Item 1. Business
Provident Financial Services, Inc.
The Company is a Delaware corporation which became the holding company for Provident Bank (the “Bank”) on January 15, 2003, following the completion of the Bank's conversion to a New Jersey-chartered capital stock savings bank. On January 15, 2003, the Company issued an aggregate of 59,618,300 shares of its common stock, par value $0.01 per share in a subscription offering, and contributed $4.8 million in cash and 1,920,000 shares of its common stock to The Provident Bank Foundation, a charitable foundation established by the Bank. As a result of the conversion and related stock offering, the Company raised $567.2 million in net proceeds, of which $293.2 million was utilized to acquire all of the outstanding common stock of the Bank. The Company owns all of the outstanding common stock of the Bank, and as such, is a bank holding company subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve Board.
At December 31, 2019, the Company had total assets of $9.81 billion, total loans of $7.33 billion, total deposits of $7.10 billion, and total stockholders’ equity of $1.41 billion. The Company’s mailing address is 239 Washington Street, Jersey City, New Jersey 07302, and the Company’s telephone number is (732) 590-9200.
Capital Management. The Company paid cash dividends totaling $72.8 million and repurchased 916,326 shares of its common stock at a cost of $21.8 million in 2019. At December 31, 2019, 1.6 million shares remain eligible for repurchase under the board approved stock repurchase program. The Company and the Bank were “well capitalized” at December 31, 2019 under current regulatory standards.
Available Information. The Company is a public company, and files interim, quarterly and annual reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The SEC maintains an Internet site (http://www.sec.gov) that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC, including the Company. All SEC reports and amendments to these reports are available on the SEC's website and are made available as soon as practical after they have been filed or furnished to the SEC and are available on the Bank’s website, www.provident.bank, at the “Investor Relations” page, without charge from the Company. Information on our website should not be considered a part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Provident Bank
Established in 1839, the Bank is a New Jersey-chartered capital stock savings bank operating full-service branch offices in the New Jersey counties of Bergen, Essex, Hudson, Hunterdon, Mercer, Middlesex, Monmouth, Morris, Ocean, Passaic, Somerset, Union and Warren, as well as in Bucks, Lehigh and Northampton counties in Pennsylvania. As a community- and customer-oriented institution, the Bank emphasizes personal service and customer convenience in serving the financial needs of the individuals, families and businesses residing in its primary market areas. The Bank attracts deposits from the general public
and businesses primarily in the areas surrounding its banking offices and uses those funds, together with funds generated from operations and borrowings, to originate commercial real estate loans, commercial business loans, residential mortgage loans, and consumer loans. The Bank also invests in mortgage-backed securities and other permissible investments.
The following are highlights of Provident Bank’s operations:
Diversified Loan Portfolio. To improve asset yields and reduce its exposure to interest rate risk, the Bank continues to emphasize the origination of commercial real estate loans, multi-family loans and commercial business loans. These loans generally have adjustable rates or shorter fixed terms and interest rates that are higher than the rates applicable to one-to four-family residential mortgage loans. However, these loans generally have a higher risk of loss than one- to four-family residential mortgage loans.
Asset Quality. As of December 31, 2019, non-performing assets were $42.9 million or 0.44% of total assets, compared to $27.3 million or 0.28% of total assets at December 31, 2018. The Bank’s non-performing asset levels rose from lower levels reported in the prior year largely due to credit deterioration in several commercial lending relationships, and is not indicative of credit deterioration in the broader loan portfolio. The Bank continues to focus on conservative underwriting criteria and on active and timely collection efforts.
Emphasis on Relationship Banking and Core Deposits. The Bank emphasizes the acquisition and retention of core deposit accounts, consisting of savings and demand deposit accounts, and expanding customer relationships. Core deposit accounts totaled $6.37 billion at December 31, 2019, representing 89.7% of total deposits, compared with $6.08 billion, or 89.0% of total deposits at December 31, 2018. The Bank also focuses on increasing the number of households and businesses served and the number of banking products per customer.
