or the incurring of losses that will deplete substantially all of the institution’s capital with no reasonable prospect of replenishment without federal assistance.
Deposit Insurance. Hampden Bank is a member of the Deposit Insurance Fund, which is administered by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). Deposit accounts in Hampden Bank are insured by the FDIC. In October 2008, the FDIC increased deposit insurance to a maximum of $250,000 per depositor. The Dodd-Frank Act has made this maximum of $250,000 in deposit insurance, which was to end on January 1, 2014, permanent. In addition, as a Massachusetts-chartered savings bank, Hampden Bank is required to be member of the Massachusetts Depositors Insurance Fund, a corporation that insures savings bank deposits in excess of federal deposit insurance coverage.
Federal law requires that the designated reserve ratio for the deposit insurance fund to be established by the FDIC. The Dodd-Frank Act increased the minimum reserve ratio to 1.35% from 1.15%, and the FDIC has been instructed to offset the effect of this increase on institutions with less than $10 billion in assets. If this reserve ratio drops below 1.35%, the FDIC must, within 90 days, establish and implement a plan to restore the designated reserve ratio to 1.35% of estimated insured deposits within five years. The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated the 1.5% maximum reserve ratio, leaving it to be set by the FDIC in its discretion. The FDIC has established a long term maximum reserve ratio of 2%.
The FDIC imposes an assessment for deposit insurance on all depository institutions. Beginning in the second quarter of 2009, institutions are assigned an initial base assessment rate ranging from 5 to 35 basis points of deposits depending on risk category. The initial base assessment is then adjusted based upon the level of unsecured debt, secured liabilities, and brokered deposits to establish a total base assessment rate ranging from 2.5 to 45 basis points. In February 2011, the FDIC published a final rule under the Dodd-Frank Act to reform the deposit insurance assessment system. The rule redefines the assessment base used for calculating deposit insurance assessments effective April 1, 2011. Under the new rule, assessments will be based on an institution’s average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity as opposed to total deposits. Since the new base will be much larger than the current base, the FDIC also lowered assessment rates so that the total amount of revenue collected from the industry will not be significantly altered. The new rule is expected to benefit smaller financial institutions, which typically rely more on deposits for funding, and shift more of the burden for supporting the insurance fund to larger institutions, which have greater access to non-deposit sources of funding.
On November 12, 2009, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation approved a final rule requiring insured depository institutions to prepay on December 30, 2009, their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009, and for all of 2010, 2011, and 2012. Estimated assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010 are based upon the assessment rate in effect on September 30, 2009, with three basis points added for the 2011 and 2012 assessment rates. In addition, a 5% annual growth in the assessment base is assumed. Prepaid assessments are to be applied against the actual quarterly assessments until exhausted, and may not be applied to any special assessments that may occur in the future. Any unused prepayments will be returned to the institution on June 30, 2013. On December 30, 2009, the Bank prepaid $2.0 million in estimated assessment fees for years 2010 through 2012. Because the prepaid assessments represent the prepayment of future expense, they do not affect our regulatory capital (the prepaid asset will have a risk-weighting of 0%) or tax obligations.
Insurance of deposits may be terminated by the FDIC upon a finding that an institution has engaged in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC. We do not know of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of Hampden Bank’s deposit insurance.
In addition to the FDIC assessments, the Financing Corporation (“FICO”) is authorized to impose and collect, with the approval of the FDIC, assessments for anticipated payments, issuance costs and custodial fees on bonds issued by the FICO in the 1980s to recapitalize the former Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. The bonds issued by the FICO are due to mature in 2017 through 2019. For the quarter ended June 30, 2013, the annualized FICO assessment was equal to 0.64 basis points for each $100 in domestic deposits maintained at an institution.
Privacy Regulations. Pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the FDIC has published final regulations implementing the privacy protection provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act. The regulations generally require that Hampden Bank disclose its privacy policy, including identifying with whom it shares a customer’s “non-public personal information,” to customers at the time of establishing the customer relationship and annually thereafter. In addition, Hampden Bank is required to provide its customers with the ability to “opt-out” of having their personal information shared with unaffiliated third parties and not to disclose account numbers or access codes to non-affiliated third parties for marketing purposes. Hampden Bank currently has a privacy protection policy in place and believes that such policy is in compliance with the regulations.
