ITEM 1. BUSINESS

OVERVIEW

We are a financial holding company whose business is conducted primarily through our wholly owned banking subsidiary, Ameris Bank (the “Bank”), which provides a full range of banking services to its retail and commercial customers who are primarily concentrated in select markets in Georgia, Alabama, Florida and South Carolina. Ameris was incorporated on December 18, 1980 as a Georgia corporation. The Company’s executive office is located at 310 First St., S.E., Moultrie, Georgia 31768, our telephone number is (229) 890-1111 and our internet address is www.amerisbank.com. We operate 97 domestic banking offices. We do not operate in any foreign countries. At December 31, 2016, we had approximately $6.89 billion in total assets, $5.37 billion in total loans, $5.58 billion in total deposits and $646.4 million of stockholders’ equity. Our deposits are insured, up to applicable limits, by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”).

We make our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act available free of charge on our website at www.amerisbank.com as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with the SEC. These reports are also available without charge on the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov.

The Parent Company

Our primary business as a bank holding company is to manage the business and affairs of the Bank. As a bank holding company, we perform certain shareholder and investor relations functions and seek to provide financial support, if necessary, to the Bank.

Ameris Bank

Our principal subsidiary is the Bank, which is headquartered in Moultrie, Georgia and operates branches primarily concentrated in select markets in Georgia, Alabama, Florida and South Carolina. These branches serve distinct communities in our business areas with autonomy but do so as one bank, leveraging our favorable geographic footprint in an effort to acquire more customers.

Capital Trust Securities

On September 20, 2006, the Company completed a private placement of an aggregate of $36,000,000 of trust preferred securities. The placement occurred through a statutory trust subsidiary of Ameris, Ameris Statutory Trust I (the “Trust”). The trust preferred securities carry a quarterly adjustable interest rate of 1.63% over the 3-Month LIBOR. The trust preferred securities mature on December 15, 2036, and became redeemable at the Company’s option on September 15, 2011. 

On December 16, 2005, Ameris acquired First National Banc, Inc. (“FNB”) by merger. In connection with such transaction, Ameris assumed the obligations of FNB related to its prior issuance of trust preferred securities. In 2004, FNB’s statutory trust subsidiary, First National Banc Statutory Trust I, issued $5,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 2.80% through a pool sponsored by a national brokerage firm. These trust preferred securities have a maturity of 30 years and are redeemable at the Company’s option on any quarterly interest payment date.

On December 23, 2013, Ameris acquired The Prosperity Banking Company (“Prosperity”) by merger. In connection with such transaction, Ameris assumed the obligations of Prosperity related to the following issuances of trust preferred securities: (i) in 2003, Prosperity’s statutory trust subsidiary, Prosperity Bank Statutory Trust II, issued $4,500,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 3.15%; (ii) in 2004, Prosperity’s statutory trust subsidiary, Prosperity Banking Capital Trust I, issued $5,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 2.57%; (iii) in 2006, Prosperity’s statutory trust subsidiary, Prosperity Bank Statutory Trust III, issued $10,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.60%; and (iv) in 2007, Prosperity’s statutory trust subsidiary, Prosperity Bank Statutory Trust IV, issued $10,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.54%. Each of the foregoing issuances was consummated through a pool sponsored by a national brokerage firm. These trust preferred securities have a maturity of 30 years and are redeemable at the Company’s option on any quarterly interest payment date.

On June 30, 2014, Ameris acquired Coastal Bankshares, Inc. (“Coastal”) by merger. In connection with such transaction, Ameris assumed the obligations of Coastal related to the following issuances of trust preferred securities: (i) in 2003, Coastal’s statutory trust subsidiary, Coastal Bankshares Statutory Trust I, issued $5,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 3.15%; and (ii) in 2005, Coastal’s statutory trust subsidiary, Coastal Bankshares Statutory Trust II, issued $10,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.60%. Each of the foregoing issuances was consummated through a pool sponsored by a national brokerage firm. These trust preferred securities have a maturity of 30 years and are redeemable at the Company’s option on any quarterly interest payment date.

On May 22, 2015, Ameris acquired Merchants & Southern Banks of Florida, Incorporated (“Merchants”) by merger. In connection with such transaction, Ameris assumed the obligations of Merchants related to the following issuances of trust preferred securities: (i) in 2005, Merchants’ statutory trust subsidiary, Merchants & Southern Statutory Trust I, issued $3,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.90%; and (ii) in 2006, Merchants’ statutory trust subsidiary, Merchants & Southern Statutory Trust II, issued $3,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.50%. Each of the foregoing issuances was consummated through a pool sponsored by a national brokerage firm. These trust preferred securities have a maturity of 30 years and are redeemable at the Company’s option on any quarterly interest payment date.

On March 11, 2016, Ameris acquired Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. (“JAXB”) by merger. In connection with such transaction, Ameris assumed the obligations of JAXB related to the following issuances of trust preferred securities: (i) in 2004, JAXB’s statutory trust subsidiary, Jacksonville Statutory Trust I, issued $4,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 2.63%; (ii) in 2006, JAXB’s statutory trust subsidiary, Jacksonville Statutory Trust II, issued $3,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.73%; (iii) in 2008, JAXB’s statutory trust subsidiary, Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc. Statutory Trust III, issued $7,550,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 3.75%; and (iv) in 2005, JAXB’s statutory trust subsidiary, Atlantic BancGroup, Inc. Statutory Trust I, issued $3,000,000 in principal amount of trust preferred securities at a rate per annum equal to the 3-Month LIBOR plus 1.50%. Each of the foregoing issuances was consummated through a pool sponsored by a national brokerage firm. These trust preferred securities have a maturity of 30 years and are redeemable at the Company’s option on any quarterly interest payment date.

See the notes to our consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report for a further discussion of these trust preferred securities.

Strategy

We seek to increase our presence and grow the “Ameris” brand in the markets that we currently serve in Georgia, Alabama, Florida and South Carolina and in neighboring communities that present attractive opportunities for expansion. Management has pursued this objective through an acquisition-oriented growth strategy and a prudent operating strategy. Our community banking philosophy emphasizes personalized service and building broad and deep customer relationships, which has provided us with a substantial base of low cost core deposits. Our markets are managed by senior level, experienced decision makers in a decentralized structure that differentiates us from our larger competitors. Management believes that this structure, along with involvement in and knowledge of our local markets, will continue to provide growth and assist in managing risk throughout our Company.

We have maintained our focus on a long-term strategy of expanding and diversifying our franchise in terms of revenues, profitability and asset size. Our growth over the past several years has been enhanced significantly by bank acquisitions, including the purchase of JAXB in 2016, 18 retail branches from Bank of America in 2015 and the acquisition of Merchants in 2015, Coastal in 2014, Prosperity in 2013 and ten failed institutions in FDIC-assisted transactions between 2009 and 2012. We expect to continue to take advantage of the consolidation in the financial services industry and enhance our franchise through future acquisitions. We intend to grow within our existing markets, to branch into or acquire financial institutions in existing markets as well as financial institutions in other markets consistent with our capital availability and management abilities.