Non-Interest Income. The Bank’s focus on transaction accounts and expanded products and services has enabled the Bank to generate increased non-interest income. Fees derived from core deposit accounts are a primary source of non-interest income. The Bank also offers investment, wealth and asset management services through its subsidiaries to generate non-interest income. Total non-interest income was $63.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared with $58.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2018, of which fee income and wealth management income were $28.3 million and $22.5 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2019, compared with $28.1 million and $18.0 million, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2018.
Managing Interest Rate Risk. The Bank manages its exposure to interest rate risk through the origination and retention of adjustable rate and shorter-term loans, and its investments in securities. In addition, the Bank uses interest rate swaps as part of its interest rate risk management strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable amounts from a counterparty in exchange for the Bank making fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements without exchange of the underlying notional amount. These interest rate swaps are used to hedge the variable cash outflows associated with Federal Home Loan Bank of New York ("FHLBNY") borrowings. At December 31, 2019, 62.4% of the Bank’s loan portfolio had a term to maturity of one year or less, or had adjustable interest rates. At December 31, 2019, the Bank’s securities portfolio totaled $1.49 billion and had an expected average life of 3.41 years to manage its exposure to interest rate movements.
MARKET AREA
The Company and the Bank are headquartered in Jersey City, which is located in Hudson County, New Jersey. At December 31, 2019, the Bank operated a network of 83 full-service banking offices throughout thirteen counties in northern and central New Jersey, as well as three counties in Pennsylvania. The Bank maintains its administrative offices in Iselin, New Jersey and satellite loan production offices in Convent Station, Flemington, Paramus and Manasquan, New Jersey, as well as in Bethlehem, Newtown and Wayne, Pennsylvania. The Bank’s lending activities, though concentrated in the communities surrounding its offices, extend predominantly throughout New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania.
The Bank’s primary market area includes a mix of urban and suburban communities, and has a diversified mix of industries including pharmaceutical, manufacturing companies, network communications, insurance and financial services, healthcare, and retail. According to the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent population data, the Bank’s New Jersey market area has a population of approximately 6.9 million, which was 78.0% of the state’s total population. The Bank’s Pennsylvania market area has a population of approximately 1.3 million, which was 10.2% of that state’s total population. Because of the diversity of industries within the Bank’s market area and, to a lesser extent, its proximity to the New York City financial markets, the area’s economy can be significantly affected by changes in national and international economies. According to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, the unemployment rate in New Jersey was 3.5% at December 31, 2019, a decrease from 4.0% at December 31, 2018. The unemployment rate in Pennsylvania was 4.5% for December 31, 2019, an increase from 4.2% at December 31, 2018.
Within its primary market areas in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, the Bank had an approximate 2.16% and 0.67% share of bank deposits as of June 30, 2019, respectively, the latest date for which statistics are available. On a statewide basis, the Bank had an approximate 1.95% deposit share of the New Jersey market and an approximate 0.06% deposit share of the Pennsylvania market.
COMPETITION
The Bank faces significant competition in originating and retaining loans and attracting deposits. The northern and central New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania market areas have a high concentration of financial institutions, including large money center and regional banks, community banks, credit unions, investment brokerage firms and insurance companies. The Bank faces direct competition for loans from each of these institutions as well as from mortgage companies, on-line lenders and other loan origination firms operating in its market area. The Bank’s most direct competition for deposits comes from several commercial banks and savings banks in its market area. Certain of these banks have substantially greater financial resources than the Bank. The Bank also faces significant competition for deposits from the mutual fund and investment advisory industries and from investors’ direct purchases of short-term money market securities and other corporate and government securities.
The Bank competes in this environment by maintaining a diversified product line, including mutual funds, annuities and other investment services made available through its investment subsidiaries. Relationships with customers are built and maintained through the Bank’s branch network, its deployment of branch ATMs, and its mobile, telephone and web-based banking services.
LENDING ACTIVITIES
The Bank originates commercial real estate loans, commercial business loans, fixed-rate and adjustable-rate mortgage loans collateralized by one- to four-family residential real estate and other consumer loans, for borrowers generally located within its primary market area.
