Item 1
Business
COLONY BANKCORP, INC.
General
Colony Bankcorp, Inc. (the “Company” or “Colony”) is a Georgia business corporation which was incorporated on November 8, 1982. The Company was organized for the purpose of operating as a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and the bank holding company laws of Georgia. On July 22, 1983, the Company, after obtaining the requisite regulatory approvals, acquired 100% of the issued and outstanding common stock of Colony Bank (formerly Colony Bank of Fitzgerald and The Bank of Fitzgerald), Fitzgerald, Georgia (the “Bank” or “Colony Bank”), through the merger of the Bank with a subsidiary of the Company which was created for the purpose of organizing the Bank into a one-bank holding company. Since that time, Colony Bank has operated as a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Company. Our business is conducted primarily through our wholly-owned bank subsidiary, which provides a broad range of banking services to its retail and commercial customers. We operate twenty-eight domestic banking offices and two corporate operations offices. At December 31, 2021, we had approximately $2.7 billion in total assets, $1.4 billion in total loans, $2.4 billion in total deposits and $217.7 million in stockholder’s equity. Deposits are insured, up to applicable limits, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
The Parent Company
Because the Company is a bank holding company, its principal operations are conducted through the Bank. It has 100 percent ownership of its subsidiary and maintains systems of financial, operational and administrative controls that permit centralized evaluation of the operations of the subsidiary bank in selected functional areas including operations, accounting, marketing, investment management, purchasing, human resources, computer services, auditing, compliance and credit review. As a bank holding company, we perform certain shareholder and investor relations functions.
Colony Bank - Banking Services
Our principal subsidiary is the Bank. The Bank, headquartered in Fitzgerald, Georgia, offers traditional banking products and services to commercial and consumer customers in our markets. Our product line includes, among other things, loans to small and medium-sized businesses, residential and commercial construction and land development loans, commercial real estate loans, commercial loans, agri-business and production loans, residential mortgage loans, home equity loans, consumer loans and a variety of demand, savings and time deposit products. We also offer internet banking services, electronic bill payment services, safe deposit box rentals, telephone banking, credit and debit card services, remote depository products and access to a network of ATMs to our customers. The Bank conducts a general full service commercial, consumer and mortgage banking business through twenty-eight offices located in central, south and coastal Georgia cities of Fitzgerald, Warner Robins, Centerville, Ashburn, Leesburg, Cordele, Albany, LaGrange, Columbus, Sylvester, Tifton, Moultrie, Douglas, Broxton, Savannah, Eastman, Soperton, Rochelle, Quitman, Valdosta and Statesboro, Georgia.
For additional discussion of our loan portfolio and deposit accounts, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Loans" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Deposits.”
Subordinated Debentures (Trust Preferred Securities)
During the second quarter of 2004, the Company formed Colony Bankcorp Statutory Trust III for the sole purpose of issuing $4,500,000 in Trust Preferred Securities through a pool sponsored by FTN Financial Capital Market. The securities have a maturity of thirty years and are redeemable after five years with certain exceptions.
During the second quarter of 2006, the Company formed Colony Bankcorp Capital Trust I for the sole purpose of issuing $5,000,000 in Trust Preferred Securities through a pool sponsored by SunTrust Bank Capital Markets. The securities have a maturity of thirty years and are redeemable after five years with certain exceptions.
During the first quarter of 2007, the Company formed Colony Bankcorp Capital Trust II for the sole purpose of issuing $9,000,000 in Trust Preferred Securities through a pool sponsored by Trapeza Capital Management, LLC. The securities have a maturity of thirty years and are redeemable after five years with certain exceptions. Proceeds from this issuance were used to pay off trust preferred securities issued on March 26, 2002 through Colony Bankcorp Statutory Trust I.
During the third quarter of 2007, the Company formed Colony Bankcorp Capital Trust III for the sole purpose of issuing $5,000,000 in Trust Preferred Securities through a pool sponsored by Trapeza Capital Management, LLC. The securities have a maturity of thirty years and are redeemable after five years with certain exceptions. Proceeds from this issuance were used to pay off trust preferred securities issued on December 19, 2002 through Colony Bankcorp Statutory Trust II.
The Company is not in default of any outstanding Trust Preferred Securities as of December 31, 2021.
Recent Developments
On August 1, 2021, the Company acquired SouthCrest Financial Group, Inc. (“SouthCrest”), a bank holding company headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia. Upon consummation of the acquisition, SouthCrest was merged with and into the Company, with Colony Bankcorp, Inc. as the surviving entity in the merger. Immediately following the holding company merger, SouthCrest’s wholly owned bank subsidiary, SouthCrest Bank, N.A. was also merged with and into the Bank. The acquisition expanded the Company’s market presence, as SouthCrest Bank, N.A. had eight full-service banking locations, one in Cedartown, Chickamauga, Cumming, Fayetteville, Luthersville, Manchester, Rockmart and Thomaston, Georgia. Under the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger, each SouthCrest shareholder had the option to receive either $10.45 in cash or 0.7318 of a share of the Company’s common stock in exchange for each share of SouthCrest stock, subject to certain proration and allocation procedures. As a result, the Company issued approximately 4.0 million shares of its common stock at a fair value of $71.4 million and paid $21.6 million in cash to the former shareholders of SouthCrest as merger consideration.
On August 1, 2021, September 1, 2021 and October 1, 2021, the Company acquired several insurance agencies and formed Colony Insurance.
The Company paid dividends to its shareholders throughout 2021 and 2020 on a quarterly basis. In 2021, we had a quarterly dividend of $0.1025 per common stock and in 2020, we had a quarterly dividend of $0.10 per common stock.
On February 10, 2022, the Company completed a public offering of 3,848,485 shares of its common stock at a public offering price of $16.50 per share, with aggregate proceeds of approximately $63.5 million.
Markets and Competition
The banking industry in general is highly competitive. Our market areas consist of central, south and coastal Georgia. In contrast to our rural markets, in which we typically rank in the top three in terms of market share, we face competitive pressures in attracting deposits and making loans from larger regional banks and smaller community banks. The Bank's competition includes not only other banks of comparable or larger size in the same markets, but also various other nonbank financial institutions, including savings and loan associations, credit unions, mortgage companies, personal and commercial financial companies, peer to peer lending businesses, fintech companies, investment brokerage and financial advisory firms and mutual fund companies. The Bank competes for deposits, commercial, fiduciary and investment services and various types of loans and other financial services. The Bank also competes for interest-bearing funds with a number of other financial intermediaries, including brokerage and insurance firms, as well as investment alternatives, including mutual funds, governmental and corporate bonds, and other securities. Continued consolidation and rapid technological changes within the financial services industry will likely change the nature and intensity of competition, but also will create opportunities for the Company to demonstrate and leverage its competitive advantages. The continuing consolidation within the financial services industry is leading to larger, better capitalized and geographically diverse institutions with enhanced product and technology capabilities. Additionally, competition from fintechs, is increasing. In addition to fintechs, certain technology companies are working to provide financial services directly to their customers. These nontraditional financial service providers have been successful in developing digital and other products and services that effectively compete with traditional banking services, but are in some cases subject to fewer regulatory restrictions than banks and bank holding companies, allowing them to operate with greater flexibility and lower cost structures. Although digital products and services have been important competitive features of financial institutions for some time, the COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the move toward digital financial services products and we expect that trend to continue.
Competitors include not only financial institutions based in Georgia, but also a number of large out-of-state and foreign banks, bank holding companies and other financial institutions that have an established market presence in Georgia or that offer
internet-based products. Many of the Company's competitors are engaged in local, regional, national and international operations and have greater assets, personnel and other resources. Some of these competitors are subject to less regulation and/or more favorable tax treatment. Many of these institutions have greater resources, broader geographic markets and higher lending limits, and may offer services that the Company does not offer. In addition, these institutions may be able to better afford and make broader use of media advertising, support services, and electronic and other technology. To offset these potential competitive disadvantages, the Company depends on its reputation for superior service, ability to make credit and other business decisions quickly, and the delivery of an integrated distribution of traditional branches and bankers, with digital technology.
Correspondents
Colony Bank has correspondent relationships with the following banks: Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta; FHN Financial in Memphis, Tennessee; SouthState Bank in Lake Wales, Florida, ServisFirst in Birmingham, Alabama and the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta. These correspondent relationships facilitate the transactions of business by means of loans, collections, investment services, lines of credit and exchange services, particularly in markets in which Colony Bank does not have a physical presence. As compensation for these services, the Bank maintains balances with its correspondents in primarily interest-bearing accounts and pays some service charges.
Human Capital Resources
On December 31, 2021, the Company had a total of 502 employees, 492 of which are full-time equivalent employees. We consider our relationship with our employees to be satisfactory.
In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the Company prioritized the health and safety of its teammates, and took protective measures, such as implementing remote work arrangements, to the full extent possible and adjusted banking center hours and operational measures to promote social distancing, and it will continue to do so throughout the duration of the pandemic. We believe employees to be our greatest asset and that our future success depends on our ability to attract, retain and develop employees. Professional development is a key priority, which is facilitated through our many corporate development initiatives including extensive training programs, corporate mentoring, leadership programs, educational reimbursement and professional speaker series.
Our culture emphasizes our longstanding dedication to being respectful to others and having a workforce that is representative of the communities we serve. Diversity and inclusion are fundamental to our culture. We believe in attracting, retaining and promoting quality talent and recognize that diversity makes us stronger as a company. Our talent acquisition teams partner with hiring managers in sourcing and presenting a diverse slate of qualified candidates to strengthen our organization.
As part of our effort to attract and retain employees, we offer a broad range of benefits, including a profit-sharing plan covering all employees, subject to certain minimum age and service requirements. In addition, the Company maintains a comprehensive employee benefit program providing, among other benefits, hospitalization, major medical, life insurance and disability insurance. Management considers these benefits to be competitive with those offered by other financial institutions in our market area. Colony’s employees are not represented by any collective bargaining group.
Corporate Information
The Company’s headquarters is located at 115 South Grant Street, Fitzgerald, Georgia 31750, its telephone number is 229-426-6000 and its internet address is www.colonybank.com. The information contained on or accessible from our website does not constitute a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K and is not incorporated by reference herein.