BANKING SERVICES

Lending Activities

General . The Company maintains a diversified loan portfolio by providing a broad range of commercial and retail lending services to business entities and individuals. We provide agricultural loans, commercial business loans, commercial and residential real estate construction and mortgage loans, consumer loans, revolving lines of credit and letters of credit. The Company also originates first mortgage residential mortgage loans and generally enters into a commitment to sell these loans in the secondary market. We have not made or participated in foreign, energy-related or subprime loans. In addition, the Company does not regularly buy loan participations or portions of national credits but from time to time, may acquire balances subject to participation agreements through acquisition. Less than 1% of the Company’s loan portfolio was a loan participation purchased at December 31, 2016 and 2015.

At December 31, 2016, our loan portfolio totaled approximately $5.37 billion, representing approximately 77.9% of our total assets. For additional discussion of our loan portfolio, see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Loans.”

Commercial Real Estate Loans.  This portion of our loan portfolio has grown significantly over the past few years and represents the largest segment of our loan portfolio. These loans are generally extended for acquisition, development or construction of commercial properties. The loans are underwritten with an emphasis on the viability of the project, the borrower’s ability to meet certain minimum debt service requirements and an analysis and review of the collateral and guarantors, if any.

Residential Real Estate Mortgage Loans.  Ameris originates adjustable and fixed-rate residential mortgage loans. These mortgage loans are generally originated under terms and conditions consistent with secondary market guidelines. Some of these loans will be placed in the Company’s loan portfolio; however, a majority are sold in the secondary market. The residential real estate mortgage loans that are included in the Company’s loan portfolio are usually owner-occupied and generally amortized over a 20- to 30-year period with three- to five-year maturity or repricing. In addition, during 2015 and 2016, the Company purchased residential mortgage loan pools collateralized by properties located outside our Southeast markets, specifically in California, Washington and Illinois.

Agricultural Loans.  Our agricultural loans are extended to finance crop production, the purchase of farm-related equipment or farmland and the operations of dairies, poultry producers, livestock producers and timber growers. Agricultural loans typically involve seasonal balance fluctuations. Although we typically look to an agricultural borrower’s cash flow as the principal source of repayment, agricultural loans are also generally secured by a security interest in the crops or the farm-related equipment and, in some cases, an assignment of crop insurance and mortgage on real estate. The lending officer visits the borrower regularly during the growing season and re-evaluates the loan in light of the borrower’s updated cash flow projections. A portion of our agricultural loans is guaranteed by the Farm Service Agency Guaranteed Loan Program.

Commercial and Industrial Loans. Generally, commercial and industrial loans consist of loans made primarily to manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers of goods, service companies, municipalities and other industries. These loans are made for acquisition, expansion and working capital purposes and may be secured by real estate, accounts receivable, inventory, equipment, personal guarantees or other assets. The Company monitors these loans by requesting submission of corporate and personal financial statements and income tax returns. The Company has also generated loans which are guaranteed by the U.S. Small Business Administration (the “SBA”). SBA loans are generally underwritten in the same manner as conventional loans generated for the Bank’s portfolio. Periodically, a portion of the loans that are secured by the guaranty of the SBA will be sold in the secondary market. Management believes that making such loans helps the local community and also provides Ameris with a source of income and solid future lending relationships as such businesses grow and prosper. The primary repayment risk for commercial loans is the failure of the business due to economic or financial factors. During 2016, the Bank purchased a pool of commercial insurance premium finance loans made to borrowers throughout the United States and began a division to originate, administer and service these types of loans.

Consumer Loans.  Our consumer loans include motor vehicle, home improvement, home equity, loans secured by savings accounts and small unsecured personal credit lines. The terms of these loans typically range from 12 to 72 months and vary based upon the nature of collateral and size of the loan. These loans are generally secured by various assets owned by the consumer. In addition, during 2016, the Bank began purchasing consumer installment home improvement loans made to borrowers throughout the United States.

Credit Administration

We have sought to maintain a comprehensive lending policy that meets the credit needs of each of the communities served by the Bank, including low and moderate-income customers, and to employ lending procedures and policies consistent with this approach. All loans are subject to our corporate loan policy, which is reviewed annually and updated as needed. The loan policy provides that lending officers have sole authority to approve loans of various amounts commensurate with their seniority, experience and needs within the market. Our local market presidents have discretion to approve loans in varying principal amounts up to established limits, and our regional credit officers review and approve loans that exceed such limits.

Individual lending authority is assigned by the Company’s Chief Credit Officer, as is the maximum limit of new extensions of credit that may be approved in each market. These approval limits are reviewed annually by the Company and adjusted as needed. All requests for extensions of credit in excess of any of these limits are reviewed by one of five regional credit officers. When the request for approval exceeds the authority level of the regional credit officer, the approval of the Company’s Chief Credit Officer and/or the Company’s loan committee are required. All new loans or modifications to existing loans in excess of $250,000 are reviewed monthly by the Company’s credit administration department with the lender responsible for the credit. In addition, our ongoing loan review program subjects the portfolio to sampling and objective review by our ongoing internal loan review process which is independent of the originating loan officer.

Each lending officer has authority to make loans only in the market area in which his or her Bank office is located and its contiguous counties. Occasionally, our loan committee will approve making a loan outside of the market areas of the Bank, provided the Bank has a prior relationship with the borrower. Our lending policy requires analysis of the borrower’s projected cash flow and ability to service the debt.

The Bank has purchased loans outside of its market area. These include residential mortgage loan pools collateralized by properties located outside our Southeast markets, specifically in California, Washington and Illinois, and commercial insurance premium finance loans made to borrowers throughout the United States. These purchases were reviewed and approved by the Chief Credit Officer.

We actively market our services to qualified lending customers in both the commercial and consumer sectors. Our commercial lending officers actively solicit the business of new companies entering the market as well as longstanding members of that market’s business community. Through personalized professional service and competitive pricing, we have been successful in attracting new commercial lending customers. At the same time, we actively advertise our consumer loan products and continually seek to make our lending officers more accessible.

The Bank continually monitors its loan portfolio to identify areas of concern and to enable management to take corrective action when necessary. Local market presidents and lending officers meet periodically to review all past due loans, the status of large loans and certain other credit or economic related matters. Individual lending officers are responsible for collection of past due amounts and monitoring any changes in the financial status of the borrowers. Loans that are serviced by others, such as the purchased loan pools, home improvement loans and insurance premium loans, are monitored by the Company’s credit officers, although ultimate collection of past due amounts is the responsibility of the servicing agents.

Investment Activities

Our investment policy is designed to maximize income from funds not needed to meet loan demand in a manner consistent with appropriate liquidity and risk management objectives. Under this policy, our Company may invest in federal, state and municipal obligations, corporate obligations, public housing authority bonds, industrial development revenue bonds, securities issued by Government-Sponsored Enterprises (“GSEs”) and satisfactorily-rated trust preferred obligations. Investments in our portfolio must satisfy certain quality criteria. Our Company’s investments must be “investment-grade” as determined by either Moody’s or Standard and Poor’s. Investment securities where the Company has determined a certain level of credit risk are periodically reviewed to determine the financial condition of the issuer and to support the Company’s decision to continue holding the security. Our Company may purchase non-rated municipal bonds only if the issuer of such bonds is located in the Company’s general market area and such bonds are determined by the Company to have a credit risk no greater than the minimum ratings referred to above. Industrial development authority bonds, which normally are not rated, are purchased only if the issuer is located in the Company’s market area and if the bonds are considered to possess a high degree of credit soundness. Traditionally, the Company has purchased and held investment securities with very high levels of credit quality, favoring investments backed by direct or indirect guarantees of the U.S. Government.