Residential mortgage loans are primarily underwritten to standards that allow the sale of the loans to the secondary markets, primarily to the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC” or “Freddie Mac”), the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA” or “Fannie Mae”) and the FHLBNY. To manage interest rate risk, the Bank generally sells fixed-rate residential mortgages that it originates with terms greater than 15 years. The Bank commonly retains biweekly payment fixed-rate residential mortgage loans with a maturity of 30 years or less and a majority of the originated adjustable-rate mortgages for its portfolio.
The Bank originates commercial real estate loans that are secured by income-producing properties such as multi-family apartment buildings, office buildings, and retail and industrial properties. Generally, these loans have maturities of either 5 or 10 years. For loans greater than $5.0 million originated with maturities in excess of 7 years, the Bank generally requires loan-level interest rate swaps for qualified borrowers.
The Bank has historically provided construction loans for both single family and condominium projects intended for sale and commercial projects, including residential rental projects that will be retained as investments by the borrower. The Bank underwrites most construction loans for a term of three years or less. The majority of these loans are underwritten on a floating rate basis. The Bank recognizes that there is higher risk in construction lending than permanent lending. As such, the Bank takes certain precautions to mitigate this risk, including the retention of an outside engineering firm to perform plan and cost reviews, and to review all construction advances made against work in place, and a limitation on how and when loan proceeds are advanced. In most cases, for the single family and condominium projects, the Bank limits its exposure against houses or units that are not under contract. Similarly, commercial construction loans usually have commitments for significant pre-leasing, or funds are held back until the leases are finalized. Funding requirements and loan structure for residential rental projects vary depending on whether such projects are vertical or horizontal construction.
Commercial loans are made to businesses of varying size and type within the Bank’s market. The Bank lends to established businesses, and the loans are generally secured by business assets such as equipment, receivables, inventory, real estate or marketable securities. On a limited basis, the Bank makes unsecured commercial loans. Most commercial lines of credit are made on a floating interest rate basis and most term loans are made on a fixed interest rate basis, usually with terms of five years or less.
The Bank originates consumer loans that are secured, in most cases, by a borrower’s assets. Home equity loans and home equity lines of credit that are secured by a first or second mortgage lien on the borrower’s residence comprise the largest category of the Bank’s consumer loan portfolio.
Loan Portfolio Composition. Set forth below is selected information concerning the composition of the loan portfolio by type, including Purchased Credit Impaired ("PCI") loans, (after deductions for deferred fees and costs, unearned discounts and premiums and allowances for losses) at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
Amount
|
|
Percent
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
$
|
1,078,227
|
|
|
14.82
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,100,009
|
|
|
15.29
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,142,914
|
|
|
15.73
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,212,255
|
|
|
17.46
|
%
|
|
$
|
1,255,159
|
|
|
19.38
|
%
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
2,578,477
|
|
|
35.43
|
|
|
2,299,417
|
|
|
31.96
|
|
|
2,171,174
|
|
|
29.88
|
|
|
1,978,700
|
|
|
28.50
|
|
|
1,716,117
|
|
|
26.50
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
1,225,675
|
|
|
16.84
|
|
|
1,339,800
|
|
|
18.62
|
|
|
1,404,005
|
|
|
19.32
|
|
|
1,402,169
|
|
|
20.20
|
|
|
1,234,066
|
|
|
19.06
|
|
Construction loans