SUPERVISION AND REGULATION
General
We are extensively regulated under federal and state law. The following is a brief summary that does not purport to be a complete description of all regulations that affect us or all aspects of those regulations. This discussion is qualified in its entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provisions described below and is not intended to be an exhaustive description of the statutes or regulations applicable to the Company’s and the Bank’s business. In addition, proposals to change the laws and regulations governing the banking industry are frequently raised at both the state and federal levels. The likelihood and timing of any changes in these laws and regulations, and the impact such changes may have on us and the Bank, are difficult to predict. In addition, bank regulatory agencies may issue enforcement actions, policy statements, interpretive letters
and similar written guidance applicable to us or the Bank. Changes in applicable laws, regulations or regulatory guidance, or their interpretation by regulatory agencies or courts may have a material adverse effect on our and the Bank’s business, operations, and earnings. Supervision and regulation of banks, their holding companies and affiliates is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and customers, the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), and the U.S. banking and financial system rather than holders of our capital stock.
Regulation of the Company
We are registered as a bank holding company with the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”) and have elected to be treated as a financial holding company. As such, we are subject to comprehensive supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve and are subject to its regulatory reporting requirements. Federal law subjects bank holding companies, such as the Company, to particular restrictions on the types of activities in which they may engage, and to a range of supervisory requirements and activities, including regulatory enforcement actions for violations of laws and regulations. Violations of laws and regulations, or other unsafe and unsound practices, may result in regulatory agencies imposing fines or penalties, cease and desist orders, or taking other enforcement actions. Under certain circumstances, these agencies may enforce these remedies directly against officers, directors, employees and other parties participating in the affairs of a bank or bank holding company.
Activity Limitations. As a financial holding company, we are permitted to engage directly or indirectly in a broader range of activities than those permitted for a bank holding company that has not elected to be a financial holding company. Bank holding companies are generally restricted to engaging in the business of banking, managing or controlling banks and certain other activities determined by the Federal Reserve to be closely related to banking. Financial holding companies may also engage in activities that are considered to be financial in nature, as well as those incidental or, if determined by the Federal Reserve, complementary to financial activities. We and Colony Bank must each remain “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” and Colony Bank must receive a CRA rating of at least “Satisfactory” at its most recent examination in order for us to maintain our status as a financial holding company. If Colony Bank ceases to be “well capitalized” or “well managed” under applicable regulatory standards, or if Colony Bank receives a rating of less than satisfactory under the CRA, the Federal Reserve Board may, among other things, place limitations on our ability to conduct these broader financial activities or, if the deficiencies persist, require us to divest the banking subsidiary or the businesses engaged in activities permissible only for financial holding companies.
In addition, the Federal Reserve has the power to order a bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any nonbanking activity or terminate its ownership or control of any nonbank subsidiary, when it has reasonable cause to believe that continuation of such activity or such ownership or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness, or stability of any bank subsidiary of that bank holding company.
Source of Strength Obligations. A financial holding company is required to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to its subsidiary bank and to maintain resources adequate to support its bank. The term “source of financial strength” means the ability of a company, such as us, that directly or indirectly owns or controls an insured depository institution, such as the Bank, to provide financial assistance to such insured depository institution in the event of financial distress. The appropriate federal banking agency for the depository institution (in the case of the Bank, this agency is the FDIC) may require reports from us to assess our ability to serve as a source of strength and to enforce compliance with the source of strength requirements by requiring us to provide financial assistance to the Bank in the event of financial distress. If we were to enter bankruptcy or become subject to the orderly liquidation process established by the Dodd-Frank Act, any commitment by us to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of the Bank would be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee or the FDIC, as appropriate, and entitled to a priority of payment.
Acquisitions. The BHC Act permits acquisitions of banks by bank holding companies, such that we and any other bank holding company, whether located in Georgia or elsewhere, may acquire a bank located in any other state, subject to certain deposit-percentage, age of bank charter requirements, and other restrictions. The BHC Act requires that a bank holding company obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve before (i) acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any additional bank or bank holding company, (ii) taking any action that causes an additional bank or bank holding company to become a subsidiary of the bank holding company, or (iii) merging or consolidating with any other bank holding company. The Federal Reserve may not approve any such transaction that would result in a monopoly or would be in furtherance of any combination or conspiracy to monopolize or attempt to monopolize the business of banking in any section of the United States, or the effect of which may be substantially to lessen competition or to tend to create a monopoly in any section of the country, or that in any other manner would be in restraint of trade, unless the anticompetitive effects of the proposed transaction are clearly outweighed by the public interest in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be served. The Federal Reserve is also required to consider: (1) the financial and managerial resources of the companies involved,
including pro forma capital ratios; (2) the risk to the stability of the United States banking or financial system; (3) the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, including performance under the Community Reinvestment Act, further described below; and (4) the effectiveness of the companies in combatting money laundering.
Change in Control. Federal law restricts the amount of voting stock of a bank holding company or a bank that a person may acquire without the prior approval of banking regulators. Under the Change in Bank Control Act and the regulations thereunder, a person or group must give advance notice to the Federal Reserve before acquiring control of any bank holding company, such as the Company, and the FDIC before acquiring control of the Bank. Upon receipt of such notice, the bank regulatory agencies may approve or disapprove the acquisition. The Change in Bank Control Act creates a rebuttable presumption of control if a person or group acquires the power to vote 10% or more of our outstanding common stock. The overall effect of such laws is to make it more difficult to acquire a bank holding company and a bank by tender offer or similar means than it might be to acquire control of another type of corporation. Consequently, shareholders of the Company may be less likely to benefit from the rapid increases in stock prices that may result from tender offers or similar efforts to acquire control of other companies. Investors should be aware of these requirements when acquiring shares of our stock.
Governance and Financial Reporting Obligations. We are required to comply with various corporate governance and financial reporting requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, as well as rules and regulations adopted by the SEC, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, and the Nasdaq Stock Market. In particular, we are required to include management reports on internal controls as part of our Annual Report on Form 10-K in order to comply with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We have evaluated our controls, including compliance with the SEC rules on internal controls, and have and expect to continue to spend significant amounts of time and money on compliance with these rules. Our failure to comply with these internal control rules may materially adversely affect our reputation, ability to obtain the necessary certifications to financial statements, and the values of our securities.
Corporate Governance. The Dodd-Frank Act addresses many investor protections, corporate governance, and executive compensation matters that will affect most U.S. publicly traded companies. The Dodd-Frank Act (1) grants shareholders of U.S. publicly traded companies an advisory vote on executive compensation; (2) enhances independence requirements for Compensation Committee members; and (3) requires companies listed on national securities exchanges to adopt incentive-based compensation claw-back policies for executive officers.
Incentive Compensation. The Dodd-Frank Act required the banking agencies and the SEC to establish joint rules or guidelines for financial institutions with more than $1 billion in assets, such as us and the Bank, which prohibit incentive compensation arrangements that the agencies determine to encourage inappropriate risks by the institution. The federal banking agencies issued proposed rules in 2011 and previously issued guidance on sound incentive compensation policies. In 2016, the federal banking agencies also proposed rules that would, depending upon the assets of the institution, directly regulate incentive compensation arrangements and would require enhanced oversight and recordkeeping. As of December 31, 2021, these rules have not been implemented. We and the Bank have undertaken efforts to ensure that our incentive compensation plans do not encourage inappropriate risks, consistent with three key principles - that incentive compensation arrangements should appropriately balance risk and financial rewards, be compatible with effective controls and risk management, and be supported by strong corporate governance.
Shareholder Say-On-Pay Votes. The Dodd-Frank Act requires public companies to take shareholders’ votes on proposals addressing compensation (known as say-on-pay), the frequency of a say-on-pay vote, and the golden parachutes available to executives in connection with change-in-control transactions. Public companies must give shareholders the opportunity to vote on the compensation at least every three years and the opportunity to vote on frequency at least every six years, indicating whether the say-on-pay vote should be held annually, biennially, or triennially. The say-on-pay, the say-on-parachute and the say-on-frequency votes are explicitly nonbinding and cannot override a decision of our board of directors.
Other Regulatory Matters. We and our subsidiaries are subject to oversight by the SEC, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, (“FINRA”), the PCAOB, the Nasdaq Stock Market and various state securities regulators. We and our subsidiaries have from time to time received requests for information from regulatory authorities in various states, including state attorneys general, securities regulators and other regulatory authorities, concerning our business practices. Such requests are considered incidental to the normal conduct of business.
Capital Requirements. The Bank is required under federal law to maintain certain minimum capital levels based on ratios of capital to total assets and capital to risk-weighted assets. The required capital ratios are minimums, and the federal banking agencies may determine that a banking organization, based on its size, complexity or risk profile, must maintain a higher level of capital in order to operate in a safe and sound manner. Risks such as concentration of credit risks and the risk arising from non-traditional activities, as well as the institution’s exposure to a decline in the economic value of its capital due to changes in
interest rates, and an institution’s ability to manage those risks are important factors that are to be taken into account in assessing an institution’s overall capital adequacy. The following is a brief description of the relevant provisions of these capital rules and their potential impact on our capital levels.
The Bank is subject to the following risk-based capital ratios: a common equity Tier 1 (“CET1”) risk-based capital ratio, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, which includes CET1 and additional Tier 1 capital, and a total risk-based capital ratio, which includes Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. CET1 is primarily comprised of the sum of common stock instruments and related surplus net of treasury stock, plus retained earnings, and certain qualifying minority interests, less certain adjustments and deductions, including with respect to goodwill, intangible assets, mortgage servicing assets and deferred tax assets subject to temporary timing differences. Additional Tier 1 capital is primarily comprised of noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, tier 1 minority interests and grandfathered trust preferred securities. Tier 2 capital consists of instruments disqualified from Tier 1 capital, including qualifying subordinated debt, other preferred stock and certain hybrid capital instruments, and a limited amount of loan loss reserves up to a maximum of 1.25% of risk-weighted assets, subject to certain eligibility criteria. The capital rules also define the risk-weights assigned to assets and off-balance sheet items to determine the risk-weighted asset components of the risk-based capital rules, including, for example, certain “high volatility” commercial real estate, past due assets, structured securities and equity holdings.
The leverage capital ratio, which serves as a minimum capital standard, is the ratio of Tier 1 capital to quarterly average total consolidated assets net of goodwill, certain other intangible assets, and certain required deduction items. The required minimum leverage ratio for all banks is 4%.
In addition, as of January 1, 2019, the capital rules require a capital conservation buffer of 2.5%, constituted of CET1, above each of the minimum capital ratio requirements (CET1, Tier 1, and total risk-based capital), which is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. These buffer requirements must be met for a bank to be able to pay dividends, engage in share buybacks or make discretionary bonus payments to executive management without restriction.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), among other things, requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” regarding depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. FDICIA establishes five regulatory capital tiers: “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized,” and “critically undercapitalized.” A depository institution’s capital tier will depend upon how its capital levels compare to various relevant capital measures and certain other factors, as established by regulation. FDICIA generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distribution (including payment of a dividend) or paying any management fee to its holding company if the depository institution would thereafter be undercapitalized. The FDICIA imposes progressively more restrictive restraints on operations, management and capital distributions, depending on the category in which an institution is classified.