Customer Information Security. The FDIC and other bank regulatory agencies have adopted guidelines for establishing standards for safeguarding nonpublic personal information about customers that implement provisions of the Gramm-Leach Bliley Act (“Information Security Guidelines”). Among other things, the Information Security Guidelines require each financial institution, under the supervision and ongoing oversight of its Board of Directors or an appropriate committee thereof, to develop, implement and maintain a comprehensive written information security program designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information, to protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information and to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. In April 2005, the FDIC and other bank regulatory agencies issued further guidance for the establishment of these Information Security Guidelines, requiring financial institutions to develop and implement response programs designed to address incidents of unauthorized access to sensitive customer information maintained by the financial institution or its service provider, including customer notification procedures. Hampden Bank currently has Information Security Guidelines in place and believes that such guidelines are in compliance with the regulations.
Community Reinvestment Act. Under the Community Reinvestment Act (the “CRA”) as amended and as implemented by FDIC regulations, a bank has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with its safe and sound operation, to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community, consistent with the CRA. The CRA does require the FDIC, in connection with its examination of a bank, to assess the institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community and to take such record into account in its evaluation of certain applications by such institution, including applications to acquire branches and other financial institutions. The CRA requires the FDIC to provide a written evaluation of an institution’s CRA performance utilizing a four-tiered descriptive rating system. Hampden Bank’s latest FDIC CRA rating was “Outstanding.”
Massachusetts has its own statutory counterpart to the CRA which is also applicable to Hampden Bank. The Massachusetts version is generally similar to the CRA but utilizes a five-tiered descriptive rating system. Massachusetts law requires the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks to consider, but not be limited to, a bank’s record of performance under Massachusetts law in considering any application by the bank to establish a branch or other deposit- taking facility, to relocate an office or to merge or consolidate with or acquire the assets and assume the liabilities of any other banking institution. Hampden Bank’s most recent rating under Massachusetts law was “Outstanding.”
Consumer Protection and Fair Lending Regulations. Massachusetts savings banks are subject to a variety of federal and Massachusetts statutes and regulations that are intended to protect consumers and prohibit discrimination in the granting of credit. These statutes and regulations provide for a range of sanctions for non-compliance with their terms, including imposition of administrative fines and remedial orders, and referral to the Attorney General for prosecution of a civil action for actual and punitive damages and injunctive relief. Certain of these statutes authorize private individual and class action lawsuits and the award of actual, statutory and punitive damages and attorneys’ fees for certain types of violations.
Anti-Money Laundering
The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (referred to as the “USA PATRIOT Act”) significantly expands the responsibilities of financial institutions, including savings and banks, in preventing the use of the U.S. financial system to fund terrorist activities. Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act provides for a significant overhaul of the U.S. anti-money laundering regime. Among other provisions, Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act requires financial institutions operating in the United States to develop new anti-money laundering compliance programs, due diligence policies and controls to ensure the detection and reporting of money laundering. Such required compliance programs are intended to supplement existing compliance requirements, also applicable to financial institutions, under the Bank Secrecy Act and the Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulations.
Other Regulations
Interest and other charges collected or contracted for by Hampden Bank are subject to state usury laws and federal laws concerning interest rates. Hampden Bank’s loan operations are also subject to state and federal laws applicable to credit transactions, such as the:
• Home Mortgage Disclosure Act of 1975, requiring financial institutions to provide information to enable the public and public officials to determine whether a financial institution is fulfilling its obligation to help meet the housing needs of the community it serves;
• Equal Credit Opportunity Act, prohibiting discrimination on the basis of race, creed or other prohibited factors in extending credit;
• Fair Credit Reporting Act of 1978, governing the use and provision of information to credit reporting agencies;
• Massachusetts Debt Collection Regulations, establishing standards, by defining unfair or deceptive acts or practices, for the collection of debts from persons within the Commonwealth of Massachusetts;
• General Laws of Massachusetts, Chapter 167E, which governs Hampden Bank’s lending powers; and
• Rules and regulations of the various federal and state agencies charged with the responsibility of implementing such federal and state laws.
The deposit operations of Hampden Bank also are subject to, among others, the:
• Right to Financial Privacy Act, which imposes a duty to maintain confidentiality of consumer financial records and prescribes procedures for complying with administrative subpoenas of financial records;
• Electronic Funds Transfer Act and Regulation E promulgated thereunder, as well as Chapter 167B of the General Laws of Massachusetts, which govern automatic deposits to and withdrawals from deposit accounts and customers’ rights and liabilities arising from the use of automated teller machines and other electronic banking services;
• Check Clearing for the 21st Century Act (also known as “Check 21”), which gives “substitute checks,” such as digital check images and copies made from that image, the same legal standing as the original paper check; and
• General Laws of Massachusetts, Chapter 167D, which governs the Hampden Bank’s deposit powers.
In many cases, Massachusetts has similar statutes to those under federal law that will be applicable to Hampden Bank.