|
429,812
|
|
|
5.91
|
|
|
388,999
|
|
|
5.41
|
|
|
392,580
|
|
|
5.40
|
|
|
264,814
|
|
|
3.81
|
|
|
331,649
|
|
|
5.12
|
|
Total mortgage loans
|
5,312,191
|
|
|
73.00
|
|
|
5,128,225
|
|
|
71.28
|
|
|
5,110,673
|
|
|
70.33
|
|
|
4,857,938
|
|
|
69.97
|
|
|
4,536,991
|
|
|
70.06
|
|
Commercial loans
|
1,634,759
|
|
|
22.46
|
|
|
1,695,148
|
|
|
23.56
|
|
|
1,745,301
|
|
|
24.02
|
|
|
1,630,887
|
|
|
23.49
|
|
|
1,434,291
|
|
|
22.15
|
|
Consumer loans
|
391,360
|
|
|
5.38
|
|
|
431,428
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
473,958
|
|
|
6.52
|
|
|
516,755
|
|
|
7.44
|
|
|
566,175
|
|
|
8.74
|
|
Total gross loans
|
7,338,310
|
|
|
100.84
|
|
|
7,254,801
|
|
|
100.84
|
|
|
7,329,932
|
|
|
100.87
|
|
|
7,005,580
|
|
|
100.90
|
|
|
6,537,457
|
|
|
100.95
|
|
Premiums on purchased loans
|
2,474
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
3,243
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
4,029
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
4,968
|
|
|
0.07
|
|
|
5,740
|
|
|
0.09
|
|
Unearned discounts
|
(26)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(33)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(36)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(39)
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
(41)
|
|
|
—
|
|
Net deferred fees
|
(7,873)
|
|
|
(0.12)
|
|
|
(7,423)
|
|
|
(0.11)
|
|
|
(8,207)
|
|
|
(0.10)
|
|
|
(7,023)
|
|
|
(0.08)
|
|
|
(5,482)
|
|
|
(0.09)
|
|
Total loans
|
7,332,885
|
|
|
100.74
|
|
|
7,250,588
|
|
|
100.77
|
|
|
7,325,718
|
|
|
100.83
|
|
|
7,003,486
|
|
|
100.89
|
|
|
6,537,674
|
|
|
100.95
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
(55,525)
|
|
|
(0.76)
|
|
|
(55,562)
|
|
|
(0.77)
|
|
|
(60,195)
|
|
|
(0.83)
|
|
|
(61,883)
|
|
|
(0.89)
|
|
|
(61,424)
|
|
|
(.95)
|
|
Total loans, net
|
$
|
7,277,360
|
|
|
99.98
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,195,026
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,265,523
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
6,941,603
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
6,476,250
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
Loan Maturity Schedule. The following table sets forth certain information as of December 31, 2019, regarding the maturities of loans in the loan portfolio, including PCI loans. Demand loans having no stated schedule of repayment and no stated maturity, and overdrafts are reported as due within one year.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Within
One Year
|
|
One
Through
Three
Years
|
|
Three
Through
Five Years
|
|
Five
Through
Ten Years
|
|
Ten
Through
Twenty
Years
|
|
Beyond
Twenty
Years
|
|
Total
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
$
|
462
|
|
|
$
|
4,272
|
|
|
$
|
13,832
|
|
|
$
|
94,036
|
|
|
$
|
425,984
|
|
|
$
|
539,641
|
|
|
$
|
1,078,227
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
239,389
|
|
|
445,888
|
|
|
466,554
|
|
|
1,230,672
|
|
|
189,517
|
|
|
6,457
|
|
|
2,578,477
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
125,192
|
|
|
117,277
|
|
|
250,969
|
|
|
662,217
|
|
|
65,349
|
|
|
4,671
|
|
|
1,225,675
|
|
Construction loans
|
229,644
|
|
|
162,602
|
|
|
7,149
|
|
|
14,900
|
|
|
15,517
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
429,812
|
|
Total mortgage loans
|
594,687
|
|
|
730,039
|
|
|
738,504
|
|
|
2,001,825
|
|
|
696,367
|
|
|
550,769
|
|
|
5,312,191
|
|
Commercial loans
|
371,857
|
|
|
302,082
|
|
|
215,188
|
|
|
537,366
|
|
|
158,629
|
|
|
49,637
|
|
|
1,634,759
|
|
Consumer loans
|
14,260
|
|
|
6,325
|
|
|
16,543
|
|
|
88,579
|
|
|
211,115
|
|
|
54,538
|
|
|
391,360
|
|
Total gross loans
|
$
|
980,804
|
|
|
$
|
1,038,446
|
|
|
$
|
970,235
|
|
|
$
|
2,627,770
|
|
|
$
|
1,066,111
|
|
|
$
|
654,944
|
|
|
$
|
7,338,310
|
|
Fixed- and Adjustable-Rate Loan Schedule. The following table sets forth as of December 31, 2019 the amount of all fixed-rate and adjustable-rate loans due after December 31, 2020.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due After December 31, 2020
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed
|
|
Adjustable
|
|
Total
|
|
( In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