While our investment policy permits our Company to trade securities to improve the quality of yields or marketability or to realign the composition of the portfolio, the Bank historically has not done so to any significant extent.

Our investment committee implements the investment policy and portfolio strategies and monitors the portfolio. Reports on all purchases, sales, net profits or losses and market appreciation or depreciation of the bond portfolio are reviewed by our Board of Directors each month. The written investment policy is reviewed annually by the Company’s Board of Directors and updated as needed.

The Company’s securities are held in safekeeping accounts at approved correspondent banks.

Deposits

The Company provides a full range of deposit accounts and services to both retail and commercial customers. These deposit accounts have a variety of interest rates and terms and consist of interest-bearing and noninterest-bearing accounts, including commercial and retail checking accounts, regular interest-bearing savings accounts, money market accounts, individual retirement accounts and certificates of deposit. Our Bank obtains most of its deposits from individuals and businesses in its market areas.

Brokered time deposits are deposits obtained by utilizing an outside broker that is paid a fee. The Bank utilizes brokered deposits to accomplish several purposes, such as (i) acquiring a certain maturity and dollar amount without repricing the Bank’s current customers which could increase or decrease the overall cost of deposits and (ii) acquiring certain maturities and dollar amounts to help manage interest rate risk.

Other Funding Sources

The Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) allows the Company to obtain advances through its credit program. These advances are secured by securities owned by the Company and held in safekeeping by the FHLB, FHLB stock owned by the Company and certain qualifying loans secured by real estate, including residential mortgage loans, home equity lines of credit and commercial real estate loans. The Company has a revolving credit agreement with a regional bank, secured by subsidiary bank stock, and the Company maintains credit arrangements with various other financial institutions to purchase federal funds. The Company participates in the Federal Reserve discount window borrowings.

The Company also enters into repurchase agreements. These repurchase agreements are treated as short-term borrowings and are reflected on the Company’s balance sheet as such.

Use of Derivatives

The Company seeks to provide stable net interest income despite changes in interest rates. In its review of interest rate risk, the Company considers the use of derivatives to protect interest income on loans or to create a structure in institutional borrowings that limits the Company’s cost. During 2015 and 2016, the Company had an interest rate swap with a notional amount of $37.1 million for the purpose of converting from a variable to a fixed interest rate on certain junior subordinated debentures on the Company’s balance sheet. The interest rate swap, which is classified as a cash flow hedge, is indexed to LIBOR.

The Company maintains a risk management program to manage interest rate risk and pricing risk associated with its mortgage lending activities. This program includes the use of forward contracts and other derivatives that are used to offset changes in the value of the mortgage inventory due to changes in market interest rates. As a normal part of its operations, the Company enters into derivative contracts such as forward sale commitments and interest rate lock commitments (“IRLCs”) to economically hedge risks associated with overall price risk related to IRLCs and mortgage loans held for sale carried at fair value. The fair value of these instruments amounted to an asset of approximately $4,314,000 and $2,687,000 at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively, and a derivative liability of approximately $0 and $137,000 at December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively.

CORPORATE RESTRUCTURING AND BUSINESS COMBINATIONS

US Premium Finance

On December 15, 2016, the Bank entered into a Management and License Agreement with William J. Villari and US Premium Financing Holding Company, a Florida corporation (“USPF”), pursuant to which Mr. Villari will manage a division of the Bank operated under the name “US Premium Finance” and which is engaged in the business of soliciting, originating, servicing, administering and collecting loans made for purposes of funding insurance premiums and other loans made to persons engaged in the insurance business. Also on December 15, 2016, Ameris entered into a Stock Purchase Agreement with Mr. Villari pursuant to which the Company agreed to purchase from him 4.99% of the outstanding shares of common stock of USPF. As consideration for those shares, the Company agreed to issue to Mr. Villari 128,572 unregistered shares of Common Stock in a private placement transaction pursuant to the exemptions from registration provided in Section 4(a)(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Rule 506 of Regulation D promulgated thereunder. Those transactions closed on January 18, 2017, and a registration statement was filed with the SEC on February 13, 2017 to register the resale or other disposition of the shares of Common Stock that were issued to Mr. Villari.

At the time of closing, the Company also entered into a Shareholders Agreement with USPF and all other shareholders of USPF under which the Company will be obligated to purchase from Mr. Villari, and Mr. Villari will be obligated to sell to the Company, an additional 25.01% of the outstanding shares of common stock of USPF on or before December 31, 2017, subject to the receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals, in exchange for consideration to Mr. Villari of $12,000,000 in cash and an additional 114,285 unregistered shares of the Company’s Common Stock (with such number of shares to be increased as provided in the Shareholders Agreement if the average trading price of the Common Stock for a period of 30 days immediately prior to closing is less than $35.00 per share). If the parties agree to consummate such transactions at a later date, the cash payable to Mr. Villari for the additional USPF shares will increase by $200,000 for each calendar month or portion thereof beginning January 1, 2018 and continuing through and including June 30, 2018.

Jacksonville Bancorp, Inc.

On March 11, 2016, Ameris acquired JAXB by merger, at which time JAXB’s wholly owned banking subsidiary, The Jacksonville Bank (“Jacksonville Bank”), also was merged with and into the Bank. JAXB was headquartered in Jacksonville, Florida and it operated eight full-service branches located in Jacksonville and Jacksonville Beach, Duval County, Florida. The acquisition expanded the Company’s existing market presence in the Jacksonville market. The consideration for the acquisition was a combination of cash and our Common Stock, with an aggregate purchase price of approximately $96.4 million.  The total consideration consisted of $23.9 million in cash and 2,549,469 shares of Common Stock with a value of approximately $72.5 million.  

Merchants & Southern Banks of Florida, Inc.

On May 22, 2015, Ameris acquired Merchants by merger, at which time Merchants’ wholly owned banking subsidiary, Merchants and Southern Bank, also was merged with and into the Bank. Merchants was headquartered in Gainesville, Florida and operated thirteen banking locations in Alachua, Marion and Clay Counties in Florida.  The acquisition of Merchants was significant to the Company’s growth strategy, as it expanded our existing footprint in several attractive Florida markets. Ameris paid an aggregate purchase price of $50.0 million to acquire the stock of Merchants.

Acquisition of 18 Branches in North Florida and South Georgia

On June 12, 2015, Ameris completed the acquisition of 18 branches from Bank of America, National Association located in Calhoun, Columbia, Dixie, Hamilton, Suwanee and Walton Counties, Florida and Ben Hill, Colquitt, Dougherty, Laurens, Liberty, Thomas, Tift and Ware Counties, Georgia. Ameris acquired approximately $644.7 million in deposits and paid a deposit premium of $20.0 million, equal to 3.00% of the average daily deposits for the 15 calendar-day period immediately prior to the acquisition date. In addition, Ameris acquired approximately $4.0 million in loans and $10.7 million in premises and equipment.

Coastal Bankshares, Inc.

On June 30, 2014, Ameris acquired Coastal by merger, at which time Coastal’s wholly owned banking subsidiary, The Coastal Bank (“Coastal Bank”), also was merged with and into the Bank. Coastal was headquartered in Savannah, Georgia and it operated six banking locations in Chatham, Liberty and Effingham Counties in Georgia.  The acquisition of Coastal grew the Company’s existing market presence in the Savannah, Georgia market.  The consideration for the acquisition was our common stock, par value $1.00 per share (the “Common Stock”), with an aggregate purchase price of approximately $37.3 million.  The total consideration consisted of approximately 1,599,000 shares of Common Stock with a value of approximately $34.5 million and $2.8 million cash in exchange for outstanding warrants. 