Federal Reserve System
The Federal Reserve Board regulations require depository institutions to maintain non-interest-earning reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). The Federal Reserve Board regulations generally require that reserves be maintained against aggregate transaction accounts as follows: for that portion of transaction accounts aggregating $71.0 million or less (which may be adjusted by the Federal Reserve Board) the reserve requirement is 3.0%; and for amounts greater than $71.0 million, the reserve requirement is 10.0% (which may be adjusted by the Federal Reserve Board between 8.0% and 14.0%), of the amount in excess of $71.0 million. The first $11.5 million of otherwise reservable balances (which may be adjusted by the Federal Reserve Board) are exempted from the reserve requirements. Hampden Bank is in compliance with these requirements.
Federal Home Loan Bank System
Hampden Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, which consists of 12 regional Federal Home Loan Banks. The Federal Home Loan Bank provides a central credit facility primarily for member institutions. Members of the Federal Home Loan Bank are required to acquire and hold shares of capital stock in the Federal Home Loan Bank. Hampden Bank was in compliance with this requirement with an investment in stock of the FHLB at June 30, 2012 of $5.0 million.
The Federal Home Loan Banks are required to provide funds for certain purposes including the resolution of insolvent thrifts in the late 1980s and to contributing funds for affordable housing programs. These requirements could reduce the amount of dividends that the Federal Home Loan Banks pay to their members and result in the Federal Home Loan Banks imposing a higher rate of interest on advances to their members. If dividends were reduced, or interest on future Federal Home Loan Bank advances increased, a member bank affected by such reduction or increase would likely experience a reduction in its net interest income. Recent legislation has changed the structure of the Federal Home Loan Banks’ funding obligations for insolvent thrifts, revised the capital structure of the Federal Home Loan Banks and implemented entirely voluntary membership for Federal Home Loan Banks. Further, there can be no assurance that the impact of recent or future legislation on the Federal Home Loan Banks also will not cause a decrease in the value of the FHLB stock held by Hampden Bank.
Holding Company Regulation
Hampden Bancorp, Inc. is subject to examination, regulation, and periodic reporting under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, as administered by the Federal Reserve Board. Hampden Bancorp, Inc. is required to obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board to acquire all, or substantially all, of the assets of any bank or holding company. Prior Federal Reserve Board approval would be required for Hampden Bancorp, Inc. to acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting securities of any bank or holding company if, after such acquisition, it would, directly or indirectly, own or control more than 5% of any class of voting shares of the bank or bank holding company. In addition to the approval of the Federal Reserve Board, before any bank acquisition can be completed, prior approval must also be required to be obtained from other agencies having supervisory jurisdiction over the bank to be acquired.
A bank holding company is generally prohibited from engaging in, or acquiring, direct or indirect control of more than 5% of the voting securities of any company engaged in non-banking activities. One of the principal exceptions to this prohibition is for activities found by the Federal Reserve Board to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Some of the principal activities that the Federal Reserve Board has determined by regulation to be so closely related to banking are: (i) making or servicing loans; (ii) performing certain data processing services; (iii) providing discount brokerage services; (iv) acting as fiduciary, investment or financial advisor; (v) leasing personal or real property; (vi) making investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare; and (vii) acquiring a savings and loan association.
The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 authorizes a bank holding company that meets specified conditions, including being “well capitalized” and “well managed,” to opt to become a “financial holding company” and thereby engage in a broader array of financial activities than previously permitted. Such activities can include insurance underwriting and investment banking.
Hampden Bancorp, Inc. is subject to the Federal Reserve Board’s capital adequacy guidelines for bank holding companies (on a consolidated basis) substantially similar to those of the FDIC for Hampden Bank. The Dodd-Frank Act requires federal bank regulators to establish minimum leverage and risk based capital requirements for insured depository institutions. Such requirements have not been established. It also provides that minimum capital levels applicable to insured institutions will be applied to bank holding companies. As a result, trust preferred stock will no longer be deemed Tier 1 capital for bank holding companies with over $500 million in assets.
A bank holding company is generally required to give the Federal Reserve Board prior written notice of any purchase or redemption of then outstanding equity securities if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when combined with the net consideration paid for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding 12 months, is equal to 10% or more of the company’s consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve Board may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe and unsound practice, or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve Board order or directive, or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve Board. The Federal Reserve Board has adopted an exception to this approval requirement for well-capitalized bank holding companies that meet certain other conditions.
