The table below provides an analysis of past due status as of June 30, 2011 (in thousands):
| | Past Due Loans (Accruing Interest) | | | | | | | | | Total | |
| | 30-59 days | | | 60-89 days | | | 90+ days | | | Total | | | Nonaccrual | | | Current | | | Loans | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Real estate: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Construction and land loans | | $ | 393 | | | $ | 24 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 417 | | | $ | 7,948 | | | $ | 27,717 | | | $ | 36,082 | |
Farmland | | | 365 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 365 | | | | 851 | | | | 29,070 | | | | 30,286 | |
1-4 family residential mortgage | | | 497 | | | | 56 | | | | - | | | | 553 | | | | 508 | | | | 55,819 | | | | 56,880 | |
Multifamily | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 3,479 | | | | 3,479 | |
Commercial | | | 1,733 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 1,733 | | | | 2,998 | | | | 68,117 | | | | 72,848 | |
Agriculture | | | 34 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 34 | | | | 1,468 | | | | 22,511 | | | | 24,013 | |
Commercial | | | 37 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 37 | | | | 1,371 | | | | 20,739 | | | | 22,147 | |
Consumer | | | 49 | | | | 14 | | | | - | | | | 63 | | | | 2 | | | | 13,962 | | | | 14,027 | |
States and political subdivisions | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 3,899 | | | | 3,899 | |
Other loans | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 94 | | | | 94 | |
Totals | | $ | 3,108 | | | $ | 94 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 3,202 | | | $ | 15,146 | | | $ | 245,407 | | | $ | 263,755 | |
The table below provides an analysis of past due status as of December 31, 2010 (in thousands):
| | Past Due Loans (Accruing Interest) | | | | | | | | | | |
| | 30-59 days | | | 60-89 days | | | 90+ days | | | Total | | | Nonaccrual | | | Current | | | Loans | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Real estate: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Construction and land loans | | $ | 860 | | | $ | 106 | | | $ | - | | | $ | 966 | | | $ | 8,966 | | | $ | 26,894 | | | $ | 36,826 | |
Farmland | | | 2,527 | | | | 18 | | | | 519 | | | | 3,064 | | | | 1,210 | | | | 25,996 | | | | 30,270 | |
1-4 family residential mortgage | | | 155 | | | | 51 | | | | - | | | | 206 | | | | 801 | | | | 57,336 | | | | 58,343 | |
Multifamily | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 3,082 | | | | 3,082 | |
Commercial | | | 880 | | | | 610 | | | | - | | | | 1,490 | | | | 2,803 | | | | 69,507 | | | | 73,800 | |
Agriculture | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 1,603 | | | | 11,031 | | | | 12,634 | |
Commercial | | | 119 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 119 | | | | 2,162 | | | | 27,132 | | | | 29,413 | |
Consumer | | | 100 | | | | 15 | | | | 19 | | | | 134 | | | | - | | | | 13,464 | | | | 13,598 | |
States and political subdivisions | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 3,735 | | | | 3,735 | |
Other loans | | | 1 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 1 | | | | - | | | | 69 | | | | 70 | |
Totals | | $ | 4,642 | | | $ | 800 | | | $ | 538 | | | $ | 5,980 | | | $ | 17,545 | | | $ | 238,246 | | | $ | 261,771 | |
NOTE 5 – Operating Segments
The Corporation operates in only one segment – commercial banking.
NOTE 6 – Stock Based Compensation
At June 30, 2011, the Corporation had two stock-based compensation plans. The 1998 Stock Option Plan and the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan are described more fully in Note 13 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010. The Corporation recognizes compensation expense for all stock based payments based upon the grant date fair value.
Stock Options
1998 Stock Option Plan
The following table represents stock option activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011:
| | | | | | | | | |
Options outstanding, beginning of period | | | 22,486 | | | | 16.15 | | | | |
Granted | | | — | | | | — | | | | |
Surrendered | | | — | | | | — | | | | |
Exercised | | | — | | | | — | | | | |
Options outstanding, end of period | | | 22,486 | | | | 16.15 | | | | 1.7 | |
Exercisable, end of period | | | 22,486 | | | | 16.15 | | | | 1.7 | |
There was no intrinsic value of option shares outstanding and exercisable for the periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
The 1998 Stock Option Plan expired pursuant to its terms effective December 22, 1998 and no additional awards will be made under such plan.
2007 Equity Incentive Plan
The following table represents stock option activity for the six months ended June 30, 2011:
| | | | | | | | | |
Options outstanding, beginning of period | | | 4,000 | | | $ | 14.85 | | | | 8.4 | |
Granted | | | — | | | | — | | | | | |
Surrendered | | | — | | | | — | | | | | |
Exercised | | | — | | | | — | | | | | |
Options outstanding, end of period | | | 4,000 | | | | 14.85 | | | | 7.9 | |
Exercisable, end of period | | | 2,400 | | | | 14.85 | | | | 7.9 | |
There was no intrinsic value of option shares outstanding and exercisable for the periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, respectively.