The Prosperity Banking Company

On December 23, 2013, Ameris acquired Prosperity by merger, at which time Prosperity’s wholly owned banking subsidiary, Prosperity Bank (“Prosperity Bank”), also was merged with and into the Bank. Prosperity was headquartered in Saint Augustine, Florida and it operated 12 banking locations in St. Johns, Duval, Flagler, Bay, Putnam and Volusia Counties in northeast Florida and the Florida panhandle.  The acquisition of Prosperity was significant to the Company, as it expanded our existing Southeastern footprint in several attractive Florida markets.  The consideration for the acquisition was a combination of cash and our Common Stock, with an aggregate purchase price of approximately $24.6 million.  The total consideration consisted of $162,000 in cash and approximately 1,169,000 shares of Common Stock with a value of approximately $24.5 million. 

Montgomery Bank & Trust

On July 6, 2012, the Bank purchased certain assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Montgomery Bank & Trust (“MBT”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of MBT. MBT operated two branches in Ailey and Vidalia, Georgia. The Bank assumed approximately $156.7 million in customer deposits and acquired approximately $18.1 million in assets, including approximately $16.7 million in cash and cash equivalents and approximately $1.2 million in deposit-secured loans. The assets were acquired without a discount and the deposits were assumed with no premium. To settle the transaction, the FDIC made a cash payment to the Bank totaling approximately $138.7 million, based on the differential between liabilities assumed and assets acquired.

Central Bank of Georgia

On February 24, 2012, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Central Bank of Georgia (“CBG”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of CBG. CBG operated five branches in Ellaville, Buena Vista, Butler, Cusseta and Macon, Georgia, with approximately $182.6 million in loans and approximately $261.0 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and other real estate owned (“OREO”). Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans is five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire CBG included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $33.9 million. The bid resulted in a cash payment from the FDIC totaling $31.9 million.

High Trust Bank

On July 15, 2011, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of High Trust Bank (“HTB”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of HTB. HTB operated two branches in Stockbridge and Leary, Georgia, with approximately $133.5 million in loans and approximately $175.9 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans is five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire HTB included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $33.5 million. The bid resulted in a cash payment from the FDIC totaling $30.2 million.

One Georgia Bank

On July 15, 2011, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of One Georgia Bank (“OGB”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of OGB. OGB operated one branch in Midtown Atlanta, Georgia, with approximately $120.8 million in loans and approximately $136.1 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans is five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire OGB included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $22.5 million. The bid resulted in a cash payment to the FDIC totaling $5.7 million.

Tifton Banking Company

On November 12, 2010, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Tifton Banking Company (“TBC”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of TBC. TBC operated one branch in Tifton, Georgia, with approximately $118.4 million in loans and approximately $132.9 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s acquisition of TBC resulted in the Bank recording $956,000 of goodwill related to the purchase. The bid resulted in a cash payment to the FDIC totaling $10.3 million to settle the transaction.

Darby Bank & Trust Co.

On November 12, 2010, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Darby Bank & Trust Co. (“DBT”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of DBT. DBT operated seven branches in Vidalia, Lyons, Savannah and Pooler, Georgia, with approximately $393.3 million in loans and approximately $387.0 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. The loss-sharing agreements for residential real estate loans and for all other loans are separately structured with reimbursement percentages dependent on the losses incurred under the specific agreement. Under the residential real estate agreement, losses up to $8.4 million are reimbursed at 80%, losses between $8.4 million and $11.8 million are reimbursed at 30%, and losses in excess of $11.8 million are reimbursed at 80%. Under the all other agreement, losses up to $123.4 million are reimbursed at 80%, losses between $123.4 million and $181.3 million are reimbursed at 30%, and losses in excess of $181.3 million are reimbursed at 80%. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire DBT included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $45.0 million. The bid resulted in a cash payment to the FDIC totaling $149.9 million.

First Bank of Jacksonville

On October 22, 2010, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of First Bank of Jacksonville (“FBJ”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of FBJ. FBJ operated two branches in Jacksonville, Florida, with approximately $51.1 million in loans and approximately $71.9 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire FBJ included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $4.8 million. The bid resulted in a cash payment from the FDIC totaling $8.1 million.

Satilla Community Bank

On May 14, 2010, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of Satilla Community Bank (“SCB”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of SCB. SCB operated one branch in St. Marys, Georgia, the southernmost city on the Georgia coast and a northern suburb of Jacksonville, Florida, with approximately $68.8 million in loans and approximately $75.5 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries during the term of the agreement. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire SCB included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $14.4 million. Also included in the bid was a premium of approximately $92,000 on SCB’s deposits. Because SCB’s brokered deposits did not pass to the Bank, the acquisition resulted in significantly more assets being purchased than liabilities assumed. As a result, the Bank made a cash payment to the FDIC totaling $35.7 million to settle the transaction.

United Security Bank

On November 6, 2009, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of United Security Bank (“USB”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of USB. USB operated one branch in Woodstock, Georgia and one branch in Sparta, Georgia, with total loans of approximately $108.4 million and approximately $141.1 million of total deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries on the first $46 million of losses and absorb 95% of losses and share in 95% of loss recoveries on losses exceeding $46 million. The term for loss sharing on residential real estate loans is ten years, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire USB included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $32.6 million. Also included in the bid was a premium of approximately $228,000 on USB’s deposits. The bid resulted in a cash payment from the FDIC totaling $24.2 million.

American United Bank

On October 23, 2009, the Bank purchased substantially all of the assets and assumed substantially all of the liabilities of American United Bank (“AUB”) from the FDIC, as Receiver of AUB. AUB operated one branch in Lawrenceville, Georgia, a northeast suburb of Atlanta, Georgia, with approximately $85.7 million in loans and approximately $100.5 million in deposits. The Company’s agreements with the FDIC included a loss-sharing agreement which affords the Bank significant protection from losses associated with loans and OREO. Under the terms of the loss-sharing agreement, the FDIC will absorb 80% of losses and share 80% of loss recoveries on the first $38 million of losses and absorb 95% of losses and share in 95% of loss recoveries on losses exceeding $38 million. The loss-sharing agreement for residential real estate loans was terminated in 2012 with two remaining loans, while the term for loss sharing on all other loans was five years.

The Company’s bid to acquire AUB included a discount on the book value of the assets totaling $19.6 million. Also included in the bid was a premium of approximately $262,000 on AUB’s deposits. The bid resulted in a cash payment from the FDIC totaling $17.1 million.

Capital Purchase Program

On November 21, 2008, the Company, pursuant to the Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”) established under the Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), in connection with the Troubled Asset Relief Program (“TARP”), issued and sold to the United States Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”), for an aggregate cash purchase price of $52 million, (i) 52,000 shares (the “Preferred Shares”) of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, having a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share, and (ii) a ten-year warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase up to 679,443 shares of Common Stock, at an exercise price of $11.48 per share. Proceeds from the issuance of the Preferred Shares and the Warrant were allocated based on the relative market values of each. As a result of the Company’s participation in the CPP, the Company was subject to the rules and regulations promulgated under the EESA. These rules and regulations included certain limitations on compensation for senior executives, dividend payments and payments to senior executives upon termination of employment, as well as certain obligations of the Company to increase its efforts to reduce the number of foreclosures of primary residences.