The Federal Reserve Board has issued a policy statement regarding the payment of dividends by bank holding companies. In general, the Federal Reserve Board’s policies provide that dividends should be paid only out of current earnings and only if the prospective rate of earnings retention by the bank holding company appears consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. The Federal Reserve Board’s policies also require that a bank holding company serve as a source of financial strength to its subsidiary banks by standing ready to use available resources to provide adequate capital funds to those banks during periods of financial stress or adversity and by maintaining the financial flexibility and capital-raising capacity to obtain additional resources for assisting its subsidiary banks where necessary. Under the prompt corrective action laws, the ability of a bank holding company to pay dividends may be restricted if a subsidiary bank becomes undercapitalized. These regulatory policies could affect the ability of Hampden Bancorp, Inc. to pay dividends or otherwise engage in capital distributions.
Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, depository institutions are liable to the FDIC for losses suffered or anticipated by the FDIC in connection with the default of a commonly controlled depository institution or any assistance provided by the FDIC to such an institution in danger of default. This law would have potential applicability if Hampden Bancorp, Inc. ever held as a separate subsidiary a depository institution in addition to Hampden Bank.
Hampden Bancorp, Inc. and Hampden Bank will be affected by the monetary and fiscal policies of various agencies of the United States Government, including the Federal Reserve System. In view of changing conditions in the national economy and in the money markets, it is impossible for management to accurately predict future changes in monetary policy or the effect of such changes on the business or financial condition of Hampden Bancorp, Inc. or Hampden Bank.
The status of Hampden Bancorp, Inc. as a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act will not exempt it from certain federal and state laws and regulations applicable to corporations generally, including, without limitation, certain provisions of the federal securities laws.
Massachusetts Holding Company Regulation. Under the Massachusetts banking laws, a company owning or controlling two or more banking institutions, including a savings bank, is regulated as a bank holding company. The term “company” is defined by the Massachusetts banking laws similarly to the definition of “company” under the Bank Holding Company Act. Each Massachusetts bank holding company: (i) must obtain the approval of the Massachusetts Board of Bank Incorporation before engaging in certain transactions, such as the acquisition of more than 5% of the voting stock of another banking institution; (ii) must register, and file reports, with the Division; and (iii) is subject to examination by the Division. Hampden Bancorp, Inc. would become a Massachusetts bank holding company if it acquires a second banking institution and holds and operates it separately from Hampden Bank.
Federal Securities Laws. Our common stock is registered with the SEC under Section 12(b) of the Exchange Act. We are subject to information, proxy solicitation, insider trading restrictions, and other requirements under the Exchange Act.
FEDERAL AND STATE TAXATION
Federal Income Taxation
General. The Company reports its income using the accrual method of accounting. The federal income tax laws apply to the Company in the same manner as to other corporations with some exceptions, including the reserve for bad debts discussed below. The following discussion of tax matters is intended only as a summary and does not purport to be a comprehensive description of the tax rules applicable to the Company. Hampden Bank currently files a consolidated federal income tax return with Hampden Bancorp, Inc. Hampden Bank's federal income tax returns have been either audited or closed under the statute of limitations through October 31, 2008. For its 2012 tax year, Hampden Bank's maximum federal income tax rate was 34%.
Bad Debt Reserves. For taxable years beginning before January 1, 1996, thrift institutions that qualified under certain definitional tests and other conditions of the Internal Revenue Code were permitted to use certain favorable provisions to calculate their deductions from taxable income for annual additions to their bad debt reserve. A reserve could be established for bad debts on qualifying real property loans, generally secured by interests in real property improved or to be improved, under the percentage of taxable income method or the experience method. The reserve for nonqualifying loans was computed using the experience method. Federal legislation enacted in 1996 repealed the reserve method of accounting for bad debts and the percentage of taxable income method for tax years beginning after 1995 and required savings institutions to recapture or take into income certain portions of their accumulated bad debt reserves. However, those bad debt reserves accumulated prior to 1988 ("Base Year Reserves") were not required to be recaptured unless the savings institution failed certain tests. Approximately $1.5 million of Hampden Bank's accumulated bad debt reserves would not be recaptured into taxable income unless Hampden Bank makes a "non-dividend distribution" to Hampden Bancorp, Inc. as described below.
Distributions. If Hampden Bank makes "non-dividend distributions" to Hampden Bancorp, Inc., the distributions will be considered to have been made from Hampden Bank's unrecaptured tax bad debt reserves, including the balance of its Base Year Reserves as of October 31, 1987, to the extent of the "non-dividend distributions," and then from Hampden Bank's supplemental reserve for losses on loans, to the extent of those reserves, and an amount based on the amount distributed, but not more than the amount of those reserves, will be included in Hampden Bank's taxable income. Non-dividend distributions include distributions in excess of Hampden Bank's current and accumulated earnings and profits, as calculated for federal income tax purposes, distributions in redemption of stock and distributions in partial or complete liquidation. Dividends paid out of Hampden Bank's current or accumulated earnings and profits will not be so included in Hampden Bancorp, Inc.'s taxable income.