Restricted Stock
The following table represents restricted stock activity under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan for the six months ended June 30, 2011:
| | | | | | |
Shares under grant at beginning of period | | | 5,515 | | | | 16.65 | |
Granted | | | — | | | | — | |
Surrendered | | | — | | | | — | |
Vested | | | — | | | | — | |
Shares under grant at end of period | | | 5,515 | | | | 16.65 | |
Shares available for future stock grants to employees and directors under the 2007 Equity Incentive Plan of United Bancorporation of Alabama, Inc. were 293,843 at June 30, 2011.
As of June 30, 2011, there was $50,383 of total unrecognized compensation costs related to the nonvested share based compensation arrangements granted under the 1998 and 2007 Plans. That cost is expected to be recognized over a period of approximately 3 years.
NOTE 7 – Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The Corporation uses fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain assets and liabilities and to determine fair value disclosures. In accordance with the Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures topic (FASB ASC 820), the fair value of a financial instrument is the price that would be received to sell an asset or paid to transfer a liability in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date. Fair value is best determined based upon quoted market prices. However, in many instances, there are no quoted market prices for the Corporation’s various financial instruments. In cases where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on estimates using present value or other valuation techniques. Those techniques are significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate and estimates of future cash flows. Accordingly, the fair value estimates may not be realized in an immediate settlement of the instrument.
The fair value guidance provides a consistent definition of fair value, which focuses on exit price in an orderly transaction (that is, not a forced liquidation or distressed sale) between market participants at the measurement date under current market conditions. If there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability, a change in valuation technique or the use of multiple valuation techniques may be appropriate. In such instances, determining the price at which willing market participants would transact at the measurement date under current market conditions depends on the facts and circumstances and requires the use of significant judgment. The fair value is a reasonable point within the range that is most representative of fair value under current market conditions.
Fair Value Hierarchy
In accordance with this guidance, the Corporation groups its financial assets and financial liabilities generally measured at fair value in three levels, based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the reliability of the assumptions used to determine fair value.
Level 1 - Valuation is based on quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities that the reporting entity has the ability to access at the measurement date. Level 1 assets and liabilities generally include debt and equity securities that are traded in an active exchange market. Valuations are obtained from readily available pricing sources for market transactions involving identical assets or liabilities.
Level 2 - Valuation is based on inputs other than quoted prices included within level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. The valuation may be based on quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities; quoted prices in markets that are not active; or other inputs that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the full term of the asset or liability.
Level 3 - Valuation is based on unobservable inputs that are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of the assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include financial instruments whose value is determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.
A financial instrument’s categorization within the valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement.
Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Recurring Basis
Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments measured at fair value on a recurring basis and recognized in the accompanying balance sheet, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy.
Available for Sale Securities
Where quoted market prices are available in an active market, securities are classified within Level 1 of the valuation hierarchy. Level 1 securities would include highly liquid government bonds, mortgage products and exchange traded equities. If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated by using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics or discounted cash flows. Level 2 securities include U.S. agency securities, mortgage-backed agency securities, obligations of states and political subdivisions and certain corporate, asset backed and other securities. In certain cases where Level 1 or Level 2 inputs are not available, securities are classified within Level 3 of the hierarchy.
| | | | | Fair Value Measurements at June 30, 2011 Using | |
| | | | | Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | | | Significant Other Observable Inputs Level (2) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AFS Securities | | $ | 66,211,005 | | | $ | 20,303,534 | | | $ | 45,907,471 | | | $ | - | |
| | | | | Fair Value Measurements at December 31, 2010 Using | |
| | Assets/Liabilities Measured at Fair Value | | | Quoted Prices in Active Markets for Identical Assets (Level 1) | | | Significant Other Observable Inputs Level (2) | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
AFS Securities | | $ | 68,808,624 | | | $ | 21,203,537 | | | $ | 47,605,087 | | | $ | - | |
Assets Measured at Fair Value on a Nonrecurring Basis
Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments measured at fair value on a non-recurring basis and recognized in the accompanying balance sheet, as well as the general classification of such instruments pursuant to the valuation hierarchy.
A loan is considered impaired when full payment under the loan terms is not expected. Impaired loans are carried at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan's existing rate, or the fair value of collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. A portion of the allowance for loan losses is allocated to impaired loans if the value of such loans is deemed to be less than the unpaid balance. If these allocations cause the allowance for loan losses to require increase, such increase is reported as a component of the provision for loan losses. Loan losses are charged against the allowance when management believes the uncollectability of a loan is confirmed. When the fair value of the collateral is based on an observable market price or a current appraised value, the Corporation records the loan impairment as nonrecurring Level 2. When an appraised value is not available or management determines the fair value of the collateral is further impaired below the appraised value and there is no observable market price, the Corporation records the loan impairment as nonrecurring Level 3.
Other Real Estate (Foreclosed Assets)
Other real estate is adjusted to fair value upon transfer from the loan portfolio. Subsequently, other real estate assets are carried at the lower of carrying value or fair value. Fair value is based upon independent market prices, appraised values of the collateral or management’s estimation of the value of the collateral. When the fair value of the collateral is based on an observable market price or a current appraised value, the Corporation records the other real estate as nonrecurring Level 2. When an appraised value is not available or management determines the fair value of the collateral is further impaired below the appraised value and there is no observable market price, the Corporation records the other real estate as nonrecurring Level 3.