To be well-capitalized, the Bank must maintain at least the following capital ratios:
•6.5% CET1 to risk-weighted assets;
•8.0% Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets;
•10.0% Total capital to risk-weighted assets; and
•5.0% Leverage ratio.
Failure to be well-capitalized or to meet minimum capital requirements could result in certain mandatory and possible additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have an adverse material effect on our operations or financial condition. For example, only a well-capitalized depository institution may accept brokered deposits without prior regulatory approval. Failure to be well-capitalized or to meet minimum capital requirements could also result in restrictions on the Bank’s ability to pay dividends or otherwise distribute capital or to receive regulatory approval of applications or other restrictions on its growth.
As of December 31, 2021, our Bank's regulatory capital ratios were above the applicable well-capitalized standards and met the then-applicable capital conservation buffer.
The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (the “Economic Growth Act”) signed into law in May 2018 scaled back certain requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act and provided other regulatory relief. Among the provisions of the Economic Growth Act was a requirement that the Federal Reserve raise the asset threshold for those bank holding companies subject to the Federal Reserve’s Small Bank Holding Company Policy Statement (“Policy Statement”) to $3 billion. As a result, as of the effective date of that change in 2018, the Company was no longer required to comply with the risk-based capital rules applicable to the Bank as described above. The Federal Reserve may, however, require smaller bank holding companies subject to the Policy Statement to maintain certain minimum capital levels, depending upon general economic conditions and a bank holding company’s particular condition, risk profile and growth plans.
As a result of the Economic Growth Act, the federal banking agencies were also required to develop a “Community Bank Leverage Ratio” (the ratio of a bank’s Tier 1 capital to average total consolidated assets) for financial institutions with assets of less than $10 billion. A “qualifying community bank” that exceeds this ratio will be deemed to be in compliance with all other capital and leverage requirements, including the capital requirements to be considered “well capitalized” under prompt corrective action statutes. The federal banking agencies may consider a financial institutions risk profile when evaluating whether it qualifies as a community bank for purposes of the capital ratio requirement. The federal banking agencies set the minimum capital for the new Community Bank Leverage Ratio at 9%. The Bank has not opted into the Community Bank Leverage Ratio Framework.
On December 21, 2018, federal banking agencies issued a joint final rule to revise their regulatory capital rules to (i) address the upcoming implementation of the “current expected credit losses” (“CECL”) accounting standard under GAAP; (ii) provide an optional three-year phase-in period for the day-one adverse regulatory capital effects that banking organizations are expected to experience upon adopting CECL; and (iii) require the use of CECL in stress tests beginning with the 2020 capital planning and stress testing cycle for certain banking organizations. In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board issued Accounting Standards Update No. 2016-13, which introduced CECL as the methodology to replace the current “incurred loss” methodology for financial assets measured at amortized cost, and changed the approaches for recognizing and recording credit losses on available-for-sale debt securities and purchased credit impaired financial assets. Under the incurred loss methodology, credit losses are recognized only when the losses are probable or have been incurred; under CECL, companies are required to recognize the full amount of expected credit losses for the lifetime of the financial assets, based on historical experience, current conditions and reasonable and supportable forecasts. This change will result in earlier recognition of credit losses that the Company deems expected but not yet probable. For SEC reporting companies with smaller reporting company designation and December 31 fiscal-year ends, such as the Company, CECL will become effective beginning with the first quarter of 2023.
Payment of Dividends. We are a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank and our other subsidiaries. Our primary source of cash, other than securities offerings, is dividends from the Bank. Under the laws of the State of Georgia, we, as a business corporation, may declare and pay dividends in cash or property unless the payment or declaration would be contrary to restrictions contained in our Articles of Incorporation, as amended, or unless, after payment of the dividend, we would not be able to pay our debts when they become due in the usual course of our business or our total assets would be less than the sum of our total liabilities. In addition, we are also subject to federal regulatory capital requirements that effectively limit the amount of cash dividends that we may pay.
The primary sources of funds for our payment of dividends to our shareholders are cash on hand and dividends from the Bank and our non-bank subsidiaries. Various federal and state statutory provisions and regulations limit the amount of dividends that the Bank and our non-bank subsidiaries may pay. The Bank is a Georgia bank. Under the regulations of the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance, a Georgia bank must have approval of the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance to pay cash dividends if, at the time of such payment:
•the ratio of Tier 1 capital to average total assets is less than 6%;
•the aggregate amount of dividends to be declared or anticipated to be declared during the current calendar year exceeds 50% of its net after-tax profits before dividends for the previous calendar year; or
•its total adversely classified assets in its most recent regulatory examination exceeded 80% of its Tier 1 capital plus its allowance for loan and lease losses.
The Georgia Financial Institutions Code contains restrictions on the ability of a Georgia bank to pay dividends other than from retained earnings without the approval of the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance. As a result of the foregoing restrictions, the Bank may be required to seek approval from the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance to pay dividends.
In addition, we and the Bank are subject to various general regulatory policies and requirements relating to the payment of dividends, including requirements to maintain adequate capital above regulatory minimums. The appropriate federal bank regulatory authority may prohibit the payment of dividends where it has determined that the payment of dividends would be an
unsafe or unsound practice and to prohibit payment thereof. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a bank’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsound and unsafe banking practice. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve have each indicated that depository institutions and their holding companies should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. Prior approval by the FDIC is required if the total of all dividends declared by a bank in any calendar year exceeds the bank’s profits for that year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two calendar years.
Under a Federal Reserve policy adopted in 2009, the board of directors of a bank holding company must consider different factors to ensure that its dividend level is prudent relative to maintaining a strong financial position, and is not based on overly optimistic earnings scenarios, such as potential events that could affect its ability to pay, while still maintaining a strong financial position. As a general matter, the Federal Reserve has indicated that the board of directors of a bank holding company should consult with the Federal Reserve and eliminate, defer or significantly reduce the bank holding company’s dividends if:
•its net income available to shareholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends;
•its prospective rate of earnings retention is not consistent with its capital needs and overall current and prospective financial condition; or
•it will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios.
Regulation of the Bank
The Bank is subject to comprehensive supervision and regulation by the FDIC and is subject to its regulatory reporting requirements. The Bank also is subject to certain Federal Reserve regulations. In addition, as discussed in more detail below, the Bank and any other of our subsidiaries that offer consumer financial products and services are subject to regulation and potential supervision by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB"). Authority to supervise and examine the Company and the Bank for compliance with federal consumer laws remains largely with the Federal Reserve and the FDIC, respectively. However, the CFPB may participate in examinations on a “sampling basis” and may refer potential enforcement actions against such institutions to their primary regulators. The CFPB also may participate in examinations of our other direct or indirect subsidiaries that offer consumer financial products or services. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and regulations that are stricter than those regulations promulgated by the CFPB, and state attorneys general are permitted to enforce certain federal consumer financial protection rules adopted by the CFPB.
Broadly, regulations applicable to the Bank include limitations on loans to a single borrower and to its directors, officers and employees; restrictions on the opening and closing of branch offices; the maintenance of required capital and liquidity ratios; the granting of credit under equal and fair conditions; the disclosure of the costs and terms of such credit; requirements to maintain reserves against deposits and loans; limitations on the types of investment that may be made by the Bank; and requirements governing risk management practices. The Bank is permitted under federal law to branch on a de novo basis across state lines where the laws of that state would permit a bank chartered by that state to open a de novo branch.
Transactions with Affiliates and Insiders. The Bank is subject to restrictions on extensions of credit and certain other transactions between the Bank and the Company or any nonbank affiliate. Generally, these covered transactions with either the Company or any affiliate are limited to 10% of the Bank’s capital and surplus, and all such transactions between the Bank and the Company and all of its nonbank affiliates combined are limited to 20% of the Bank’s capital and surplus. Loans and other extensions of credit from the Bank to the Company or any affiliate generally are required to be secured by eligible collateral in specified amounts. In addition, any transaction between the Bank and the Company or any affiliate are required to be on an arm’s length basis. Federal banking laws also place similar restrictions on certain extensions of credit by insured banks, such as the Bank, to their directors, executive officers and principal shareholders.
Reserves. Federal Reserve rules require depository institutions, such as the Bank, to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts, primarily interest bearing and non-interest bearing checking accounts. Effective March 26, 2020, reserve requirement ratios were reduced to zero percent. These reserve requirements are subject to annual adjustment by the Federal Reserve.
FDIC Insurance Assessments and Depositor Preference. The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC’s DIF up to the limits under applicable law, which currently are set at $250,000 per depositor, per insured bank, for each account ownership category. The Bank is subject to FDIC assessments for its deposit insurance. The FDIC calculates quarterly deposit insurance assessments based on an institution’s average total consolidated assets less its average tangible equity, and applies one of four risk categories determined by reference to its capital levels, supervisory ratings, and certain other factors. The assessment rate schedule can change from time to time, at the discretion of the FDIC, subject to certain limits.
Insurance of deposits may be terminated by the FDIC upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and 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 a bank’s federal regulatory agency. In addition, the Federal Deposit Insurance Act provides that, in the event of the liquidation or other resolution of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the institution, including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors, and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver, will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution, including those of the parent bank holding company.
Standards for Safety and Soundness. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to prescribe, by regulation or guideline, operational and managerial standards for all insured depository institutions relating to: (1) internal controls; (2) information systems and audit systems; (3) loan documentation; (4) credit underwriting; (5) interest rate risk exposure; and (6) asset quality.
The federal banking agencies have adopted regulations and Interagency Guidelines Establishing Standards for Safety and Soundness to implement these required standards. These guidelines set forth the safety and soundness standards used to identify and address problems at insured depository institutions before capital becomes impaired. Under the regulations, if a regulator determines that a bank fails to meet any standards prescribed by the guidelines, the regulator may require the bank to submit an acceptable plan to achieve compliance, consistent with deadlines for the submission and review of such safety and soundness compliance plans.