On June 14, 2012, the Preferred Shares were sold by the Treasury through a registered public offering as part of the Treasury’s efforts to wind down its remaining TARP bank investments. While the sale of the Preferred Shares to new investors did not result in any accounting entries and did not change the Company’s capital position, it eliminated the executive compensation and corporate governance restrictions that were applicable to the Company during the period in which the Treasury held its investment in the Preferred Shares. Subsequently, on August 22, 2012, the Company repurchased the Warrant from the Treasury for $2.67 million and in December 2012, the Company repurchased 24,000 of the outstanding Preferred Shares. The Company redeemed the remaining 28,000 outstanding Preferred Shares on March 24, 2014.

MARKET AREAS AND COMPETITION

The banking industry in general, and in the southeastern United States specifically, is highly competitive and dramatic changes continue to occur throughout the industry. Our select market areas in Georgia, Alabama, Florida and South Carolina have experienced strong population growth over the past 20 to 30 years, but have endured significant economic challenges in recent years. Intense market demands, national and local economic pressures, interest rates near zero and increased customer awareness of product and service differences among financial institutions have forced banks to diversify their services and become much more cost effective. Over the past few years, our Bank has faced strong competition in attracting deposits at profitable levels. Competition for deposits comes from other commercial banks, thrift institutions, savings banks, internet banks, credit unions, and brokerage and investment banking firms. Interest rates, convenience of office locations and marketing are all significant factors in our Bank’s competition for deposits.

Competition for loans comes from other commercial banks, thrift institutions, savings banks, insurance companies, consumer finance companies, credit unions, mortgage companies, leasing companies and other institutional lenders. In order to remain competitive, our Bank has varied interest rates and loan fees to some degree as well as increased the number and complexity of services provided. We have not varied or altered our underwriting standards in any material respect in response to competitor willingness to do so and in some markets have not been able to experience the growth in loans that we would have preferred. Competition is affected by the general availability of lendable funds, general and local economic conditions, current interest rate levels and other factors that are not readily predictable.

Competition among providers of financial products and services continues to increase with consumers having the opportunity to select from a growing variety of traditional and nontraditional alternatives. The industry continues to consolidate, which affects competition by eliminating some regional and local institutions, while strengthening the franchise of acquirers. Management expects that competition will become more intense in the future due to changes in state and federal laws and regulations and the entry of additional bank and nonbank competitors. See “Supervision and Regulation” under this Item.

EMPLOYEES

At December 31, 2016, the Company employed approximately 1,298 full-time-equivalent employees. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good.

We have adopted the Ameris Bancorp 401(k) Profit Sharing Plan, as a retirement plan for our employees. This plan provides deferral of compensation by our employees and contributions by Ameris.  We also maintain a comprehensive employee benefits program providing, among other benefits, hospitalization and major medical insurance and life insurance. Management considers these benefits to be competitive with those offered by other financial institutions in our market areas. Our employees are not represented by any collective bargaining group.

RELATED PARTY TRANSACTIONS

The Company makes loans to our directors and their affiliates and to banking officers. These loans are made on substantially the same terms as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions and do not involve more than normal credit risk. At December 31, 2016, we had approximately $5.37 billion in total loans outstanding, of which approximately $3.2 million were outstanding to certain directors and their affiliates. Company policy prohibits loans to executive officers.

SUPERVISION AND REGULATION

General

We are extensively regulated under federal and state law.  Generally, these laws and regulations are intended to protect depositors and not shareholders. Set forth below is a summary of certain provisions of certain laws that affect the regulation of bank holding companies and banks. The discussion is qualified in its entirety by reference to applicable laws and regulations. Changes in such laws and regulations may have a material effect on our business and prospects.

FDIC Consent Order

On December 16, 2016, the Bank entered into a Stipulation to the Issuance of a Consent Order with its bank regulatory agencies, the FDIC and the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance (the “GDBF”), consenting to the issuance of a consent order (the “Order”) relating to the Bank’s Bank Secrecy Act (together with its implementing regulations, the “BSA”) compliance program. In consenting to the issuance of the Order, the Bank did not admit or deny any charges of unsafe or unsound banking practices related to its BSA compliance program.

Under the terms of the Order, the Bank or its board of directors is required to take certain affirmative actions to comply with the Bank’s obligations under the BSA. These include, but are not limited to, the following: strengthening the board of directors’ oversight of BSA activities; enhancing and adopting a revised BSA compliance program; completing a BSA risk assessment; developing a revised system of internal controls designed to ensure full compliance with the BSA; reviewing and revising customer due diligence and risk assessment processes, policies and procedures; developing, adopting and implementing effective BSA training programs; assessing BSA staffing needs and resources and appointing a qualified BSA officer; establishing an independent BSA testing program; ensuring that all reports required by the BSA are accurately and properly filed; and engaging an independent firm to review past account activity to determine whether suspicious activity was properly identified and reported.

Prior to implementation, certain of the actions required by the Order are subject to review by, and approval or non-objection from, the FDIC and the GDBF. The Order will remain in effect and be enforceable until it is modified, terminated, suspended or set aside by the FDIC and the GDBF. The Bank began taking corrective actions prior to the entry of the Order after communicating with its regulators and expects that it will be able to undertake and implement all required actions within the time periods specified in the Order.

Federal Bank Holding Company Regulation and Structure

As a bank holding company, we are subject to regulation under the Bank Holding Company Act and to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”). Our Bank has a Georgia state charter and is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the FDIC and the GDBF.

The Bank Holding Company Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve before:

The Bank Holding Company Act further provides that the Federal Reserve may not approve any transaction that would result in a monopoly or that would substantially lessen competition in the banking business, unless the public interest in meeting the needs of the communities to be served outweighs the anti-competitive effects. The Federal Reserve is also required to consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding companies and banks involved and the convenience and needs of the communities to be served. Consideration of financial resources generally focuses on capital adequacy, and consideration of convenience and needs issues focuses, in part, on the performance under the Community Reinvestment Act, both of which are discussed elsewhere in more detail.

Subject to various exceptions, the Bank Holding Company Act and the Change in Bank Control Act, together with related regulations, require Federal Reserve approval prior to any person or company acquiring “control” of a bank holding company. Control is conclusively presumed to exist if an individual or company acquires 25% or more of any class of voting securities of a bank holding company. Control is also presumed to exist, although rebuttable, if a person or company acquires 10% or more, but less than 25%, of any class of voting securities and either:

Our Common Stock is registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act. The regulations provide a procedure for challenging rebuttable presumptions of control.

The Bank Holding Company Act generally prohibits a bank holding company from engaging in activities other than banking; managing or controlling banks or other permissible subsidiaries and acquiring or retaining direct or indirect control of any company engaged in any activities other than activities closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks. In determining whether a particular activity is permissible, the Federal Reserve considers whether performing the activity can be expected to produce benefits to the public that outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices. The Federal Reserve has the power to order a bank holding company or its subsidiaries to terminate any activity or control of any subsidiary when the continuation of the activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial safety, soundness or stability of any bank subsidiary of that bank holding company.