The following tables present the assets carried on the balance sheet by asset type and by level within the FASB ASC 820 valuation hierarchy (as described above) as of June 30, 2011 and 2010, for which a nonrecurring change in fair value has been recorded during the periods ended June 30, 2011 and 2010.
| | Carrying Value at June 30, 2011 | | | Six Months Ended | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | June 30, 2011 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Total gains | |
| | Total | | | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level3 | | | (losses) | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Impaired loans (1) | | $ | 11,604,753 | | | $ | - | | | $ | - | | | $ | 11,604,753 | | | $ | (576,632 | ) |
Foreclosed assets | | | 10,853,521 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 10,853,521 | | | | (9,281 | ) |
(1) Losses related to loans were recognized as either charge-offs or specific allocations of the allowance for loan loss
| | Carrying Value at December 31, 2010 | | | Twelve Months Ended | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | December 31, 2010 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | Total | |
| | Total | | | Level 1 | | | Level 2 | | | Level3 | | | losses | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Impaired loans | | $ | 11,367,697 | | | $ | - | | | $ | - | | | $ | 11,367,697 | | | $ | (4,023,954 | ) |
Foreclosed assets | | | 10,163,992 | | | | - | | | | - | | | | 10,163,992 | | | | (199,999 | ) |
Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The assumptions used in estimating the fair value of the Corporation’s financial instruments are explained below. Where quoted market prices are not available, fair values are based on estimates using discounted cash flow and other valuation techniques. Discounted cash flows can be significantly affected by the assumptions used, including the discount rate and estimates of future cash flows. The following fair value estimates cannot be substantiated by comparison to independent markets and should not be considered representative of the liquidation value of the Corporation’s financial instruments, but rather a good–faith estimate of the fair value of financial instruments held by the Corporation. FASB ASC 820 excludes certain financial instruments and all nonfinancial instruments from its disclosure requirements.
The following methods and assumptions were used by the Corporation in estimating the fair value of its financial instruments:
(a) Cash and Short-term Investments
Fair value approximates the carrying value of such assets.
(b) Investment Securities and Other Securities
The fair value of investment securities is based on quoted market prices. If quoted market prices are not available, then fair values are estimated by using pricing models, quoted prices of securities with similar characteristics or discounted cash flows. The fair value of other securities, which includes Federal Home Loan Bank stock and other correspondent stocks, approximates their carrying value.
(c) Loans
The fair value of loans is calculated using discounted cash flows and excludes lease–financing arrangements. The discount rates used to determine the present value of the loan portfolio are estimated market discount rates that reflect the credit and interest rate risk inherent in the loan portfolio. The estimated maturities are based on the Corporation’s historical experience with repayments adjusted to estimate the effect of current market conditions.
(d) Bank Owned Life Insurance
The fair value of bank owned life insurance approximates its carrying value.
(e) Deposits
The fair value of deposits with no stated maturity, such as non–interest bearing demand deposits, NOW accounts, savings and money market deposit accounts, approximates the carrying value. Certificates of deposit have been valued using discounted cash flows. The discount rates used are based on estimated market rates for deposits of similar remaining maturities.
The fair value estimates in the table below do not include the benefit that results from the low–cost funding provided by the deposit liabilities compared to the cost of borrowing funds in the market.
(f) FHLB, Other Borrowed Funds and Subordinated Debt
The fair value of the Corporation’s other borrowed funds and subordinated debt approximates the carrying value of such liabilities. The fair value of FHLB advances have been valued using discounted cash flows. The discount rates used are based on estimated market rates for borrowings of similar remaining maturities.
(g) Accrued Interest
The fair value of accrued interest receivable and payable approximates their carrying value.
(h) Commitments to Extend Credit and Standby Letters of Credit
There is no market for the commitment to extend credit and standby letters of credit and they were issued without explicit cost. Therefore, it is not practical to establish their fair value.