Anti-Money Laundering. A continued focus of governmental policy relating to financial institutions in recent years has been combating money laundering and terrorist financing. The USA PATRIOT Act broadened the application of anti-money laundering regulations to apply to additional types of financial institutions such as broker-dealers, investment advisors and insurance companies, and strengthened the ability of the U.S. Government to help prevent, detect and prosecute international money laundering and the financing of terrorism. The principal provisions of Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act require that regulated financial institutions, including state member banks: (i) establish an anti-money laundering program that includes training and audit components; (ii) comply with regulations regarding the verification of the identity of any person seeking to open an account; (iii) take additional required precautions with non-U.S. owned accounts; and (iv) perform certain verification and certification of money laundering risk for their foreign correspondent banking relationships. Failure of a financial institution to comply with the USA PATRIOT Act’s requirements could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution. The Bank has augmented its systems and procedures to meet the requirements of these regulations and will continue to revise and update its policies, procedures and controls to reflect changes required by law.
FinCEN has adopted rules that require financial institutions to obtain beneficial ownership information with respect to legal entities with which such institutions conduct business, subject to certain exclusions and exemptions. Bank regulators are focusing their examinations on anti-money laundering compliance, and we continue to monitor and augment, where necessary, our anti-money laundering compliance programs.
Banking regulators will consider compliance with the Act’s money laundering provisions in acting upon acquisition and merger proposals. Bank regulators routinely examine institutions for compliance with these obligations and have been active in imposing cease and desist and other regulatory orders and money penalty sanctions against institutions found to be violating these obligations. Sanctions for violations of the Act can be imposed in an amount equal to twice the sum involved in the violating transaction, up to $1 million. On January 1, 2021, Congress passed federal legislation that made sweeping changes to federal anti-money laundering laws, including changes that will be implemented in 2021 and subsequent years.
Economic Sanctions. The Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”) is responsible for helping to ensure that U.S. entities do not engage in transactions with certain prohibited parties, as defined by various Executive Orders and acts of Congress. OFAC publishes, and routinely updates, lists of names of persons and organizations suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, including the Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List. If we find a name on any transaction, account or wire transfer that is on an OFAC list, we must undertake certain specified activities, which could include blocking or freezing the account or transaction requested, and we must notify the appropriate authorities.
Concentrations in Lending. During 2006, the federal bank regulatory agencies released guidance on “Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending” (the “Guidance”) and advised financial institutions of the risks posed by commercial real estate (“CRE”) lending concentrations. The Guidance requires that appropriate processes be in place to identify, monitor and control risks associated with real estate lending concentrations. Higher allowances for loan losses and capital levels may also be required. The Guidance is triggered when CRE loan concentrations exceed either:
•total reported loans for construction, land development, and other land of 100% or more of a bank’s total risk-based capital; or
•total reported loans secured by multifamily and nonfarm nonresidential properties and loans for construction, land development, and other land of 300% or more of a bank’s total risk-based capital.
The Guidance also applies when a bank has a sharp increase in CRE loans or has significant concentrations of CRE secured by a particular property type. We have always had exposures to loans secured by commercial real estate due to the nature of our markets and the loan needs of both retail and commercial customers. We believe our long term experience in CRE lending, underwriting policies, internal controls, and other policies currently in place, as well as our loan and credit monitoring and administration procedures, are generally appropriate to managing our concentrations as required under the Guidance.
Community Reinvestment Act. The Bank is subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”), which imposes a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with their safe and sound operation, to help meet the credit needs of entire communities where the bank accepts deposits, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods. The FDIC’s assessment of the Bank’s CRA record is made available to the public. Further, a less than satisfactory CRA rating will slow, if not preclude, expansion of banking activities and prevent a company from becoming or remaining a financial holding company. Following the enactment of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (“GLB”), CRA agreements with private parties must be disclosed and annual CRA reports must be made to a bank’s primary federal regulator. A bank holding company will not be permitted to become or remain a financial holding company and no new activities authorized under GLB may be commenced by a holding company or by a bank financial subsidiary if any of its bank subsidiaries received less than a “satisfactory” CRA rating in its latest CRA examination. Federal CRA regulations require, among other things, that evidence of discrimination against applicants on a prohibited basis, and illegal or abusive lending practices be considered in the CRA evaluation. The Bank has a rating of “Satisfactory” in its most recent CRA evaluation.
Privacy and Data Security. The GLB generally prohibits disclosure of consumer information to non-affiliated third parties unless the consumer has been given the opportunity to object and has not objected to such disclosure. Financial institutions are further required to disclose their privacy policies to customers annually. Financial institutions, however, will be required to comply with state law if it is more protective of consumer privacy than the GLB. The GLB also directed federal regulators, including the FDIC, to prescribe standards for the security of consumer information. The Bank is subject to such standards, as well as standards for notifying customers in the event of a security breach. Under federal law, the Bank must disclose its privacy policy to consumers, permit customers to opt out of having nonpublic customer information disclosed to third parties in certain circumstances and allow customers to opt out of receiving marketing solicitations based on information about the customer received from another subsidiary. States may adopt more extensive privacy protections. We are similarly required to have an information security program to safeguard the confidentiality and security of customer information and to ensure proper disposal. Customers must be notified when unauthorized disclosure involves sensitive customer information that may be misused. On November 18, 2021, the federal banking agencies issued a new rule effective in 2022 that requires banks to notify their regulators within 36 hours of a “computer-security incident” that rises to the level of a “notification incident.”
Consumer Regulation. Activities of the Bank are subject to a variety of statutes and regulations designed to protect consumers. These laws and regulations include, among numerous other things, provisions that:
•limit the interest and other charges collected or contracted for by the Bank, including new rules respecting the terms of credit cards and of debit card overdrafts;
•govern the Bank’s disclosures of credit terms to consumer borrowers;
•require the Bank to provide information to enable the public and public officials to determine whether it is fulfilling its obligation to help meet the housing needs of the community it serves;
•prohibit the Bank from discriminating on the basis of race, creed or other prohibited factors when it makes decisions to extend credit;
•govern the manner in which the Bank may collect consumer debts; and
•prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices in the provision of consumer financial products and services.
Mortgage Regulation. The CFPB adopted a rule that implements the ability-to-repay and qualified mortgage provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act (the “ATR/QM rule”), which requires lenders to consider, among other things, income, employment status, assets, payment amounts, and credit history before approving a mortgage, and provides a compliance “safe harbor” for lenders that issue certain “qualified mortgages.” The ATR/QM rule defines a “qualified mortgage” to have certain specified characteristics, and generally prohibit loans with negative amortization, interest-only payments, balloon payments, or terms exceeding 30 years from being qualified mortgages. The rule also establishes general underwriting criteria for qualified mortgages, including that monthly payments be calculated based on the highest payment that will apply in the first five years of the loan and that the borrower have a total debt-to-income ratio that is less than or equal to 43%. While “qualified mortgages” will generally be afforded safe harbor status, a rebuttable presumption of compliance with the ability-to-repay requirements will attach to “qualified mortgages” that are “higher priced mortgages” (which are generally subprime loans). In addition, the securitizer of asset-backed securities must retain not less than 5% of the credit risk of the assets collateralizing the asset-backed securities, unless subject to an exemption for asset-backed securities that are collateralized exclusively by residential mortgages that qualify as “qualified residential mortgages.”
The CFPB has also issued rules to implement requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act pertaining to mortgage loan origination (including with respect to loan originator compensation and loan originator qualifications) as well as integrated mortgage disclosure rules. In addition, the CFPB has issued rules that require servicers to comply with new standards and practices with regard to: error correction; information disclosure; force-placement of insurance; information management policies and procedures; requiring information about mortgage loss mitigation options be provided to delinquent borrowers; providing delinquent borrowers access to servicer personnel with continuity of contact about the borrower’s mortgage loan account; and evaluating borrowers’ applications for available loss mitigation options. These rules also address initial rate adjustment notices for adjustable-rate mortgages (ARMs), periodic statements for residential mortgage loans, and prompt crediting of mortgage payments and response to requests for payoff amounts.
In 2020, the CARES Act granted certain forbearance rights and protection against foreclosure to borrowers with a “federally backed mortgage loan,” including certain first or subordinate lien loans designed principally for the occupancy of one to four families. These consumer protections continued during the COVID 19 pandemic emergency.
Non-Discrimination Policies. The Bank is also subject to, among other things, the provisions of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act (the “ECOA”) and the Fair Housing Act (the “FHA”), both of which prohibit discrimination based on race or color, religion, national origin, sex, and familial status in any aspect of a consumer or commercial credit or residential real estate transaction. The Department of Justice (the “DOJ”), and the federal bank regulatory agencies have issued an Interagency Policy Statement on Discrimination in Lending that provides guidance to financial institutions in determining whether discrimination exists, how the agencies will respond to lending discrimination, and what steps lenders might take to prevent discriminatory lending practices. The DOJ has increased its efforts to prosecute what it regards as violations of the ECOA and FHA.
Item 1A.
Risk Factors
In addition to the other information contained in this Annual Report, you should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as the risk factors and uncertainties discussed in our other public filings with the SEC under the caption “Risk Factors” in evaluating us and our business and making or continuing an investment in our stock. Our operations and financial results are subject to various risks and uncertainties, including, but not limited to, the material risks described below. Many of these risks are beyond our control although efforts are made to manage those risks while simultaneously optimizing operational and financial results. The occurrence of any of the following risks, as well as risks of which we are currently unaware or currently deem immaterial, could materially and adversely affect our assets, business, cash flows, condition (financial or otherwise), liquidity, prospects, results of operations and the trading price of our common stock. It is impossible to predict or identify all such factors and, as a result, you should not consider the following factors to be a complete discussion of the risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could materially and adversely affect our assets, business, cash flows, condition (financial or otherwise), liquidity, prospects, results of operations and the trading price of our common stock. These risks may also be heightened by the disruption and uncertainty resulting from COVID-19.
In addition, certain statements in the following risk factors constitute forward-looking statements. Please refer to the section entitled “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” beginning on page 1 of this Annual Report.
Risks Related to Our Business
Our business may be adversely affected by downturns in our national and local economies and our concentration in Georgia makes us vulnerable to local weather catastrophes, public health issues, and other external events, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Our operations are significantly affected by national and local economic conditions. Substantially all of our loans are to businesses and individuals in Georgia, and all of our branches and most of our deposit customers are also located in this area. As a result, local economic conditions significantly affect the demand for loans and other products we offer to our customers (including real estate, commercial and construction loans), the ability of borrowers to repay these loans and the value of the collateral securing these loans. A decline in the economies in which we operate could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, including, but not limited to the following:
•demand for our loans, deposits and services may decline;
•loan delinquencies, problem assets and foreclosures may increase;
•weak economic conditions may continue to limit the demand for loans by creditworthy borrowers, limiting our capacity to leverage our retail deposits and maintain our net interest income;
•collateral for our loans may decline further in value; and
•the amount of our low-cost or non-interest bearing deposits may decrease.