The amount of additional taxable income triggered by a non-dividend is an amount that, when reduced by the tax attributable to the income, is equal to the amount of the distribution. Therefore, if Hampden Bank makes a non-dividend distribution to Hampden Bancorp, Inc. approximately one and one-half times the amount of the distribution not in excess of the amount of the reserves would be includable in income for federal income tax purposes, assuming a 34% federal corporate income tax rate. Hampden Bank does not intend to pay dividends that would result in a recapture of any portion of its bad debt reserves.
State Taxation
Prior to tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2009, financial institutions in Massachusetts were not allowed to file consolidated income tax returns. Instead, each entity in the consolidated group files a separate annual income tax return. The Massachusetts excise tax rate for savings banks is currently 9.0% of federal taxable income, adjusted for certain items. Taxable income includes gross income as defined under the Internal Revenue Code, plus interest from bonds, notes and evidences of indebtedness of any state, including Massachusetts, less deductions, but not the credits, allowable under the provisions of the Internal Revenue Code, except for those deductions relating to dividends received and income or franchise taxes imposed by a state or political subdivision. Carryforwards and carrybacks of net operating losses and capital losses are not allowed.
On July 3, 2008, the Commonwealth of Massachusetts enacted a law that included reducing the tax rate on net income applicable to financial institutions. As a result, the rate has dropped to 10.0% for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2010, 9.5% for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2011, and to 9.0% for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2012 and thereafter. Also, for the years beginning on or after January 1, 2009, the new law requires all unitary members of a consolidated group, except those with Massachusetts Security Corporation status, to file a combined corporation excise tax return. The Company continues to analyze the impact of this law change, however, it is not expected to have a material effect on the financial statements.
The Company's state tax returns, as well as those of its subsidiaries, are not currently under audit.
A financial institution or business corporation is generally entitled to special tax treatment as a "security corporation" under Massachusetts law provided that: (a) its activities are limited to buying, selling, dealing in or holding securities on its own behalf and not as a broker; and (b) it has applied for, and received, classification as a "security corporation" by the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue. A security corporation that is also a bank holding company under the Internal Revenue Code must pay a tax equal to 0.33% of its gross income. A security corporation that is not a bank holding company under the Internal Revenue Code must pay a tax equal to 1.32% of its gross income. Hampden Investment Corporation requested and was approved to be classified as a security corporation. The classification is in effect until revoked by the Commissioner of the Massachusetts Department of Revenue in writing or revoked by conducting any activities deemed impermissible under the governing statutes and the various regulations, directives, letter rulings and administrative pronouncements issued by the Massachusetts Department of Revenue. In order to qualify as a security corporation, the Company established a subsidiary for the purpose of making the loan to the employee stock ownership plan, because making such a loan directly would disqualify it from classification as a security corporation.
Delaware Taxation. As a Delaware holding company not earning income in Delaware, the Company is exempt from Delaware corporate income tax but is required to file an annual report with and pay an annual franchise tax to the State of Delaware.
The following risk factors are relevant to our future results and financial success, and should be read with care.
Our continued emphasis on commercial lending may expose us to increased lending risks.
At June 30, 2013, our loan portfolio consisted of $167.4 million, or 37.0%, of commercial real estate loans, $43.6 million, or 9.6%, of commercial business loans and $21.2 million, or 4.7%, of commercial construction loans. We have grown these loan portfolios in recent years and intend to continue to grow commercial real estate and commercial business loans. Commercial real estate loans generally expose a lender to greater risk of non-payment and loss than one- to four-family residential real estate loans because repayment of the loans often depends on the successful operation of the property. Commercial business loans expose us to additional risks because they typically are made on the basis of the borrower's ability to make repayments from the cash flow of the borrower's business and are secured by non-real estate collateral that may depreciate over time. In addition, because commercial business loans generally entail greater risk than one- to four-family residential real estate loans, we may need to increase our allowance for loan losses in the future to account for the likely increase in probable incurred credit losses associated with the growth of such loans. Also, many of our commercial borrowers have more than one loan outstanding with us. Consequently, an adverse development with respect to one loan or one credit relationship can expose us to a significantly greater risk of loss compared to an adverse development with respect to a one- to four-family residential real estate loan. Commercial construction loans primarily include construction to permanent non-speculative real estate loans. The underlying cash flows generated by the properties are adversely impacted by a downturn in the economy, which in turn, will have an effect on the credit quality in this segment. Additionally, risk of loss is impacted by the accuracy of the initial estimate of the property’s rate of absorption, value and the estimated cost of construction.