The carrying value and estimated fair value of the Corporation’s financial instruments at June 30, 2011 and December 31, 2010 are as follows (in thousands):
| | June 30, 2011 | | | December 31, 2010 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financial assets: | | (Dollars in Thousands) | |
Cash and short–term investments | | $ | 52,897 | | | $ | 52,897 | | | $ | 80,966 | | | $ | 80,966 | |
Investment securities | | | 87,602 | | | | 87,960 | | | | 86,071 | | | | 86,111 | |
Loans held for sale | | | 857 | | | | 857 | | | | — | | | | — | |
Loans held for investment,net of the allowance for loan losses | | | 258,350 | | | | 261,706 | | | | 256,631 | | | | 264,155 | |
Bank owned life insurance | | | 2,900 | | | | 2,900 | | | | 2,845 | | | | 2,845 | |
Correspondent bank stock | | | 1,772 | | | | 1,772 | | | | 1,872 | | | | 1,872 | |
Accrued interest receivable | | | 2,065 | | | | 2,065 | | | | 2,193 | | | | 2,193 | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Financial liabilities: | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Deposits | | | 390,743 | | | | 393,845 | | | | 417,033 | | | | 420,546 | |
Other borrowed funds | | | 888 | | | | 888 | | | | 944 | | | | 944 | |
FHLB advances | | | 1,198 | | | | 1,336 | | | | 1,280 | | | | 1,534 | |
Subordinated Debt | | | 10,310 | | | | 10,310 | | | | 10,310 | | | | 10,310 | |
Accrued interest payable | | | 343 | | | | 343 | | | | 403 | | | | 403 | |
NOTE 8 – Recently Issued Accounting Pronouncements
FASB ASC 310 Receivables (“ASC 310”) was amended to enhance disclosures about credit quality of financing receivables and the allowance for credit losses. The amendments require an entity to disclose credit quality information, such as internal risk grades, more detailed nonaccrual and past due information, and modifications of its financing receivables. The disclosures under ASC 310, as amended, were effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending on or after December 15, 2010. This amendment did not have a significant impact on the Corporation’s financial results, but it has significantly expanded the disclosures that the Corporation is required to provide.
On April 5, 2011, the FASB issued ASU 2011-02 “A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring”, which clarifies when creditors should classify loan modifications as troubled debt restructurings. The guidance is effective for interim and annual periods beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and applies retrospectively to restructurings occurring on or after the beginning of the year. The guidance on measuring the impairment of a receivable restructured in a troubled debt restructuring is effective on a prospective basis. The Corporation is currently evaluating the new guidance.
Forward Looking Statements
When used or incorporated by reference herein, the words “anticipate”, “estimate”, ”expect”, “project”, “target”, “goal”, and similar expressions, are intended to identify forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933. Such forward-looking statements are subject to certain risk, uncertainties, and assumptions including those set forth herein. Should one or more of these risks or uncertainties materialize, or should underlying assumptions prove incorrect, actual results may vary materially from those expected or projected. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date they are made. The Corporation expressly disclaims any obligations or undertaking to publicly release any updates or revisions to any forward-looking statement contained herein to reflect any change in the Corporation’s expectations with regard to any change in events, conditions or circumstances on which any such statement is based.
Critical Accounting Estimates
The Corporation’s accounting and reporting policies are in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America and conform to general practices within the banking industry. The Corporation’s significant accounting policies are described in the notes to the consolidated financial statements at December 31, 2010 as filed in the Corporation’s annual report on Form 10-K. Certain accounting policies require management to make significant estimates and assumptions, which have a material impact on the carrying value of certain assets and liabilities, and we consider these to be critical accounting policies. The estimates and assumptions used are based on historical experience and other factors that management believes to be reasonable under the circumstances. Actual results could differ significantly from these estimates and assumptions, which could have a material impact on the carrying value of assets and liabilities at the balance sheet dates and results of operations for the reporting periods.
Results of Operations
The following financial review is presented to provide an analysis of the results of operations of the Corporation and the Bank for the six and three months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, compared. This review should be used in conjunction with the condensed consolidated financial statements included in the Form 10-Q.
Six Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, Compared
Net income for the six months ended June 30, 2011 was $591,826, an increase from the $501,158 that was recorded in the same period in 2010. Net income available to common shareholders was $456,673 in 2011 compared to $211,505 in the 2010 period, both after recording the payment of the dividend on preferred shares and the associated amortization of warrants related to the Corporation’s participation in the Capital Purchase Program (CPP) in 2010 and Community Development Capital Initiative (CDCI) in 2011. The dividend on the CDCI dividends in 2011 were $103,000 compared with the $257,500 for the CPP dividends in 2010. This created improvement in the net income available to shareholders. The specifics of the changes are discussed in detail below.
As previously discussed in the report for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, total assets and non interest bearing deposits decreased from December 31, 2010 as a large depositor used funds to pay down loans at other lenders. The decline in the first quarter was $17,500,000 for both deposits and assets. The second quarter saw smaller changes as assets declined by an additional $6,600,000. The decline was centered in interest bearing deposits; as, the bank was not aggressive in the time deposit market and reduced balances in response to slow loan growth and continued high levels of liquidity.
Net Interest Income
Net interest income was $7,211,959 during the first half of 2011, an increase of $34,860 or 0.5% from the level experienced during the same period in 2011. The very small change was the result of the effects of lower loan volume being offset by wider spreads between interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities. The net interest income on a tax equivalent basis was 3.60% for the first half of 2011 as compared to 3.53% for the same period in 2010.
Total interest income decreased $752,463 (7.7%) in the first half of 2011. The effect of the reduction in interest income is primarily the result of the lower level of total interest earning assets, in particular loans. Loans averaged $20,000,000 less in the first half of 2011 compared with the same period in 2010. While the loan balances significantly decreased, the yield on loans increased to 6.11% in 2011 from 6.01% in the 2010 period. Additionally, the full effect of the realignment of the investment portfolio, undertaken in 2010, was reflected in the changes between the 2011 and 2010 periods. The average volume of tax advantaged investments was lower between the periods by $16,700,000 and the average volume of taxable investments was higher by $19,500,000. This reflects the change made in the third quarter of 2010 that reduced tax advantaged investments. The taxable equivalent yield on earnings assets decreased to 4.49% in 2011 from 4.76% in 2010 and earning assets declined by $14,200,000.