Strong competition and changing banking environment may limit growth and profitability.
Competition in the banking and financial services industry is intense. We compete with commercial banks, savings institutions, mortgage brokerage firms, credit unions, finance companies, mutual funds, insurance companies, brokerage and investment banking firms operating locally and elsewhere, and non-traditional financial institutions, including fintech companies, non-depository financial services providers. Many of these competitors (whether regional or national institutions) have substantially greater resources and lending limits than we have and may offer certain services that we do not or cannot provide. Additionally, non-traditional financial institutions may not have the same regulatory requirements or burdens as we do, despite playing a rapidly increasing role in the financial services industry including providing services previously limited to commercial banks. Such competition could ultimately limit our growth, profitability and shareholder value, as increased competition in our markets may result in reduced loans, deposits and commissions and brokers’ fees, gains on sales, servicing fees, as well as reduced net interest margin and profitability. If we are unable to successfully compete in our market areas and adapt to the ever changing banking environment, we may be unable to continue to grow our business, and our financial condition and results of operations may be adversely affected. We also compete with many forms of payments offered by both bank and non-bank providers, including a variety of new and evolving alternative payment mechanisms, systems and products, such as aggregators and web-based and wireless payment platforms or technologies, digital or “crypto” currencies, prepaid systems and payment services targeting users of social networks, communications platforms and online gaming. Our future success may depend, in part, on our ability to use technology competitively to offer products and services that provide convenience to customers and create additional efficiencies in our operations.
Some of our competitors have reduced or eliminated certain service charges on deposit accounts, including overdraft fees, and additional competitors may be willing to reduce or eliminate service or other fees in order to attract additional customers. If the Company chooses to reduce or eliminate certain categories of fees, including those related to deposit accounts, fee income related to these products and services would be reduced. If the Company chooses not to take such actions, we may be at a competitive disadvantage in attracting customers for certain fee producing products.
Fluctuations in interest rates may impact net interest income and otherwise negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.
Net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income that we earn on interest-earning assets and the interest expense that we pay on interest-bearing liabilities, is a major component of our income and our primary source of revenue from our operations. A further narrowing of interest rate spreads could adversely affect our earnings and financial condition. We cannot control or predict with certainty changes in interest rates. Regional and local economic conditions, competitive pressures and the policies of regulatory authorities, including monetary policies of the Federal Reserve, affect interest income and interest expense.
Effective March 2020, the Federal Reserve lowered the target range for the federal funds rate to a range from 0 to 0.25 percent in response to the economic disruption that occurred at the outset of the COVID-19 pandemic, which has continued into 2022. We expect a long duration of reduced interest rates to negatively impact our net interest income, margin, cost of borrowing and future profitability and to have a material adverse effect on our financial results. However, we expect the Federal Reserve to raise rates more than once in the next twelve months. Increasing interest rates can have a negative impact on our business by reducing the amount of money our customers borrow or by adversely affecting their ability to repay outstanding loan balances that may increase due to adjustments in their variable rates. In addition, in a rising interest rate environment we may have to offer more attractive interest rates to depositors to compete for deposits, or pursue other sources of liquidity, such as wholesale funds. Higher income volatility from changes in interest rates and spreads to benchmark indices could result in a decrease in net interest income and a decrease in current fair market values of our assets. Fluctuations in interest rates impacts both the level of income and expense recorded on most of our assets and liabilities and the market value of all interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our net income, operating results, or financial condition. A prolonged period of volatile and unstable market conditions would likely increase our funding costs and negatively affect market risk mitigation strategies.
We have ongoing policies and procedures designed to manage the risks associated with changes in market interest rates and actively manage these risks through hedging and other risk mitigation strategies. However, if our assumptions are wrong or overall economic conditions are significantly different than anticipated, our risk mitigation techniques may be ineffective or costly.
The COVID-19 pandemic has adversely impacted, and will likely continue to adversely impact, our business, financial condition, liquidity, capital and results of operations.
The extent and duration to which the continuing COVID-19 pandemic will impact our business in the future is unknown and will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and outside our control. These developments include the duration and severity of the pandemic (including the possibility of further surges of new or existing COVID-19 variants of concern), supply chain disruptions, decreased demand for our products and services or those of our borrowers, which could increase our credit risk, rising inflation, our ability to maintain sufficient qualified personnel due to labor shortages, talent attrition, employee illness, quarantine, willingness to return to work, face-coverings and other safety requirements, or travel and other restrictions, and the actions taken by governments, businesses and individuals to contain the impact of COVID-19, as well as further actions taken by governmental authorities to limit the resulting economic impact. It is also possible that the pandemic and its aftermath will lead to a prolonged economic slowdown in sectors disproportionately affected by the pandemic or recession in the U.S. economy or the world economy in general.
Inflation could negatively impact our business, our profitability and our stock price.
Prolonged periods of inflation may impact our profitability by negatively impacting our fixed costs and expenses, including increasing funding costs and expense related to talent acquisition and retention, and negatively impacting the demand for our products and services. Additionally, inflation may lead to a decrease in consumer and clients purchasing power and negatively affect the need or demand for our products and services. If significant inflation continues, our business could be negatively affected by, among other things, increased default rates leading to credit losses which could decrease our appetite for new credit extensions. These inflationary pressures could result in missed earnings and budgetary projections causing our stock price to suffer.
Interest rates on our outstanding financial instruments might be subject to change based on developments related to LIBOR, which could adversely affect our revenue, expenses, and the value of our financial instruments.
On July 27, 2017, the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority, which regulates LIBOR, publicly announced that it intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit LIBOR rates after 2021. The ICE Benchmark Administration (IBA), the administrator of LIBOR, announced on November 30, 2020, that it would cease publishing the one-week and two-month LIBOR rates on December 31, 2021, but would continue publishing the one-, three-, six-, and twelve-month LIBOR rates until June 30, 2023. Regardless, the federal banking agencies also issued guidance on November 30, 2020, encouraging banks to (i) stop using LIBOR in new financial contracts no later than December 31, 2021; and (ii) either use a rate other than LIBOR or include clear language defining the alternative rate that will be applicable after LIBOR’s discontinuation. At this time, it is impossible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide LIBOR submissions for the calculation of LIBOR. Similarly, it is not possible to predict whether LIBOR will continue to be viewed as an acceptable market benchmark prior to its 2023 retirement, what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, or the effect of any such changes in views or alternatives may be on the markets for LIBOR-indexed financial instruments.
In particular, regulators, industry groups and certain committees (e.g., the Alternative Reference Rates Committee) have, among other things, published recommended fallback language for LIBOR-linked financial instruments, identified recommended alternatives for certain LIBOR rates (e.g., the Secured Overnight Financing Rate as the recommended alternative to U.S. Dollar LIBOR), and proposed implementations of the recommended alternatives in floating rate instruments. At this time, it is not possible to predict whether these specific recommendations and proposals will be broadly accepted, whether they will continue to evolve, and what the effect of their implementation may be on the markets for floating-rate financial instruments.
The uncertainty regarding the future of LIBOR as well as the transition from LIBOR to another benchmark rate or rates is complex and could have a range of adverse effects on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In particular, any such transition could:
•adversely affect the interest rates paid or received on, and the revenue and expenses associated with, and the value of Colony’s floating rate obligations, loans, deposits, derivatives and other financial instruments tied to LIBOR rates, or other securities or financial arrangements given LIBOR’s role in determining market interest rates globally;
•prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of our preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate;
•result in disputes, litigation or other actions with counterparties regarding the interpretation and enforceability of certain fallback language, or the absence of such language, in LIBOR-based securities and loans;
•result in customer uncertainty and disputes around how variable rates should be calculated in light of the foregoing, thereby damaging our reputation and resulting in a loss of customers and additional costs to us; and
•require the transition to or development of appropriate systems and analytics to effectively transition Colony’s risk management processes from LIBOR-based products to those based on the applicable alternative pricing benchmark, such as SOFR.
The manner and impact of this transition, as well as the effect of these developments on Colony’s funding costs, loan, and investment and trading securities portfolios, asset liability management and business is uncertain.
Liquidity risks could affect operations and jeopardize our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Liquidity is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans and/or investment securities and through other sources could have a substantial negative effect on our liquidity. Our most important source of funds consists of our customer deposits. Such deposit balances can decrease when customers perceive alternative investments, such as the stock market, as providing a better risk/return tradeoff. If customers move money out of bank deposits and into other investments, we could lose a relatively low cost source of funds, which would require us to seek wholesale funding alternatives in order to continue to grow, thereby increasing our funding costs and reducing our net interest income and net income.
Other primary sources of funds consist of cash from operations, investment maturities and sales, sale of loans and proceeds from the issuance and sale of our equity securities to investors. Additional liquidity is provided by our ability to borrow from the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and the Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta. We also may borrow from third-party lenders from time to time. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our activities or on terms that are acceptable to us could be impaired by factors that affect us directly or the financial services industry or economy in general, such as disruptions in the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry.
Any decline in available funding could adversely impact our ability to continue to implement our strategic plan, including our ability to originate loans, invest in securities, meet our expenses, or to fulfill obligations such as repaying our borrowings or meeting deposit withdrawal demands, any of which could have a material adverse impact on our liquidity, business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our business depends on our ability to successfully manage credit risk.
We are subject to the risk of losses resulting from the failure of borrowers, guarantors and related parties to pay us the interest and principal amounts due on their loans. Although we maintain well-defined credit policies and credit underwriting and monitoring and collection procedures, these policies and procedures may not prevent losses, particularly during periods in which the local, regional or national economy suffers a general decline. Further, in the event of delinquencies, regulatory changes and policies designed to protect borrowers may slow or prevent us from making our business decisions or may result in a delay in our taking certain remediation actions, such as foreclosure. If borrowers fail to repay their loans, our financial condition and results of operations would be adversely affected.
Our commercial real estate, real estate construction, and commercial business loans increase our exposure to credit risks.