Our risk management policies, procedures and techniques may not be completely effective.
Our risk management framework seeks to mitigate risk and appropriately balance risk and return. We have established policies and procedures intended to identify, monitor and manage the types of risk to which we are subject, including credit risk, market risk, liquidity risk, operational risk and reputational risk. Although we have devoted significant resources to develop our risk management policies and procedures and expect to continue to do so in the future, these policies and procedures, as well as our risk management techniques, may not be fully effective. In addition, as regulations and markets in which we operate continue to evolve, our risk management framework may not always keep sufficient pace with those changes. If our risk management framework does not effectively identify or mitigate our risks, we could suffer unexpected losses and could be materially adversely affected. Management of our risks in some cases depends upon the use of analytical and/or forecasting models. If the models we use to mitigate these risks are inadequate, we may incur increased losses. In addition, there may be risks that exist, or that develop in the future, that we have not appropriately anticipated, identified or mitigated.
Our investment portfolio may suffer reduced returns, material losses or other-than-temporary impairment losses.
During an economic downturn, our investment portfolio could be subject to higher risk. The value of our investment portfolio is subject to the risk that certain investments may default or become impaired due to a deterioration in the financial condition of one or more issuers of the securities held in the Company’s portfolio, or due to a deterioration in the financial condition of an issuer that guarantees an issuer’s payments of such investments. Such defaults and impairments could reduce the Company’s net investment income and result in realized investment losses.
The Company’s investment portfolio is also subject to increased risk as the valuation of investments is more subjective when markets are illiquid, thereby increasing the risk that the estimated fair value (i.e. the carrying amount) of the portion of the investment portfolio that is carried at fair value as reflected in the Company’s financial statements is not reflective of prices at which actual transactions would occur.
Because of the risks set forth above, the value of the Company’s investment portfolio could decrease, the Company could experience reduced net investment income, and the Company could incur realized investment losses, which could materially and adversely affect the Company’s results of operations, financial position and liquidity.
Additionally, the Company reviews its securities portfolio at each quarter-end reporting period to determine whether the fair value is below the current carrying value. When the fair value of any of the Company’s securities has declined below its carrying value, the Company is required to assess whether the decline is other-than-temporary. The Company is required to write-down the value of that security through a charge to earnings if it concludes that the decline is other-than-temporary for credit related impairments on debt securities or the entire impairment on equity securities. As of June 30, 2013, the amortized cost and the fair value of the Company’s securities portfolio totaled $138.2 million and $138.7 million, respectively. Changes in the expected cash flows of these securities and/or prolonged price declines may result in the Company concluding in future periods that the impairment of these securities is other-than-temporary, which would require a charge to earnings to write-down equity securities to their fair value or debt securities to the extent of estimated credit loss. Any charges for other-than-temporary impairment would not impact cash flow, tangible capital or liquidity.
Certain interest rate movements may hurt our earnings and asset value.
Our profitability, like that of most financial institutions, depends primarily upon our net interest income, which is the difference between our gross interest income on interest-earning assets, such as loans and securities, and our interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowed funds. Accordingly, our results of operations and financial condition depend largely on movements in market interest rates and our ability to manage our interest-rate-sensitive assets and liabilities in response to these movements, including our adjustable-rate mortgage loans, which represent a large portion of our residential loan portfolio. Changes in interest rates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. For further discussion of how changes in interest rates could impact us, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations — Risk Management."
We are also subject to reinvestment risk relating to interest rate movements. Decreases in interest rates can result in increased prepayments of loans and mortgage-related securities, as borrowers refinance to reduce their borrowing costs. Under these circumstances, we are subject to reinvestment risk to the extent that we are not able to reinvest funds from such prepayments at rates that are comparable to the rates on the prepaid loans or securities. On the other hand, increases in interest rates on adjustable-rate mortgage loans result in larger mortgage payments due from borrowers, which could potentially increase our level of loan delinquencies and defaults.
The United States economy is not anticipated to grow quickly.