The decline in interest income was offset by a reduction in interest expense of $787,323 or 30.4%. Interest bearing liabilities decreased by an average of $13,200,000 for the first half of 2011 compared to the same period in 2010 primarily on the reduction of the volume of time deposits. Time deposits in 2011 averaged $15,600,000 lower than in the 2010 period. Because loan demand was weak, the out of market CD portfolio was allowed to mature without being replaced and the banking subsidiary was not aggressive in bidding for public funds and allowed interest sensitive deposits to mature. The average rate paid on these deposits declined by 0.65% to 1.68%. The volume of savings and money market accounts increased by $2,000,000 between the 2011 and 2010 periods while the rate paid remained constant at 0.20%. The total cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased to 1.27% in 2011 from 1.74% in the 2010 period.
Provision for Loan Losses
The provision for loan losses totaled $600,000 for the first half of 2011 as compared to $1,038,000 for the same period in 2010. For further discussion of this item see Allowance for Loan Losses below.
Noninterest Income
Compared to the first half of 2010, total noninterest income decreased by $260,958 or 10.7% for the first half of 2011 to $2,179,392. The reduction in investment securities gains of $194,250, to $25,104 from $219,354, accounts for the majority of the decrease. Revenue from service charges and fees on deposit accounts decreased by $70,185. Overdraft fees declined by $167,000 within the service charge category. This decline was partially offset by increases in interchange fees of $62,000 and fees on corporate analysis checking accounts of $30,000. Fees from the origination of mortgage loans declined by $16,664. Other revenue was higher by $20,142.
Noninterest Expense
Total noninterest expense for the six months ended June 30, 2011 and 2010 was $7,995,502 and $8,155,600, respectively. This represents a decrease of $160,098, or 2.0%, for the first half of 2011 compared to the same period of 2010.
Expenses related to salaries and benefits increased by $99,381 (2.3%) to $4,421,362 in the 2011 period from $4,321,981 in 2010. The cost of providing health insurance increased by $45,495 or 15.3%. Increased participation in the 401(k) employee savings plan caused expenses to rise by $23,000. Salaries increased by $33,340 or 1% in 2011 over 2010.
Occupancy cost declined by $127,764 or 11.7%. Reduced depreciation expense was responsible for $108,663 of the difference as the Corporation continues with its plan of making capital expenditures only for necessary items. These are items that if not corrected have a negative impact on effectiveness or customer service. Repairs and maintenance has been lower in recent history as the Corporation has utilized a service contract for prepaid maintenance. The reduction in the first half of 2011 versus the first half of 2010 is $15,651 or 8.3%. This contract is ending in the June/July time frame and it is likely that the cost of repairs will increase in future periods.
Other non-interest expense experienced a decline of $131,715 or 4.8% in the first half of 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. ORE expenses and legal fees were both elevated in 2010 and are lower in the first half of 2011 than in the same period last year by $94,000 and $46,000 respectively. Credit card expense and interchange expense are both higher (by $58,000 and $34,000) reflecting the increased revenue and volume in the products. The cost of FDIC insurance was reduced in the first half by $28,000 versus the 2010 period and several volume related items, primarily items pertaining to loan, ATM, and credit card activity, showed reductions in expense of $30,000 on reduced activity.
Income Tax Expense/Benefit
Earnings before taxes for the first half of 2011 were $795,849 as compared to $423,849 in the same period of 2010. In the first half of 2011, the Corporation recorded an income tax expense of $204,023 as opposed to the benefit of $77,309 recorded in the first half of 2010. The increased expense was caused by a reduction in nontaxable interest income from investment in municipal securities and increased profitability in general.
Three Months Ended June 30, 2011 and 2010, Compared
Summary
Net income for the three months ended June 30, 2011 was $364,464, an increase from the $145,355 that was recorded in the same period in 2010. Net income available to common shareholders was $297,715 in 2011 compared to $413 in the 2010 period Preferred dividends decreased in the 2011 period by $77,250 as the result of the exchange of the preferred stock issued to the U. S. Treasury under the CPP into preferred stock issued to the U. S. Treasury under the CDCI program. As has been discussed in previous reports, the dividend rate was reduced to 2% from 5% and this creates the lower dividend amount. The associated amortization of the warrants related to the Corporation’s participation in the Capital Purchase Program continues in place. The specifics of the changes are discussed in detail below.
The net interest margin on a tax equivalent basis was 3.75% for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to 3.55% for the same period in 2010.
Net Interest Income
Net interest income was $3,681,965 during the second quarter of 2011 or level with the $3,692,390 recorded in the same period in 2010.