Over the last several years, we have increased our non-residential lending in order to improve the yield and reduce the average duration of our assets. At December 31, 2021, our portfolio of commercial real estate and commercial, financial and agricultural loans totaled $1.1 billion or 82.7% of total loans compared $854.9 million, or 80.7% of total loans of total loans at December 31, 2020. At December 31, 2021, the amount of nonperforming commercial real estate and commercial, financial and agricultural loans was $1.6 million , or 28.9% of total nonperforming loans. These loans may expose us to a greater risk of non-payment and loss than residential real estate loans because, in the case of commercial loans, repayment often depends on the successful operation and earnings of the borrower's businesses and, in the case of consumer loans, the applicable collateral is subject to rapid depreciation. Additionally, commercial real estate loans typically involve larger loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers compared to residential real estate loans. If loans that are collateralized by real estate become troubled and the value of the real estate has been significantly impaired, then we may not be able to recover the full contractual amount of principal and interest due on the loan, which could cause us to increase our provision for loan losses and adversely affect our financial condition and operating results. In addition, if hazardous or toxic substances are found on properties pledged as collateral, the value of the real estate could be impaired. If we foreclose on and take title to such properties, we may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. Environmental laws may also require us to incur substantial expenses to address unknown liabilities and may materially reduce the affected property’s value or limit our ability to use or sell the affected property.
Our allowance for loan losses may not cover actual losses, and we may be required to materially increase our allowance, which may adversely affect our capital, financial condition and results of operations.
We derive the most significant portion of our revenues from our lending activities. When we lend money, commit to lend money or enter into a letter of credit or other contract with a counterparty, we incur credit risk, which is the risk of losses if our borrowers do not repay their loans or our counterparties fail to perform according to the terms of their contracts. We estimate and maintain an allowance for loan losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan losses charged to expenses, which represents management's best estimate of probable credit losses that have been incurred within the existing portfolio of loans, as described under Note 5 of Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in this Report and under “Allowance for Loan Losses” under “Part II - Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” of this Report.
The allowance, in the judgment of management, is established to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent in the loan portfolio. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks using existing qualitative and quantitative information, all of which may undergo material changes, as we have experienced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic and continue to experience the after-effects of the pandemic through supply chain disruptions. Changes in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans, risk ratings, and other factors, both within and outside of our control, including the impact of COVID-19, may require an increase in the allowance for loan losses.
Because the risk rating of the loans is dependent on some subjective information and subject to changes in the borrower's credit risk profile, evolving local market conditions and other factors, it can be difficult for us to predict the effects that those factors
will have on the classifications assigned to the loan portfolio, and thus difficult to anticipate the velocity or volume of the migration of loans through the classification process and effect on the level of the allowance for loan losses. An increase in the allowance for loan losses would result in a decrease in net income and capital, and could have a material adverse effect on our capital, financial condition and results of operations. Accordingly, we monitor our credit quality and our reserve requirements and use that as a basis for capital planning and other purposes. See “Item 7. Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Capital Requirements” of this Report for further information.
We may not be able to continue growing our business, particularly if we cannot increase loans and deposits through organic growth.
Our ability to continue to grow successfully will depend to a significant extent on our capital resources. It also will depend, in part, upon our ability to attract deposits and grow our loan portfolio and investment opportunities and on whether we can continue to fund growth while maintaining cost controls and asset quality, as well as on other factors beyond our control, such as national, regional and local economic conditions and interest rate trends.
We hold certain intangible assets that in the future could be classified as either partially or fully impaired, which would reduce our earnings and the book values of these assets.
Pursuant to applicable accounting requirements, we are required to periodically test our goodwill and core deposit intangible assets for impairment. The impairment testing process considers a variety of factors, including the current market price of our common shares, the estimated net present value of our assets and liabilities and information concerning the terminal valuation of similarly situated insured depository institutions. Future impairment testing may result in a partial or full impairment of the value of our goodwill or core deposit intangible assets, or both. If an impairment determination is made in a future reporting period, our earnings and the book value of these intangible assets will be reduced by the amount of the impairment.
The current expected credit loss standard established by the Financial Accounting Standards Board will require significant data requirements and changes to methodologies.
In the aftermath of the 2007-2008 financial crisis, the Financial Accounting Standards Board, or FASB, decided to review how banks estimate losses in the allowance for loan losses calculation, and it issued the final Current Expected Credit Loss, or CECL, standard on June 16, 2016. Currently, the impairment model used by financial institutions is based on incurred losses, and loans are recognized as impaired when there is no longer an assumption that future cash flows will be collected in full under the originally contracted terms. This model will be replaced by the CECL model that will become effective for us for the fiscal year beginning after December 15, 2022 in which financial institutions will be required to use historical information, current conditions and reasonable forecasts to estimate the expected loss over the life of the loan. The transition to the CECL model will require significantly greater data requirements and changes to methodologies to accurately account for expected loss. There can be no assurance that we will not be required to increase our reserves and allowance for loan losses as a result of the implementation of CECL.
Acquisitions could disrupt our business and adversely affect our operating results.
To the extent that we grow through acquisitions, we may not be able to adequately or profitably manage this growth. In addition, such acquisitions may involve the issuance of securities, which may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share. Acquiring banks, bank branches or businesses involves risks commonly associated with acquisitions, including:
•potential exposure to unknown or contingent liabilities we acquire;
•exposure to potential asset quality problems of the acquired financial institutions, businesses or branches;
•difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of financial institutions, businesses or branches we acquire;
•higher than expected deposit attrition;
•potential diversion of our management’s time and attention;
•the possible loss of key employees and customers of financial institutions, businesses or branches we acquire;
•difficulty in safely investing any cash generated by the acquisition;
•inability to utilize potential tax benefits from such transactions;
•difficulty in estimating the fair value of the financial institutions, businesses or branches to be acquired which affects the profits we generate from the acquisitions; and
•potential changes in banking or tax laws or regulations that may affect the financial institutions or businesses to be acquired.
In addition, we face significant competition from numerous other financial services institutions, many of which will have greater financial resources than we do, when considering acquisition opportunities. Accordingly, attractive acquisition opportunities may not be available to us. Furthermore, we may not be able to complete future acquisitions and, if we do complete such acquisitions, we may not be able to successfully integrate the operations, management, products and services of the entities that we acquire and eliminate redundancies.
Reductions in service charge income or failure to comply with payment network rules could negatively impact our earnings.
We derive significant revenue from service charges on deposit accounts, the bulk of which comes from overdraft-related fees. We have seen a slight increase in our service charge income, which is primarily attributable to an increase in insufficient funds and overdraft fees due to a general increase in customer spending activity driven by the winding down of the economic impact of COVID-19.
In addition, changes in banking regulations could have an adverse impact on our ability to derive income from service charges. Increased competition from other financial institutions or changes in consumer behavior could lead to declines in our deposit balances, which would result in a decline in service charge fees. Such a reduction could have a material impact on our earnings.
Reductions in interchange income could negatively impact our earnings.
Interchange income is derived from fees paid by merchants to the interchange network in exchange for the use of the network's infrastructure and payment facilitation. These fees are paid to card issuers to compensate them for the costs associated with issuance and operation. We earn interchange fees on card transactions from debit cards, including $6.9 million during the year ended December 31, 2021. Merchants have attempted to negotiate lower interchange rates, and the Durbin Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act limits the amount of interchange fees that may be charged for certain debit card transactions. Merchants may also continue to pursue alternative payment platforms, such as Apple Pay, to lower their processing costs. Any such new payment system may reduce our interchange income. Our failure to comply with the operating regulations set forth by payment card networks, which may change, could subject us to penalties, fees or the termination of our license to use the networks. Any of these scenarios could have a material impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Because the nature of the financial services business involves a high volume of transactions, we face significant operational risks.
We are exposed to many types of operation risks, including reputational risk, legal and regulatory and compliance risk, the risk of fraud, theft, illegal, wrongful or suspicious activities, and/or activities resulting in consumer harm that adversely affects our customers and/or our business by employees or persons outside our Company, including the execution of unauthorized transactions by employees or operational errors, clerical or record-keeping errors or those resulting from faulty or disabled computer or telecommunications systems. The precautions we take to detect and prevent such misconduct may not always be effective and regulatory sanctions and/or penalties, serious harm to our reputation, financial condition, customer relationships and ability to attract new customers. In addition, improper use or disclosure of confidential information by our employees, even if inadvertent, could result in serious harm to our reputation, financial condition and current and future business relationships. The precautions we take to detect and prevent such misconduct may not always be effective. Actual or alleged conduct by Colony Bank can result in negative public opinion about our business. Negative public opinion can result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance and acquisitions and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to those activities. Negative public opinion can adversely affect our ability to attract and keep customers and can expose us to litigation and regulatory action. Negative public opinion could also affect our credit ratings, which are important to our access to unsecured wholesale borrowings.
Our business involves storing and processing sensitive consumer and business customer data. If personal, non-public, confidential or proprietary information of customers in our possession were to be mishandled or misused, we could suffer significant regulatory consequences, reputational damage and financial loss. Such mishandling or misuse could include, for example, if such information were erroneously provided to parties who were not permitted to have that information, either by fault of our systems, employees, or counterparties, or where such information is intercepted or otherwise inappropriately taken by third parties. Furthermore, a cybersecurity breach could result in theft of such data.
Because we operate in diverse markets and rely on the ability of our employees and systems to process a high number of transactions, certain errors may be repeated or compounded before they are discovered and successfully rectified. Our necessary
dependence upon automated systems to record and process transactions, and our large transaction volume, may further increase the risk that technical flaws or employee tampering or manipulation of those systems will result in losses that are difficult to detect. We also may be subject to disruptions of our operating systems arising from events that are wholly or partially beyond our control (for example, security breaches, denial of service attacks, viruses, worms and other disruptive problems caused by hackers, computer break-ins, phishing and other disruptions or electrical or telecommunications outages, or natural disasters, disease pandemics or other damage to property or physical assets) which may result in violations of consumer privacy laws including the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, cause significant liability to us and give reason for existing and potential customers to refrain from doing business with us. Although we, with the help of third-party service providers, intend to continue to implement security technology and establish operational procedures to prevent such damage and potential liability, there can be no assurance that these security measures will be successful. In addition, advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptography or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the algorithms we and our third-party service providers use to encrypt and protect customer transaction data. We are further exposed to the risk that our external vendors may be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations (or will be subject to the same risk of fraud or operational errors by their respective employees as we are) and to the risk that our (or our vendors’) business continuity and data security systems prove to be inadequate. The occurrence of any of these risks could result in a diminished ability of us to operate our business (for example, by requiring us to expend significant resources to correct the defect), as well as potential liability to clients, reputational damage and regulatory intervention, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition or operations results, perhaps materially.
As an issuer of debit cards, we are exposed to losses in the event that holders of our cards experience fraud on their card accounts.