Under the Bank Holding Company Act, a bank holding company may file an election with the Federal Reserve to be treated as a financial holding company and engage in an expanded list of financial activities. The election must be accompanied by a certification that all of the company’s insured depository institution subsidiaries are “well capitalized” and “well managed.” Additionally, the Community Reinvestment Act rating of each subsidiary bank must be satisfactory or better. Effective August 24, 2000, pursuant to a previously-filed election with the Federal Reserve, Ameris became a financial holding company. As such, we may engage in activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to financial activities, including insurance underwriting, securities underwriting and dealing, and making merchant banking investments in commercial and financial companies. If the Bank ceases to be “well capitalized” or “well managed” under applicable regulatory standards, the Federal Reserve may, among other things, place limitations on our ability to conduct these broader financial activities. In addition, if the Bank receives a rating of less than satisfactory under the Community Reinvestment Act, we would be prohibited from engaging in any additional activities other than those permissible for bank holding companies that are not financial holding companies. If, after becoming a financial holding company and undertaking activities not permissible for a bank holding company, the company fails to continue to meet any of the prerequisites for financial holding company status, including those described above, the company must enter into an agreement with the Federal Reserve to comply with all applicable capital and management requirements. If the company does not return to compliance within 180 days, the Federal Reserve may order the company to divest its subsidiary banks or the company may discontinue or divest investments in companies engaged in activities permissible only for a bank holding company that has elected to be treated as a financial holding company.

By statute and regulation, we are expected to act as a source of financial strength for the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank. This support may be required at times when, without this Federal Reserve policy, we might not be inclined to provide it. In addition, any capital loans made by us to the Bank will be repaid only after its deposits and various other obligations are repaid in full.

Our Bank is also subject to numerous state and federal statutes and regulations that affect its business, activities and operations and is supervised and examined by state and federal bank regulatory agencies. The FDIC and the GDBF regularly examine the operations of our Bank and are given the authority to approve or disapprove mergers, consolidations, the establishment of branches and similar corporate actions. These agencies also have the power to prevent the continuance or development of unsafe or unsound banking practices or other violations of law.

Payment of Dividends and Other Restrictions

Ameris is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries. While there are various legal and regulatory limitations under federal and state law on the extent to which our Bank can pay dividends or otherwise supply funds to Ameris, the principal source of our cash revenues is dividends from our Bank. The prior approval of applicable regulatory authorities is required if the total amount of all dividends declared by the Bank in any calendar year exceeds 50% of the Bank’s net profits for the previous year. The relevant federal and state regulatory agencies also have authority to prohibit a state member bank or bank holding company, which would include Ameris and the Bank, from engaging in what, in the opinion of such regulatory body, constitutes an unsafe or unsound practice in conducting its business. The payment of dividends could, depending upon the financial condition of the subsidiary, be deemed to constitute an unsafe or unsound practice in conducting its business.

Under Georgia law, the prior approval of the GDBF is required before any cash dividends may be paid by a state bank if: (i) total classified assets at the most recent examination of such bank exceed 80% of the equity capital (as defined, which includes the reserve for loan losses) of such bank; (ii) the aggregate amount of dividends declared or anticipated to be declared in the calendar year exceeds 50% of the net profits (as defined) for the previous calendar year; or (iii) the ratio of equity capital to adjusted total assets is less than 6%. As of December 31, 2016, there was approximately $39.0 million of retained earnings of our Bank available for payment of cash dividends under applicable regulations without obtaining regulatory approval.

In addition, our Bank is subject to limitations under Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act with respect to extensions of credit to, investments in and certain other transactions with Ameris. Furthermore, loans and extensions of credit are also subject to various collateral requirements.

The Federal Reserve has issued a policy statement on the payment of cash dividends by bank holding companies, which expresses the Federal Reserve’s view that a bank holding company should pay cash dividends only to the extent that the holding company’s net income for the past year is sufficient to cover both the cash dividends and a rate of earning retention that is consistent with the holding company’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. The Federal Reserve also indicated that it would be inappropriate for a holding company experiencing serious financial problems to borrow funds to pay dividends. Furthermore, under the prompt corrective action regulations adopted by the Federal Reserve, the Federal Reserve may prohibit a bank holding company from paying any dividends if one or more of the holding company’s bank subsidiaries are classified as undercapitalized.

A bank holding company is required to give the Federal Reserve prior written notice of any purchase or redemption of its outstanding equity securities if the gross consideration for the purchase or redemption, when combined with the net consideration paid for all such purchases or redemptions during the preceding 12 months, is equal to 10% or more of its consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve order or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve.

Capital Adequacy

We must comply with the Federal Reserve’s established capital adequacy standards, and our Bank is required to comply with the capital adequacy standards established by the FDIC. The Federal Reserve has promulgated two basic measures of capital adequacy for bank holding companies: a risk-based measure and a leverage measure. A bank holding company must satisfy all applicable capital standards to be considered in compliance.

The risk-based capital standards are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profile among banks and bank holding companies, account for off-balance-sheet exposure and minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets.

Assets and off-balance-sheet items are assigned to broad risk categories, each with appropriate weights. The resulting capital ratios represent capital as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets and off-balance-sheet items.

The regulatory capital framework under which we operate has changed, and is expected to continue to change, in significant respects as a result of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), which was enacted in July 2010 and includes certain provisions concerning the capital regulations of U.S. banking regulators. These provisions are intended to subject bank holding companies to the same capital requirements as their bank subsidiaries and to eliminate or significantly reduce the use of hybrid capital instruments, especially trust preferred securities, as regulatory capital. Although a significant number of the rules and regulations mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act have been finalized, many of the new requirements called for have yet to be implemented and will likely be subject to implementing regulations over the course of several years. Given the uncertainty associated with the manner in which the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will be implemented by the various regulatory agencies, the full extent of the impact such requirements will have on financial institutions’ operations is unclear. The changes resulting from the Dodd-Frank Act may impact the profitability of our business activities, require changes to certain of our business practices, impose upon us more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage ratio requirements or otherwise adversely affect our business. These changes may also require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make necessary changes in order to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements.

In July 2013, the federal banking agencies approved an interim final rule that adopts a series of previously proposed rules to conform U.S. regulatory capital rules with the international regulatory standards agreed to by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision in the accord referred to as “Basel III” and to implement requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act. The adopted regulations established new higher capital ratio requirements, narrowed the definitions of capital, imposed new operating restrictions on banking organizations with insufficient capital buffers and increased the risk weighting of certain assets. The Company and the Bank were required to comply with the new capital requirements beginning January 1, 2015.

The regulatory changes found in the new final rule include the following:

Since 2001, our consolidated capital ratios have increased due to the issuance of trust preferred securities. At December 31, 2016, all of our trust preferred securities were included in Tier 1 Capital. At December 31, 2016, our total risk-based capital ratio, our Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and our common equity Tier 1 capital ratio were 10.11%, 9.69% and 8.32%, respectively. Neither Ameris nor the Bank has been advised by any federal banking agency of any additional specific minimum capital ratio requirement applicable to it.

At December 31, 2016, our leverage ratio was 8.68%, compared with 8.70% at December 31, 2015. Federal Reserve guidelines provide that bank holding companies experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels without significant reliance on intangible assets. The Federal Reserve has indicated that it will consider a “tangible Tier 1 Capital leverage ratio” and other indications of capital strength in evaluating proposals for expansion or new activities. The Federal Reserve has not advised Ameris of any additional specific minimum leverage ratio or tangible Tier 1 Capital leverage ratio applicable to it.