Total interest income decreased $359,382 (7.3%) in the second quarter of 2011. The reduction in interest income is primarily the result of the lower level of interest earning assets, particularly loan assets. As discussed in the Corporation’s Form 10-Q for the second quarter of 2010, one large customer had deposited significant funds into the Bank during the second quarter of 2010. These funds have been withdrawn, primarily in the last half of 2010. Additional funds were deployed in the second quarter of 2011 by the customer to fund a major project. The result is the reduction in average non-interest bearing deposits of $13,700,000 in the second quarter of 2011 as compared to the second quarter of 2010. In addition, loan demand was very weak with loans averaging $17,600,000 less than in 2010. The result was $229,040 lower income from loans in the quarter compared to the same quarter in 2010. Income from the investment portfolio declined by $120,943; as a result of the restructuring of the investment portfolio in the third quarter of 2010. In this restructuring shorter term securities were sold and redeployed in slightly longer term, high quality issues to reduce interest rate sensitivity and reduce the level of tax advantaged income. The reinvestment rate was higher than the yield at which the securities were sold, but lower than the yield realized in the second quarter of 2010. This reduced yield resulted in the lower revenue during the quarter.
The interest income decline was almost completely offset by a reduction in interest expense of $348,957 or 28.8%. Interest bearing liabilities decreased by an average of $15,600,000 for the second quarter of 2011 compared to the same period in 2010. As mentioned in the discussion of the six months ended June 30, 2011, the Bank was not aggressive in retaining time deposits and out of market time deposits and these categories saw average declines of approximately $8,400,000 each, in the second quarter of 2011. The rate paid on interest bearing liabilities was lower at 1.22% in 2011 vs. 1.62% in 2010, a reduction of 0.40%.
Provision for Loan Losses
The provision for loan losses totaled $300,000 for the second quarter of 2011 as compared to $600,000 for the same period in 2010. For further discussion of this account see Allowance for Loan Losses below.
Noninterest Income
Total noninterest income decreased $62,261 or 5.1% for the second quarter of 2011. Reduced investment securities gains of $34,785 and a decrease in mortgage origination revenue of $25,270 account for most of the reduction. Changes in service charge revenue and other revenue counter each other. Service charge revenue in the second quarter of 2011 is lower than the same quarter in 2010 by $40,850 or 4.9%. Overdraft fees for the period were lower than the prior year period by $85,600 as the full effects of new regulations introduced in 2010 were in place. Interchange fees rose from the prior year by $31,000 on increased volume. All other income increased between the quarters by $38,644.
Noninterest Expense
Total noninterest expense decreased $190,538, or 4.5%, in the second quarter of 2011 compared to the same quarter of 2010.
Occupancy expenses were lower by $72,980 (13.1%) due to lower depreciation expense ($55,539) as plant and equipment replacements continued to be done on an “as needed basis” or for items that had a possible negative impact on customer service. Other categories of occupancy expenses were also generally lower. Items that represent discretionary expenses were generally level with the same quarter in 2010.
In other noninterest expense, a decrease of $177,732 was experienced. Expenses for other real estate, legal and FDIC insurance decreased by $62,457, $50,758, and $82,581 respectively from the elevated level of the year ago period. These decreases were offset by increased expense for interchange ($15,065) and the expense component of the credit card operation ($28,360). Smaller decreases were experienced in other activity based expense categories.
Income Tax Expense/Benefit
Earnings before taxes for the second quarter of 2011 were $504,440 as compared $86,588 in the second quarter of 2010. Income tax expense in the 2011 period was $139,976 versus a benefit of $58,767 in 2010. The change in nontaxable income and the general increase in profitability are the reasons for the increase.
Financial Condition and Liquidity
Total assets on June 30, 2011 were $441,628,212, a decrease of $25,592,482 or 5.5% from December 31, 2010. Total deposits decreased by $26.3 million or 6.3% while loans increased by $2.0 million. Total equity (common and preferred) increased by $859,251 to $37.1 million for the six month period. The decrease in assets and deposits is the result of the factors discussed above.
The Corporation continues to take steps to maintain a strong liquidity position that is designed to provide sufficient availability of funds to meet planned and potential emergency needs. This liquidity position has been held at a higher than historical level because of the continued economic uncertainty. The ratio of total loans to deposits on June 30, 2011 was 67.5% as compared to 62.8% on December 31, 2010. The increase is the result of the small increase in loans and the decrease in deposits discussed above. The maintenance of the unusually high level of liquidity continues to be under review with the objective being that when economic conditions improve and the market for bank funding becomes more functional, it will no longer be necessary to keep the level as high.
Cash and Cash Equivalents
Cash and cash equivalents were $52,896,791 as of June 30, 2011, a decrease of $28,069,318 or 34.7%, from December 31, 2010. The change is primarily the result of the reduction of deposits from the single customer to pay debt discussed in Summary above and the increased level of loans.
Investment Securities – Available for Sale
Investment securities available for sale decreased $2,597,619, or 3.8%, compared to December 31, 2010 as only a portion of maturing, sold or called securities were reinvested in this category.
Investment Securities – Held to Maturity
Investment securities held to maturity increased $4,128,322, or 23.9%. Securities designated as held to maturity are not liquid or subject to sale. The Corporation reviews the limits and target levels on this category regularly. As a result of its review, during the second quarter of 2011 a portion of maturing, sold or called securities were reinvested in this category.