Our customers regularly use Colony Bank-issued debit cards to pay for transactions with retailers and other businesses. There is the risk of data security breaches at these retailers and other businesses that could result in the misappropriation of our customers’ debit card information. When our customers use Colony Bank-issued cards to make purchases from those businesses, card account information is provided to the business. If the business’s systems that process or store card account information are subject to a data security breach, holders of our cards who have made purchases from that business may experience fraud on their card accounts. Colony Bank may suffer losses associated with reimbursing our customers for such fraudulent transactions on customers’ card accounts, as well as for other costs related to data security compromise events, such as replacing cards associated with compromised card accounts.
The implementation of other new lines of business or new products and services may subject us to additional risk.
We continuously evaluate our service offerings and may implement new lines of business or offer new products and services within existing lines of business in the future. There are substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts. In developing and marketing new lines of business and/or new products and services, we undergo a new product process to assess the risks of the initiative, and invest significant time and resources to build internal controls, policies and procedures to mitigate those risks, including hiring experienced management to oversee the implementation of the initiative. Initial timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business and/or new products or services may not be achieved and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible. External factors, such as compliance with regulations, competitive alternatives, and shifting market preferences, may also impact the successful implementation of a new line of business and/or a new product or service. Furthermore, any new line of business and/or new product or service could require the establishment of new key and other controls and have a significant impact on our existing system of internal controls. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business and/or new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.
As a community bank, our recruitment and retention efforts may not be sufficient enough to implement our business strategy and execute successful operations.
Our financial success depends upon our ability to attract and retain highly motivated, well-qualified personnel. We face significant competition in the recruitment of qualified employees from financial institutions and others. As we continue to grow, we may find our recruitment and retention efforts more challenging. If we do not succeed in attracting, hiring, and integrating experienced or qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy, and we may be required to substantially increase our overall compensation or benefits to attract and retain such employees. Furthermore, in June 2010, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the Office of Thrift Supervision, and the FDIC jointly issued comprehensive final guidance designed to ensure that incentive compensation policies do not undermine the safety and soundness of banking organizations by encouraging employees to take imprudent risks. This regulation significantly restricts the amount, form, and context in which we pay incentive-based compensation and may put us at a competitive disadvantage compared to non-financial institutions in terms of attracting and retaining senior level employees.
We are a community bank and our ability to maintain our reputation is critical to the success of our business and the failure to do so may materially adversely affect our performance.
Our reputation is one of the most valuable components of our business. As such, we strive to conduct our business in a manner that enhances our reputation. This is done, in part, by recruiting, hiring and retaining employees who share our core values of being an integral part of the communities we serve, delivering superior service to our customers and caring about our customers and associates. Threats to our reputation can come from many sources, including adverse sentiment about financial institutions generally, unethical practices, employee misconduct, failure to deliver minimum standards of service or quality, compliance deficiencies, and questionable or fraudulent activities of our customers. Negative publicity regarding our business, employees, or customers, with or without merit, may result in the loss of customers, investors and employees, costly litigation, a decline in revenues and increased governmental regulation. If our reputation is negatively affected, by the actions of our employees or otherwise, our business and, therefore, our operating results may be materially adversely affected.
Our risk management framework may not be effective in mitigating risks and/or losses to us.
Our risk management framework is comprised of various processes, systems and strategies, and is designed to manage the types of risk to which we are subject, including, among others, credit, market, liquidity, interest rate and compliance. Our framework also includes financial or other modeling methodologies that involve management assumptions and judgment. Our risk management framework may not be effective under all circumstances and may not adequately mitigate any risk or loss to us. If our risk management framework is not effective, we could suffer unexpected losses and our business, financial condition, results of operations or growth prospects could be materially and adversely affected. We may also be subject to potentially adverse regulatory consequences.
The financial services market is undergoing rapid technological changes, and if we are unable to stay current with those changes, we will not be able to effectively compete.
The financial services market, including banking services, is undergoing rapid changes with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. These trends were accelerated by the COVID-19 pandemic, increasing demand for mobile banking solutions. Our future success will depend, in part, on our ability to keep pace with the technological changes and to use technology to satisfy and grow customer demand for our products and services and to create additional efficiencies in our operations. We expect that we will need to make substantial investments in our technology and information systems to compete effectively and to stay current with technological changes. Some of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements and will be able to invest more heavily in developing and adopting new technologies, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage. In addition, we may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers. As a result, our ability to effectively compete to retain or acquire new business may be impaired, and the failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We face significant cyber and data security risk that could result in the dissemination of confidential and sensitive information, adversely affecting our business or reputation and exposing us to material liabilities.
As a financial institution, we are under continuous threat of loss due to the swiftness and sophistication of hacking and cyber-attacks. This risk, although considerable at the present, will only increase in the future. Two of the most significant cyber-attack risks that we face are electronic fraud and loss of sensitive customer data. Loss from electronic fraud occurs when cybercriminals breach and extract funds directly from customer accounts or our own accounts. The attempts to breach sensitive customer data, such as account numbers, social security numbers, or other personal information are less frequent but would present significant legal and/or regulatory costs to us if successful, as well as potentially damage our reputation among the markets we serve. Our risk and exposure to these matters will remain relevant because of the evolving nature and complexity of the threats posed by cybercriminals and hackers along with our plans to continue to provide internet banking and mobile banking avenues for transacting business. While we have not experienced material losses relating to cyber-attacks or other information security breaches to date, we have been the subject of attempted hacking and cyber-attacks and there can be no assurance that we will not suffer such losses in the future.
The occurrence of any cyber-attack or information security breach could result in material adverse consequences including damage to our reputation and the loss of current or potential customers. We also could face litigation or additional regulatory scrutiny due to such an occurrence. Litigation or regulatory actions in turn could lead to material liability, including, but not limited to, fines and penalties or reimbursement to customers adversely affected by a data breach. Even if we do not suffer any material adverse consequences as a result of events affecting us directly, successful attacks or systems failures at other financial institutions could lead to a general loss of customer confidence in our Company.
We rely on third-party vendors for key components of our business.
Many key components of our operations, including data processing, recording and monitoring transactions, online interfaces and services, internet connections and network access are provided by other companies. Our vendor management process selects third-party vendors carefully, but we do not control their actions. Problems, including disruptions in communication, security breaches, or failure of a vendor to provide services, could hurt our operations or our relationships with customers. If our vendors suffer financial or operational issues, our operations and reputation could suffer if it harms the vendors’ ability to serve us and our customers. Third-party vendors are also a source of operational and information security risk to us. Replacing or renegotiating contracts with vendors could entail significant operational expense and delays. The use of third-party vendors represents an unavoidable inherent risk to our Company.
Our accounting estimates and risk management processes rely on analytical and forecasting models.
Processes that management uses to estimate our probable incurred credit losses and to measure the fair value of financial instruments, as well as the processes used to estimate the effects of changing interest rates and other market measures on our financial condition and results of operations, depend upon the use of analytical and forecasting models. These models reflect assumptions that may not be accurate, particularly in times of market stress or other unforeseen circumstances, as we have experienced as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Even if these assumptions are accurate, the models may prove to be inadequate or inaccurate because of other flaws in their design or their implementation. If the models that management uses for interest rate risk and asset liability management are inadequate, we may incur increased or unexpected losses upon changes in market interest rates or other market measures. If the models that management uses for determining our probable credit losses are inadequate, the allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to support future charge offs. If the models that management uses to measure the fair value of financial instruments are inadequate, the fair value of such financial instruments may fluctuate unexpectedly or may not accurately reflect what we could realize upon sale or settlement of such financial instruments. Any such failure in management’s analytical or forecasting models could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in accounting standards could materially impact our financial statements.
From time to time, the FASB or the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, may change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. Such changes may result in us being subject to new or changing accounting and reporting standards. In addition, the bodies that interpret the accounting standards (such as banking regulators or outside auditors) may change their interpretations or positions on how these standards should be applied. These changes may be beyond our control, can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retrospectively, or apply an existing standard differently, also retrospectively, in each case resulting in our needing to revise or restate prior period financial statements. Restating or revising our financial statements may result in reputational harm or may have other adverse effects on us.
Any deficiencies in our financial reporting or internal controls could materially and adversely affect us, including resulting in material misstatements in our financial statements, and could materially and adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
If we fail to maintain effective internal controls over financial reporting, our operating results could be harmed and it could result in a material misstatement in our financial statements in the future. Inferior controls and procedures or the identification of accounting errors could cause our investors to lose confidence in our internal controls and question our reported financial information, which, among other things, could have a negative impact on the trading price of our common stock. Additionally, we could become subject to increased regulatory scrutiny and a higher risk of shareholder litigation, which could result in significant additional expenses and require additional financial and management resources.
We may be adversely affected by the soundness of other financial institutions.
Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty, or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks, and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of a default by a counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices insufficient to recover the full amount of the loan or derivative exposure due to us. There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations or earnings.
Hurricanes or other adverse weather events would negatively affect our local economies or disrupt our operations, which would have an adverse effect on our business or results of operations.
Our market area is located in the southeastern region of the United States and is susceptible to natural disasters, such as hurricanes, tornadoes, tropical storms, other severe weather events and related flooding and wind damage, and man-made disasters. These natural disasters could negatively impact regional economic conditions, cause a decline in the value or destruction of mortgaged properties and an increase in the risk of delinquencies, foreclosures or loss on loans originated by us, damage our banking facilities and offices and negatively impact our growth strategy. Climate change may be increasing the nature, severity and frequency of adverse weather conditions, making the impact from these types of natural disasters on us or our customers worse. Such weather events can disrupt operations, result in damage to properties and negatively affect the local economies in the markets where they operate. We cannot predict whether or to what extent damage that may be caused by future hurricanes or tornadoes will affect our operations or the economies in our current or future market areas, but such weather events could negatively impact economic conditions in these regions and result in a decline in local loan demand and loan originations, a decline in the value or destruction of properties securing our loans and an increase in delinquencies, foreclosures or loan losses. Our business or results of operations may be adversely affected by these and other negative effects of natural or man-made disasters.
We may need to rely on the financial markets to provide needed capital.
Our common stock is listed and traded on the NASDAQ Global Market. If our capital resources prove in the future to be inadequate to meet our capital requirements, we may need to raise additional debt or equity capital. If conditions in the capital markets are not favorable, we may be constrained in raising capital, and an inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when and if needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.