Nationally, the country suffered a significant recession beginning in 2007, which created significant job loss and sustained high unemployment rates, a drop in home values, and a major decline in the stock market. These factors created job losses (or replacement jobs at significantly lower pay rates) which made homeowners unable to support mortgage debt and unable to sell the property due to declining values which resulted in negative equity; long term unemployment furthered this cycle, and the decline in the stock market affected both savings and retirement funds. Further, the declining home values made it more difficult to refinance mortgages at market rates, which had reduced significantly, and the unstable housing market made it more difficult for people to move to areas with job potential. The Federal Reserve and Federal Government have had sustained, active economic stimulation programs, including a significant and sustained reduction in the discount rate, extensions of unemployment benefit claim periods for the long-term unemployed, and multiple programs to assist in refinancing of mortgage debt. The national economic landscape has been replicated across the country, to varying degrees, with higher unemployment, lower property values, and heavier reliance on social services. This, in turn, has placed an increased burden on State and local governments to manage budgets effectively and to cover increasing costs on lower tax revenues. At this point, the national economy appears to have stabilized, the stock market has been reaching new highs, and the housing values have stabilized, with significant increases in property values in some communities. While unemployment rates have been declining, there is an expectation that the decline will not continue at a strong pace despite job growth, as people begin to re-enter the job market, and there is recognition that many of the jobs created are lower wage and lower benefit service jobs which do not equate to the economic value of the jobs lost. Rising housing values are allowing people to either sell their homes, which facilitates relocating for better job opportunities, or moving into a less costly property better suited to current income levels. Long term mortgage rates have begun to rise which may dampen the housing market, but additional housing inventory is anticipated to come into the market, which is expected to maintain a pool of lower priced properties which are relatively more affordable.
We cannot predict the timing, strength or duration of the economic recovery. Negative developments in the financial services industry and the domestic and international credit markets may significantly affect the markets in which we do business, the market for and value of our loans and investments, and our ongoing operations, costs and profitability. Moreover, declines in the stock market in general, or stock values of financial institutions and their holding companies specifically, could adversely affect our stock performance.
Consumers reaching for higher yields may decrease our level of deposits.
Our level of deposits may be affected by consumers attempting to attain higher yielding investments, which may cause depositors to withdraw deposits and invest their funds in investments yielding higher rates. These consumer preferences may force us to pay higher interest rates to retain deposits and may constrain liquidity as we seek to meet funding needs caused by reduced deposit levels.
Strong competition within our market area could adversely affect our profits and growth.
We face intense competition both in making loans and attracting and retaining deposits. Price competition for loans and deposits might result in us earning less on our loans and paying more on our deposits, which will reduce our net interest income. There are many credit unions in Hampden County, which, as tax-exempt organizations, are able to offer higher rates on retail deposits than banks. Some of the institutions with which we compete have substantially greater resources and lending limits than we have and may offer services that we do not provide. We expect competition to increase in the future as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and the continuing trend of consolidation in the financial services industry. Due to the interventions of the federal government, some of the institutions that we compete with are receiving substantial federal financial support which may not be available to us. Many institutions have been allowed to convert to banking charters and to offer insured deposits for the first time. The federal government has guaranteed money market funds which traditionally compete with bank deposits. The federal government has offered significant guarantees of new debt issuance to some of our competitors to help them fund their operations. The federal government now controls Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and may operate directly as a competitor in some lending markets in the future. Emergency measures designed to support some of our competitors may provide no advantage to us or place us at a disadvantage. Emergency changes in deposit insurance, financial market regulation, bank regulation, and policy of the Federal Home Loan Bank system may all affect the competitive environment for us and other market participants. Our profitability depends upon our continued ability to compete successfully in our market area. For more information about our market area and the competition we face, see "Business—Market Area" and " Business—Competition."
A downturn in the local economy or a decline in real estate values could hurt our profits.
Nearly all of our real estate loans are secured by real estate in Hampden and Hampshire Counties. As a result of this concentration, a downturn in the local economy could cause significant increases in non-performing loans, which would hurt our profits. Additionally, a decrease in asset quality could require additions to our allowance for loan losses through increased provisions for loan losses, which would hurt our profits. A decline in real estate values could cause some of our mortgage loans to become inadequately collateralized, which would expose us to a greater risk of loss. In addition, because we have a significant amount of commercial real estate loans, decreases in tenant occupancy may also have a negative effect on the ability of many of our borrowers to make timely repayments on their loans, which would have an adverse impact on our earnings. For a discussion of our market area, see "Business—Market Area."
If our allowance for loan losses is not sufficient to cover actual loan losses, our earnings could decrease.
In the event that our loan customers do not repay their loans according to the terms of the loans, and the collateral securing the repayment of these loans is insufficient to cover any remaining loan balance, we could experience significant loan losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our operating results. We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectibility of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets, if any, serving as collateral for the repayment of our loans. As of June 30, 2013, our allowance for loan losses was $5.4 million, representing 1.20% of total loans and 136.06% of nonperforming loans as of that date. In determining the amount of our allowance for loan losses, we rely on our loan quality reviews, our experience and our evaluation of economic conditions, among other factors. If our assumptions are incorrect, our allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover probable losses inherent in our loan portfolio, which may require additions to our allowance. Our allowance may need to be increased further in the future due to our emphasis on loan growth and on increasing our portfolio of commercial business and commercial real estate loans. Any material additions to our allowance for loan losses would materially decrease our net income. In addition, bank regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or recognize further loan charge offs. Any such action might have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
We operate in a highly regulated environment and may be adversely affected by changes in law and regulations.