Loans
Gross loans increased by $1,984,568 or 0.8% at June 30, 2011, from December 31, 2010. The increase is primarily the result of the funding of seasonal agricultural production loans ($6.3 million) and farmland loans ($5.7 million) which were offset by declines in commercial loans ($5 million) and real estate loans ($2 million). The agricultural loan increase has been aided through the expansion and diversification of this type of lending into the central Baldwin County, Alabama market where the bank has had branches and a presence, but has recently been able to obtain new loan customers. The Bank continues to seek loans to qualified borrowers.
Allowance for Loan Losses
The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level which, in management's opinion, is appropriate to provide for estimated losses in the portfolio at the balance sheet date. Factors considered in determining the adequacy of the allowance include historical loan loss experience, the amount and trend of past due loans, loans classified from the most recent regulatory examinations and internal reviews, general economic conditions, the effect of lending policies and effectiveness of management and the current portfolio mix including concentrations. The amount charged to the provision is that amount deemed necessary to maintain the allowance for loan losses at a level indicative of the associated risk, as determined by management, of the current portfolio.
The allowance for loan losses consists of two portions: the impaired portion and the non-impaired portion. The impaired portion is based on identified problem loans and is determined based on an assessment of credit risk related to those loans. Specific loss estimate amounts are included in the allowance based on an evaluation of the individual credits. Any loan categorized as loss is charged off or fully reserved in the period which the loan is so categorized.
The non-impaired portion of the allowance is for probable inherent losses which exist as of the evaluation date even though they may not have been identified by the more objective processes for the impaired portion of the allowance. This is due to the risk of error and inherent imprecision in the process. This portion of the allowance is particularly subjective and requires judgments based upon qualitative factors, which do not lend themselves to exact mathematical calculations. Some of the factors considered are changes in credit concentrations, loan mix, historical loss experience, experience of loan management, effects of lending policies and general economic environment in the Corporation's markets.
The Corporation continues with the methodology introduced in the fourth quarter of 2010 in which the Corporation began to segment the loan portfolio by type of loan for analysis and to compute the needed reserve on non-impaired loans based on historical charge off performance for each segment. This was done to more accurately reflect performance of individual portfolio segments; as well was, to obtain more precise information regarding these segments. Also, this methodology allows the Corporation to better target loan growth by concentrating on those segments with lower loss histories and aid in identification of areas or segments requiring more attention. The effect on the calculated level of the reserve will be in direct proportion to the loss rate and volume of those sectors with loss rate histories either higher or lower than the average loss rate for the portfolio as a whole.
At June 30, 2011, the ratio of reserves to total loans was 2.05% compared to the ratio at December 31, 2010 of 1.96%. The amount of reserve allocated to specific loans at June 30, 2011 was $2,530,805 versus the level at December 31, 2010 of $2,275,207.
The Corporation has procedures in place to identify and deal with problem loans and potential problem loans. It is the goal of the Corporation to identify any problems, to develop and execute strategies to deal with those identified and establish reserves to deal with identified and historic shortfalls. Although reserves may be considered appropriate at a point in time, future events may change the ability of a borrower to pay or the underlying value of collateral. The Corporation will continue to monitor closely the condition of the portfolio and, in the current, uncertain economy, continue with its program to strengthen the level of reserves.
Premises and Equipment
Premises and equipment decreased $354,754, or 2.2%, during the first half of 2011. This reduction is primarily attributable to the assets being depreciated with little additional capital spending to counter the reduction.
Deposits
Total deposits decreased approximately $26,290,000, or 6.3%, at June 30, 2011 from December 31, 2010, including a decrease of approximately $20,000,000 in non-interest bearing deposits and a decrease of approximately $6,300,000 in interest bearing deposits. The decline was anticipated and the withdrawal of deposits by the large customer and the lack of aggressive time deposit pricing described in the Summary section of the first half comparison are the primary reasons.
Liquidity
One of the Corporation’s goals is to provide adequate funds to meet changes in loan demand or any potential increase in the normal level of deposit withdrawals. This goal is accomplished primarily by generating cash from operating activities and maintaining sufficient short-term assets. These sources, coupled with a stable deposit base, allow the Corporation to fund earning assets and maintain the availability of funds. Management believes that the Corporation’s traditional sources of maturing loans and investment securities, cash from operating activities and a strong base of core deposits are adequate to meet the Corporation’s liquidity needs for normal operations. To provide additional liquidity, the Corporation has historically utilized market based sources such as short-term financing through the purchase of federal funds, and a borrowing relationship with the Federal Home Loan Bank. In the current economy, these sources are not as reliable as in more normal times. The Corporation has chosen to maintain on balance sheet sources of liquidity such as deposits at the Federal Reserve, federal funds sold and liquid, short term investments at higher than historical levels to assure an adequate source of liquid funding. This strategy has depressed the net interest margin as these short-term, highly liquid assets have lower yields than loans or longer term, less liquid assets. Should the Corporation’s traditional sources of liquidity be constrained, forcing the Corporation to pursue avenues of funding not typically used, the Corporation’s net interest margin could be further impacted negatively. The Corporation's bank subsidiary has an Asset Liability Management Committee, which has as its primary objective the maintenance of specific funding and investment strategies to achieve short-term and long-term financial goals. The Corporation’s liquidity at June 30, 2011 is considered appropriate by management.