Failure to meet capital guidelines could subject a bank to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, a prohibition on taking brokered deposits and certain other restrictions on its business. As described below, the FDIC can impose substantial additional restrictions upon FDIC-insured depository institutions that fail to meet applicable capital requirements.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (or “FDI Act”) requires the federal regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” if a depository institution does not meet minimum capital requirements. The FDI Act establishes five 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.

The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted regulations establishing relevant capital measurers and relevant capital levels applicable to FDIC-insured banks. The relevant capital measures are the Total Capital ratio, Tier 1 Capital ratio, Common Equity Tier 1 Capital ratio and leverage ratio. Under the regulations, an FDIC-insured bank will be:

An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than is indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters. As of December 31, 2016, our Bank had capital levels that qualify as “well capitalized” under such regulations.

The FDI Act generally prohibits an FDIC-insured bank from making a capital distribution (including payment of a dividend) or paying any management fee to its holding company if the bank would thereafter be “undercapitalized.” “Undercapitalized” banks are subject to growth limitations and are required to submit a capital restoration plan. The federal regulators may not accept a capital plan without determining, among other things, that the plan is based on realistic assumptions and is likely to succeed in restoring the bank’s capital. In addition, for a capital restoration plan to be acceptable, the bank’s parent holding company must guarantee that the institution will comply with such capital restoration plan. The aggregate liability of the parent holding company is limited to the lesser of: (i) an amount equal to 5% of the bank’s total assets at the time it became “undercapitalized”; and (ii) the amount which is necessary (or would have been necessary) to bring the institution into compliance with all capital standards applicable with respect to such institution as of the time it fails to comply with the plan. If a bank fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it is “significantly undercapitalized.”

“Significantly undercapitalized” insured banks may be subject to a number of requirements and restrictions, including orders to sell sufficient voting stock to become “adequately capitalized,” requirements to reduce total assets and the cessation of receipt of deposits from correspondent banks. “Critically undercapitalized” institutions are subject to the appointment of a receiver or conservator. A bank that is not “well capitalized” is also subject to certain limitations relating to brokered deposits.

FDIC Insurance Assessments

The Bank’s deposits are insured to the maximum extent permitted by the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”). As insurer, the FDIC is authorized to conduct examinations of, and to require reporting by, insured institutions. It also may prohibit any insured institution from engaging in any activity determined by regulation or order to pose a serious threat to the FDIC.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDI Act was amended to increase the maximum deposit insurance amount per depositor per depository institution from $100,000 to $250,000.

The FDIC manages the DIF in part through the DIF’s reserve ratio and sets assessment rates to achieve a “designated reserve ratio” (the “DRR”), the ratio at which the FDIC believes the DIF can withstand a future banking crisis. The FDIC has set the DRR at 2.0% as a long-range minimum target. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the reserve ratio of the DIF to reach 1.35% by September 30, 2020. As of June 30, 2016, the reserve ratio for the DIF was 1.17%. The FDIC has adopted a risk-based premium system that provides for quarterly assessments. In addition, all institutions with deposits insured by the FDIC are required to pay assessments to fund interest payments on bonds issued by the Financing Corporation, a mixed-ownership government corporation established to recapitalize the predecessor to the Deposit Insurance Fund. These assessments will continue until the Financing Corporation bonds mature in 2019.

Through June 30, 2016, the Bank’s assessment rate was based on a methodology adopted by the FDIC for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011. This methodology was in response to a provision in the Dodd-Frank Act that changed the calculation of the assessment base and that entailed changes to the risk-based pricing system. Under the methodology adopted for 2011, the assessment base became an insured depository institution’s average consolidated total assets less average tangible equity. The overall range of initial base assessment rates was 5 basis points to 45 basis points. Institutions, such as the Bank, that are not large and highly complex institutions were placed in one of four risk categories depending on the institution’s capital level (using the same thresholds as in the prompt corrective action regime) and supervisory evaluations by the institution’s primary federal regulator. The risk category with the highest-rated and well-capitalized institutions included a range of assessment rates, and a specific rate was assigned to a particular institution based on a variety of financial factors and the institution’s component CAMELS ratings. Each of the remaining three risk categories imposed the same rate on all institutions in the category.

In April 2016, the FDIC adopted new assessment rates and a new methodology for the assignment of rates that would become effective when the reserve ratio of the DIF rose above 1.15%. This event occurred when the FDIC announced that as of June 30, 2016, the reserve ratio was 1.17%. Accordingly, for the last two quarters of 2016, the Bank’s assessment rate has been determined differently. The range of initial base assessment rates shifted down to 3 basis points to 30 basis points (subject to certain adjustments for unsecured debt and brokered deposits). Insured depository institutions other than large and highly complex institutions were assigned to one of three (rather than four) risk categories based solely on composite CAMELS rating. Each of the three risk categories has a range of rates, and the rate for a particular institution is determined based on seven financial ratios and the weighted average of its component CAMELS ratings. Under the new assessment rule, further downward adjustments of assessment rates are possible as the DRR exceeds 2.0% and higher levels.

Future changes in insurance premiums could have an adverse effect on the operating expenses and results of operations, and we cannot predict what insurance assessment rates will be in the future.

The FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any insured depository institution, including the Bank, if the FDIC determines after a hearing that the institution has engaged or is engaging in unsafe or unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, order or any condition imposed by an agreement with the FDIC. The FDIC also may suspend deposit insurance temporarily during the hearing process for the permanent termination of insurance, if the institution has no tangible capital. Management is not aware of any existing circumstances that would result in termination of our deposit insurance.

Acquisitions

As an active acquirer, we must comply with numerous laws related to our acquisition activity. Under the Bank Holding Company Act, a bank holding company may not directly or indirectly acquire ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares or substantially all of the assets of any bank or merge or consolidate with another bank holding company without the prior approval of the Federal Reserve. Current federal law authorizes interstate acquisitions of banks and bank holding companies without geographic limitation. Furthermore, a bank headquartered in one state is authorized to merge with a bank headquartered in another state, as long as neither of the states has opted out of such interstate merger authority prior to such date, and subject to any state requirement that the target bank shall have been in existence and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and to certain deposit market-share limitations. After a bank has established branches in a state through an interstate merger transaction, the bank may establish and acquire additional branches at any location in the state where a bank headquartered in that state could have established or acquired branches under applicable federal or state law.

Community Reinvestment Act

The Community Reinvestment Act requires federal bank regulatory agencies to encourage financial institutions to meet the credit needs of low and moderate-income borrowers in their local communities. An institution’s size and business strategy determines the type of examination that it will receive. Large, retail-oriented institutions are examined using a performance-based lending, investment and service test. Small institutions are examined using a streamlined approach. All institutions may opt to be evaluated under a strategic plan formulated with community input and pre-approved by the bank regulatory agency.

The Community Reinvestment Act regulations provide for certain disclosure obligations. Each institution must post a notice advising the public of its right to comment to the institution and its regulator on the institution’s Community Reinvestment Act performance and to review the institution’s Community Reinvestment Act public file. Each lending institution must maintain for public inspection a file that includes a listing of branch locations and services, a summary of lending activity, a map of its communities and any written comments from the public on its performance in meeting community credit needs. The Community Reinvestment Act requires public disclosure of a financial institution’s written Community Reinvestment Act evaluations. This promotes enforcement of Community Reinvestment Act requirements by providing the public with the status of a particular institution’s community reinvestment record.