The interest rates that we pay on our securities are also influenced by, among other things, the credit ratings that we, our affiliates and/or our securities receive from recognized rating agencies. Our credit ratings are based on a number of factors, including our financial strength and some factors not entirely within our control such as conditions affecting the financial services industry generally, and remain subject to change at any time. A downgrade to the credit rating of us or our affiliates could affect our ability to access the capital markets, increase our borrowing costs and negatively impact our profitability. A downgrade to us, our affiliates or our securities could create obligations or liabilities to us under the terms of our outstanding securities that could increase our costs or otherwise have a negative effect on our results of operations or financial condition. Additionally, a downgrade to the credit rating of any particular security issued by us or our affiliates could negatively affect the ability of the holders of that security to sell the securities and the prices at which any such securities may be sold.
Because our decision to incur debt and issue securities in future offerings will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings and debt financings. Further, market conditions could require us to accept less favorable terms for the issuance of our securities in the future. In addition, geopolitical and worldwide market conditions may cause disruption or volatility in the U.S. equity and debt markets, which could hinder our ability to issue debt and equity securities in the future on favorable terms.
The costs and effects of litigation, investigations or similar matters involving us or other financial institutions or counterparties, or adverse facts and developments related thereto, could materially affect our business, operating results and financial condition.
We may be involved from time to time in a variety of litigation, investigations or similar matters arising out of our business, including litigation related to our participation in stimulus programs associated with the government’s response to the COVID-19 pandemic. It is inherently difficult to assess the outcome of these matters, and we may not prevail in any proceedings or litigation. Our insurance may not cover all claims that may be asserted against us and indemnification rights to which we are entitled may not be honored, and any claims asserted against us, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, may harm our reputation. Should the ultimate judgments or settlements in any litigation or investigation significantly exceed our insurance coverage or to the extent that we incur civil money penalties that are not covered by insurance, they could have a
material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, premiums for insurance covering the financial and banking sectors are rising. We may not be able to obtain appropriate types or levels of insurance in the future, nor may we be able to obtain adequate replacement policies with acceptable terms or at historic rates, if at all. Finally, in recent years, a number of judicial decisions have upheld the right of borrowers to sue lending institutions on the basis of various evolving legal theories, collectively termed “lender liability.” Generally, lender liability is founded on the premise that a lender has either violated a duty, whether implied or contractual, of good faith and fair dealing owed to the borrower or has assumed a degree of control over the borrower resulting in the creation of a fiduciary duty owed to the borrower or its other creditors or shareholders. We could become subject to claims based on this or other evolving legal theories in the future.
Risks Related to Legislative and Regulatory Events
We are subject to extensive government regulation that could limit or restrict our activities, which in turn may adversely impact our ability to increase our assets and earnings.
We operate in a highly regulated environment and are subject to supervision and regulation by a number of governmental regulatory agencies, including the Federal Reserve, the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance (“DBF”) and the FDIC. Regulations adopted by these agencies, which are generally intended to provide protection for depositors and customers rather than for the benefit of shareholders, govern a comprehensive range of matters relating to ownership and control of our shares, our acquisition of other companies and businesses, permissible activities for us to engage in, maintenance of adequate capital levels, and other aspects of our operations. These bank regulators possess broad authority to prevent or remedy unsafe or unsound practices or violations of law. The laws and regulations applicable to the banking industry could change at any time and we cannot predict the effects of these changes on our business, profitability or growth strategy. Increased regulation could increase our cost of compliance and adversely affect profitability. Moreover, certain of these regulations contain significant punitive sanctions for violations, including monetary penalties and limitations on a bank’s ability to implement components of its business plan, such as expansion through mergers and acquisitions or the opening of new branch offices. In addition, changes in regulatory requirements may add costs associated with compliance efforts. Furthermore, government policy and regulation, particularly as implemented through the Federal Reserve System, significantly affect credit conditions. Negative developments in the financial industry and the impact of new legislation and regulation in response to those developments could negatively impact our business operations and adversely impact our financial performance.
Federal and state regulators periodically examine our business, and we may be required to remediate adverse examination findings.
The Federal Reserve, the FDIC, and the DBF periodically examine our business, including our compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, a banking agency were to determine that our financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, interest rate sensitivity or other aspects of any of our operations had become unsatisfactory, or that we were in violation of any law or regulation, they may take a number of different remedial actions as they deem appropriate. These actions include the power to enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, to require affirmative action to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in our capital, to restrict our growth, to assess civil money penalties, to fine or remove officers and directors and, if it is concluded that such conditions cannot be corrected or there is an imminent risk of loss to depositors, to terminate our deposit insurance and place us into receivership or conservatorship. Any regulatory action against us could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to federal and state fair lending laws, and failure to comply with these laws could lead to material penalties.
Federal and state fair lending laws and regulations, such as the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act, impose nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Department of Justice, Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”) and other federal and state agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. A successful challenge to our performance under the fair lending laws and regulations could adversely impact our rating under the Community Reinvestment Act and result in a wide variety of sanctions, including the required payment of damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, imposition of restrictions on merger and acquisition activity and restrictions on expansion activity, which could negatively impact our reputation, business, financial condition and results of operations.
We could face a risk of noncompliance and enforcement action with the Bank Secrecy Act and other anti-money laundering statutes and regulations.
The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970, the USA PATRIOT Act and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain effective anti-money laundering programs and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. FinCEN, established by the U.S. Department of the Treasury to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and engages in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal banking regulators, as well as the U.S. Department of Justice, Drug Enforcement Administration and IRS. There is also increased scrutiny of compliance with the rules enforced by OFAC related to U.S. sanctions regimes. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient or the policies, procedures and systems of the financial institutions that we have already acquired or may acquire in the future are deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, including our acquisition plans, which would negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. Failure to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat money laundering and terrorist financing could also have serious reputational consequences for us.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
Our management team’s strategies for the enhancement of shareholder value may not succeed.
Our management team is taking and considering actions to enhance shareholder value, including reviewing personnel, developing new products, issuing dividends and exploring acquisition opportunities. These actions may not enhance shareholder value. For example, holders of our common stock are only entitled to receive such dividends as our Board of Directors may declare out of funds legally available for such payments. We are not legally required to do so. Further, the Federal Reserve could decide at any time that paying any dividends on our common stock could be an unsafe or unsound banking practice. The reduction or elimination of dividends paid on our common stock could adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
An investment in our common stock is not an insured deposit and may lose value.
An investment in our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described herein, and is subject to the same market forces that affect the price of common stock in any company. As a result, if you acquire our common stock, you could lose some or all of your investment.
Our stock price may be volatile due to limited trading volume.
Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market. However, the average daily trading volume in the Company’s common stock has been relatively small, averaging approximately 391 total trades per day during 2021. As a result, trades involving a relatively small number of shares may have a significant effect on the market price of the common stock, and it may be difficult for investors to acquire or dispose of large blocks of stock without significantly affecting the market price.
ESG risks could adversely affect our reputation and shareholder, employee, client and third party relationships and may negatively affect our stock price.
Our business faces increasing public scrutiny related to environmental, social and governance (“ESG”) activities. We risk damage to our brand and reputation if we fail to act responsibly in a number of areas, such as diversity, equity, inclusion, environmental stewardship, human capital management, support for our local communities, corporate governance and transparency, or fail to consider ESG factors in our business operations.
Furthermore, as a result of our diverse base of clients and business partners, we may face potential negative publicity based on the identity of our clients or business partners and the public’s (or certain segments of the public’s) view of those entities. Such publicity may arise from traditional media sources or from social media and may increase rapidly in size and scope. If our client or business partner relationships were to become intertwined in such negative publicity, our ability to attract and retain clients, business partners, and employees may be negatively impacted, and our stock price may also be negatively impacted. Additionally, we may face pressure to not do business in certain industries that are viewed as harmful to the environment or are otherwise negatively perceived, which could impact our growth.
Additionally, investors and shareholder advocates are placing ever increasing emphasis on how corporations address ESG issues in their business strategy when making investment decisions and when developing their investment theses and proxy recommendations. We may incur meaningful costs with respect to our ESG efforts and if such efforts are negatively perceived, our reputation and stock price may suffer.
Our ability to deliver and pay dividends depends primarily upon the results of operations of our subsidiary Bank, and we may not pay, or be permitted to pay, dividends in the future.
We are a bank holding company that conducts substantially all of our operations through our subsidiary Bank. As a result, our ability to make dividend payments on our common stock will depend primarily upon the receipt of dividends and other distributions from the Bank. The ability of the Bank to pay dividends or make other payments to us, as well as our ability to pay dividends on our common stock, is limited by the Bank’s obligation to maintain sufficient capital and by other general regulatory restrictions on its dividends, which have tightened since the financial crisis.
The Federal Reserve has stated that bank holding companies should not pay dividends from sources other than current earnings. If these requirements are not satisfied, we will be unable to pay dividends on our common stock. We may also decide to limit the payment of dividends even when we have the legal ability to pay them in order to retain earnings for use in our business, which could adversely affect the market value of our common stock. There can be no assurance of whether or when we may pay dividends in the future.
Securities analysts might not continue coverage on our common stock, which could adversely affect the market for our common stock.
The trading price of our common stock depends in part on the research and reports that securities analysts publish about us and our business. We do not have any control over these analysts, and they may not continue to cover our common stock. If securities analysts do not continue to cover our common stock, the lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. If securities analysts continue to cover our common stock, and our common stock is the subject of an unfavorable report, the price of our common stock may decline. If one or more of these analysts cease to cover us or fail to publish regular reports on us, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause the price or trading volume of our common stock to decline.
Future equity issuances could result in dilution, which could cause our common stock price to decline.
We are generally not restricted from issuing additional shares of our common stock, up to the 20 million shares of voting common stock and 10 million shares of preferred stock authorized in our articles of incorporation (subject to Nasdaq shareholder approval rules), which in each case could be increased by a vote of a majority of our shares. We may issue additional shares of our common stock in the future pursuant to current or future equity compensation plans, upon conversions of preferred stock or debt, upon exercise of warrants or in connection with future acquisitions or financings. If we choose to raise capital by selling shares of our common stock for any reason, the issuance could have a dilutive effect on the holders of our common stock and could have a material negative effect on the market price of our common stock.
We have the ability to incur debt and pledge our assets, including our stock in the Bank, to secure that debt.
We have the ability to incur debt and pledge our assets to secure that debt. Absent special and unusual circumstances, a holder of indebtedness for borrowed money has rights that are superior to those of holders of common stock. For example, interest must be paid to the lender before dividends can be paid to the shareholders, and loans must be paid off before any assets can be distributed to shareholders if we were to liquidate. Furthermore, we would have to make principal and interest payments on our indebtedness, which could reduce our profitability or result in net losses on a consolidated basis even if the Bank were profitable.
Item 1B