Capital Adequacy
Total stockholders' equity on June 30, 2011, was $36,561,248, an increase of $1,042,042 from December 31, 2010. This increase is comprised of current period earnings of $591,826 and is supplemented by an increase in accumulated other comprehensive income net of tax of $544,003; offset by dividends and amortization of $135,153 related to the U.S. Treasury’s Community Development Capital Initiative as described more fully in Note 9 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010; and the recognition of $12,446 of compensation expense related to previous years’ grants of stock options and restricted stock.
The table below sets forth various capital ratios for the Corporation and the Bank. Under current regulatory guidelines, debt associated with trust preferred securities qualifies for Tier 1 capital treatment. At June 30, 2011, trust preferred securities included in Tier 1 capital totaled $10 million.
Federal and State of Alabama Regulators have established quantitative measures to ensure capital adequacy requiring the Corporation and its Bank to maintain minimum capital levels. The primary target capital ratio is the maintenance of the Tier I Leverage Ratio by the Bank at or above 8.50% of average assets during any quarter. In the second quarter of 2011, the Bank reported in its “Call Report” a Tier I Leverage Ratio of 9.21% of average assets. Management believes as of June 30, 2011 that the Corporation and its Bank meet all capital adequacy requirements to which they are subject. The payment of dividends has a direct impact on capital adequacy and is subject to approval by the Federal and State of Alabama regulators.
Information regarding risk-based capital and leverage ratios of the Corporation and the Bank are set forth in the table below:
| | | | | Well Capitalized Treatment | |
United Bancorporation of Alabama, Inc. | | | | | | |
Total risk-based capital | | | 15.28 | % | | | N/A | |
Tier 1 risk-based capital | | | 14.04 | | | | N/A | |
Leverage Ratio | | | 9.17 | | | | N/A | |
| | | | | | | | |
United Bank | | | | | | | | |
Total risk-based capital | | | 15.27 | % | | | 10.00 | % |
Tier 1 risk-based capital | | | 14.02 | | | | 6.00 | |
Leverage ratio | | | 9.21 | | | | 5.00 | |
Based on management’s projections, existing regulatory capital should be sufficient to satisfy capital requirements in the foreseeable future for existing operations.
Off Balance Sheet items
The Bank is a party to financial obligations with off-balance sheet risk in the normal course of business. The financial obligations include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit issued to customers.
The following table sets forth the off-balance sheet risk of the Bank as of the end of the period.
| | June 30, | |
| | 2011 | |
| | | |
Commitments to extend credit | | $ | 34,866,693 | |
Standby letters of credit | | | 1,406,922 | |
Based on evaluation of the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures (as such term is defined in Rules 13a-15 and 15d-15 under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”)), as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report, the principal executive officer and the principal financial officer of the Corporation have concluded that as of such date the Corporation’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information the Corporation is required to disclose in its filings under the Exchange Act is recorded, processed, summarized and reported, within the time periods specified in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s rules and forms, and to ensure that information required to be disclosed by the Corporation in the reports that it files under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to the Corporation’s management, including its principal executive officer and principal financial officer, as appropriate to allow timely decisions regarding required disclosure.
There were no changes in the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation required by paragraph (d) of Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 or 15d-15 that occurred during the last fiscal quarter that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting.
PART II -- OTHER INFORMATION
Loans Held for Sale
Loans held for sale are funded loan commitments of the Bank that are accompanied by third-party agreements to purchase at a date subsequent to the original commitment between the Bank and its borrower. Should the subsequent sale of the loan, or loans, from the Bank to the third party not occur due to either the failure of the third-party to complete the transaction or changes in macro-market conditions, the Bank could be required to lower the fair value of the loan in order to sell the loan to another entity or maintain the loan as held for investment. The difference between the values of the original loan contract and the later value would be recognized as a reduction of bank earnings.
| 31.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 31.2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 32.1 | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 32.2 | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| 101.SCH | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document |
| 101.CAL | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document |
| 101.DEF | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document |
| 101.LAB | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document |
| 101.PRE | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document |
S I G N A T U R E S
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.
| UNITED BANCORPORATION OF ALABAMA, INC. |
| | | |
Date: August 12, 2011 | | | |
| | | |
| | | /s/ Robert R. Jones, III |
| | Robert R. Jones, III |
| | | President and Chief Executive Officer |
| | | |
| | | |
| | | /s/ Allen O. Jones, Jr. |
| | Allen O. Jones, Jr. |
| | | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
INDEX TO EXHIBITS
EXHIBIT NUMBER | | DESCRIPTION | |
| | | |
| | Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| | Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| | Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
| | Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 |
101.INS | | Instance Document |
101.SCH | | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Schema Document |
101.CAL | | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Calculation Linkbase Document |
101.DEF | | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Definition Linkbase Document |
101.LAB | | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Label Linkbase Document |
101.PRE | | XBRL Taxonomy Extension Presentation Linkbase Document |