Consumer Protection Laws

The Bank is subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect borrowers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act and state law counterparts.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act created a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which has been given the power to promulgate and enforce federal consumer protection laws. Depository institutions are subject to the CFPB’s rulemaking authority, while existing federal bank regulatory agencies retain examination and enforcement authority for such institutions. The focus of the CFPB is on the following: (i) risks to consumers and compliance with the federal consumer financial laws; (ii) the markets in which firms operate and risks to consumers posed by activities in those markets; (iii) depository institutions that offer a wide variety of consumer financial products and services; (iv) depository institutions with a more specialized focus; and (v) non-depository companies that offer one or more consumer financial products or services.

Financial Privacy

Federal law currently contains extensive customer privacy protection provisions. Under these provisions, a financial institution must provide to its customers, at the inception of the customer relationship and annually thereafter, the institution’s policies and procedures regarding the handling of customers’ nonpublic personal financial information. These provisions also provide that, except for certain limited exceptions, an institution may not provide such personal information to unaffiliated third parties unless the institution discloses to the customer that such information may be so provided and the customer is given the opportunity to opt out of such disclosure. Federal law makes it a criminal offense, except in limited circumstances, to obtain or attempt to obtain customer information of a financial nature by fraudulent or deceptive means.

The federal banking agencies pay close attention to the cybersecurity practices of banks, bank holding companies and their affiliates. The interagency council of the agencies, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council (the “FFIEC”), has issued several policy statements and other guidance for banks as new cybersecurity threats arise. The FFIEC has recently focused on such matters as compromised customer credentials and business continuity planning. Examinations by the banking agencies now include review of an institution’s information technology and its ability to thwart cyber attacks.

Fiscal and Monetary Policy

Banking is a business which depends on interest rate differentials for success. In general, the difference between the interest paid by a bank on its deposits and its other borrowings, and the interest received by a bank on its loans and securities holdings, constitutes the major portion of a bank’s earnings. Thus, our earnings and growth will be subject to the influence of economic conditions generally, both domestic and foreign, and also to the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States and its agencies, particularly the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve regulates the supply of money through various means, including open market dealings in United States government securities, the discount rate at which banks may borrow from the Federal Reserve and the reserve requirements on deposits. The nature and timing of any changes in such policies and their effect on Ameris cannot be known at this time.

Current and future legislation and the policies established by federal and state regulatory authorities will affect our future operations. Banking legislation and regulations may limit our growth and the return to our investors by restricting certain of our activities.

In addition, capital requirements could be changed and have the effect of restricting our activities or requiring additional capital to be maintained. We cannot predict with certainty what changes, if any, will be made to existing federal and state legislation and regulations or the effect that such changes may have on our business.

Federal Home Loan Bank System

Our Company has a correspondent relationship with the FHLB of Atlanta, which is one of 12 regional FHLBs that administer the home financing credit function of savings companies. Each FHLB serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region. FHLBs are funded primarily from proceeds derived from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB system and make loans to members (i.e., advances) in accordance with policies and procedures, established by the Board of Directors of the FHLB which are subject to the oversight of the Federal Housing Finance Board. All advances from the FHLB are required to be fully secured by sufficient collateral as determined by the FHLB. In addition, all long-term advances are required to provide funds for residential home financing.

The FHLB offers certain services to our Company such as processing checks and other items, buying and selling federal funds, handling money transfers and exchanges, shipping coin and currency, providing security and safekeeping of funds or other valuable items and furnishing limited management information and advice. As compensation for these services, our Company maintains certain balances with the FHLB in interest-bearing accounts.

Under federal law, the FHLBs are required to provide funds for the resolution of troubled savings companies and to contribute to low and moderately-priced housing programs through direct loans or interest subsidies on advances targeted for community investment and low and moderate-income housing projects.

Real Estate Lending Evaluations

The federal regulators have adopted uniform standards for evaluations of loans secured by real estate or made to finance improvements to real estate. Banks are required to establish and maintain written internal real estate lending policies consistent with safe and sound banking practices and appropriate to the size of the institution and the nature and scope of its operations. The regulations establish loan-to-value ratio limitations on real estate loans. Our Company’s loan policies establish limits on loan-to-value ratios that are equal to or less than those established in such regulations.

Commercial Real Estate Concentrations

Our lending operations may be subject to enhanced scrutiny by federal banking regulators based on our concentration of commercial real estate loans. The federal banking regulators previously issued guidance reminding financial institutions of the risk posed by commercial real estate (“CRE”) lending concentrations. CRE loans generally include land development, construction loans, and loans secured by multifamily property, and nonfarm, nonresidential real property where the primary source of repayment is derived from rental income associated with the property. The guidance prescribes the following guidelines for its examiners to help identify institutions that are potentially exposed to significant CRE risk and may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny:

As of December 31, 2016, excluding purchased non-covered and covered assets, our C&D concentration as a percentage of capital totaled 62.7% and our CRE concentration, net of owner-occupied loans, as a percentage of capital totaled 204.7%. Including purchased non-covered and covered loans subject to loss-sharing agreements with the FDIC, the Company’s C&D concentration as a percentage of capital totaled 76.7% and our CRE concentration, net of owner-occupied loans, as a percentage of capital totaled 269.4%.

Limitations on Incentive Compensation

The Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal banking regulators and other agencies, including the SEC, to issue regulations or guidelines requiring disclosure to the regulators of incentive-based compensation arrangements and to prohibit incentive-based compensation arrangements for directors, officers or employees that encourage inappropriate risks by providing excessive compensation, fees or benefits or that could lead to material financial loss to a financial institution. The federal bank regulatory agencies have issued guidance on incentive compensation policies, which covers all employees who have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an institution, either individually or as part of a group, that is based upon the key principles that a financial institution’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the institution’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the institution’s board of directors and appropriate policies, procedures and monitoring.

As part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations will be reviewed, and the regulator’s findings will be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct any deficiencies.

In April 2016, the FDIC, the other federal banking agencies and other financial regulatory agencies proposed guidance on incentive-based compensation arrangements. As applied to banks with total assets between $1 billion and $50 billion, the proposal would (i) prohibit types and features of incentive-based compensation arrangements that encourage inappropriate risks because they are excessive or could lead to material financial loss, (ii) require such arrangements to strike a balance between risk and reward, to be subject to effective risk management and controls, and to be subject to effective governance and (iii) require appropriate board of directors (or committee) oversight and recordkeeping and disclosure to the appropriate agency. The federal agencies have not finalized the proposal, and we do not know whether or when they may do so.

The scope and content of federal bank regulatory agencies’ policies on executive compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect the Company’s ability to hire, retain and motivate its key employees.

Evolving Legislation and Regulatory Action

The Dodd-Frank Act implements many new changes in the way financial and banking operations are regulated in the United States. Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to further rulemaking and will take effect over several years, with the result that the overall financial impact on the Company and the Bank cannot be anticipated at this time.

In addition, from time to time, various other legislative and regulatory initiatives are introduced in Congress and state legislatures, as well as by regulatory agencies, that may impact the Company or the Bank. Such initiatives may include proposals to expand or contract the powers of bank holding companies and depository institutions or proposals to substantially change the financial institution regulatory system. Such legislation could change banking statutes and the operating environment of Ameris in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, such legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions and other financial institutions. The Company cannot predict whether any such legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. A change in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company or the Bank could have a material effect on the business of the Company.