We are subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination. See "Business — Regulation and Supervision". Any change in the laws or regulations applicable to us, or in banking regulators' supervisory policies or examination procedures, whether by the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks, the FDIC, the Federal Reserve Board, other state or federal regulators, the United States Congress or the Massachusetts legislature could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. The FDIC may impose additional assessment fees which could negatively impact our earnings.
We are subject to regulations promulgated by the Massachusetts Division of Banks, as our chartering authority, and by the FDIC as the insurer of our deposits up to certain limits. We also belong to the Federal Home Loan Bank System and, as a member of such system, we are subject to certain limited regulations promulgated by the FHLB. In addition, currently the Federal Reserve Board regulates and oversees Hampden Bancorp, Inc., as a bank holding company. Additionally, we are subject to regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission as a publicly traded company.
This regulation and supervision limits the activities in which we may engage. The purpose of regulation and supervision is primarily to protect our depositors and borrowers and, in the case of FDIC regulation, the FDIC's insurance fund. Regulatory authorities have extensive discretion in the exercise of their supervisory and enforcement powers. They may, among other things, impose restrictions on the operation of a banking institution, the classification of assets by such institution and such institution's allowance for loan losses. Regulatory and law enforcement authorities also have wide discretion and extensive enforcement powers under various consumer protection and civil rights laws, including the Truth-in-Lending Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act and Massachusetts's deceptive acts and practices law. These laws also permit private individual and class action lawsuits and provide for the recovery of attorneys fees in certain instances. No assurance can be given that the foregoing regulations and supervision will not change so as to affect us adversely. Any change in such regulation and oversight, whether in the form of regulatory policy, regulations, or legislation, may have a material impact on our operations.
The potential exists for additional federal or state laws and regulations regarding lending and funding practices and liquidity standards, and bank regulatory agencies are expected to be active in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, including the expected issuance of many formal enforcement orders. Actions taken to date, as well as potential actions, may not have the beneficial effects that are intended, particularly with respect to the extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability currently being experienced. In addition, new law, regulations, and other regulatory changes will increase our Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation insurance premiums and may also increase our costs of regulatory compliance and of doing business, and otherwise affect our operations. New laws, regulations, and other regulatory changes, along with negative developments in the financial industry and the domestic and international credit markets, may significantly affect the markets in which we do business, the markets for and value of our loans and investments, and our ongoing operations, costs and profitability. Further, continue declines in the stock market in general, or for stock of financial institutions and their holding companies, could affect our stock performance.
The Dodd-Frank Act, among other things, created a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, tightened capital standards and resulted in new laws and regulations that are expected to increase our costs of operations.
The Dodd-Frank Act, signed into law on July 21, 2010, is significantly changing the bank regulatory structure and affecting the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new implementing rules and regulations, and to prepare numerous studies and reports for Congress. The federal agencies are given significant discretion in drafting the implementing rules and regulations, and consequently, many of the details and much of the impacts of the Dodd-Frank Act may not be known for many months or years.
The Dodd-Frank Act created a new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with broad powers to supervise and enforce consumer protection laws. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has broad rule-making authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to all banks and savings institutions, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive” acts and practices. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau has examination and enforcement authority over all banks with more than $10 billion in assets. Banks with $10 billion or less in assets will continue to be examined for compliance with the consumer laws by their primary bank regulators. The Dodd-Frank Act also weakens the federal preemption rules that have been applicable for national banks and federal savings associations, and gives state attorneys general the ability to enforce federal consumer protection laws.
The Dodd-Frank Act requires minimum leverage (Tier 1) and risk based capital requirements for bank and savings and loan holding companies that are no less than those applicable to banks, which will exclude certain instruments that previously have been eligible for inclusion by bank holding companies as Tier 1 capital, such as trust preferred securities.
It is difficult to predict at this time what specific impact the Dodd-Frank Act and the yet to be written implementing rules and regulations will have on community banks. However, it is expected that at a minimum they will increase our operating and compliance costs and could increase our interest expense.
Our information systems may experience an interruption or breach in security.
We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business. Any failure, interruption, or breach in security or operational integrity of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan, and other systems. While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of the failure, interruption, or security breach of our information systems, we cannot assure you that any such failures, interruptions, or security breaches will not occur or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. The occurrence of any failures, interruptions, or security breaches of our information systems could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
| Unresolved Staff Comments |
Not applicable.