$
|
805,206
|
|
|
$
|
272,559
|
|
|
$
|
1,077,765
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
970,481
|
|
|
1,368,608
|
|
|
2,339,089
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
357,754
|
|
|
742,729
|
|
|
1,100,483
|
|
Construction loans
|
5,840
|
|
|
194,328
|
|
|
200,168
|
|
Total mortgage loans
|
2,139,281
|
|
|
2,578,224
|
|
|
4,717,505
|
|
Commercial loans
|
394,407
|
|
|
868,495
|
|
|
1,262,902
|
|
Consumer loans
|
261,189
|
|
|
115,910
|
|
|
377,099
|
|
Total loans
|
$
|
2,794,877
|
|
|
$
|
3,562,629
|
|
|
$
|
6,357,506
|
|
Residential Mortgage Loans. The Bank originates residential mortgage loans secured by first mortgages on one- to four-family residences, generally located in the State of New Jersey and the eastern part of Pennsylvania. The Bank originates residential mortgages primarily through commissioned mortgage representatives and via the Internet. The Bank originates both fixed-rate and adjustable-rate mortgages. As of December 31, 2019, $1.08 billion or 14.8% of the total loan portfolio consisted of residential real estate loans. Of the one- to four-family loans at that date, 74.7% were fixed-rate and 25.3% were adjustable-rate loans.
The Bank originates fixed-rate fully amortizing residential mortgage loans with the principal and interest payments due each month, that typically have maturities ranging from 10 to 30 years. The Bank also originates fixed-rate residential mortgage loans with maturities of 10, 15, 20 and 30 years that require the payment of principal and interest on a biweekly basis. Fixed-rate jumbo residential mortgage loans (loans over the maximum that one of the government-sponsored agencies will purchase) are originated with maturities of up to 30 years. The Bank currently offers adjustable-rate mortgage loans with a fixed-rate period of 5, 7 or 10 years prior to the first annual interest rate adjustment. The standard adjustment formula is the one-year constant maturity Treasury rate plus 2.75%, adjusting annually after its first re-set period, with a 2% maximum annual adjustment and a 6% maximum adjustment over the life of the loan.
Residential mortgage loans are primarily underwritten to Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae standards. The Bank’s standard maximum loan to value ratio is 80%. However, working through mortgage insurance companies, the Bank underwrites loans for sale to Freddie Mac programs that will finance up to 97% of the value of the residence. Generally all fixed-rate loans with terms of 20 years or more are sold into the secondary market with servicing rights retained. Fixed-rate residential mortgage loans retained in the Bank’s portfolio generally include loans with a term of 15 years or less and biweekly payment residential mortgage loans with a term of 30 years or less. The Bank retains the majority of the originated adjustable-rate mortgages for its portfolio.
Loans are sold without recourse, generally with servicing rights retained by the Bank. The percentage of loans sold into the secondary market will vary depending upon interest rates and the Bank’s strategies for reducing exposure to interest rate risk. In 2019, $1.9 million or 1.2% of residential real estate loans originated were sold into the secondary market. All of the loans sold in 2019 were long-term, fixed-rate mortgages.
The retention of adjustable-rate mortgages, as opposed to longer-term, fixed-rate residential mortgage loans, helps reduce the Bank’s exposure to interest rate risk. However, adjustable-rate mortgages generally pose credit risks different from the credit risks inherent in fixed-rate loans primarily because as interest rates rise, the underlying debt service payments of the borrowers rise, thereby increasing the potential for default. The Bank believes that these credit risks, which have not had a material adverse effect on the Bank to date, generally are less onerous than the interest rate risk associated with holding 20- and 30-year fixed-rate loans in its loan portfolio.
For many years, the Bank has offered discounted rates on residential mortgage loans to low- to moderate-income individuals. Loans originated in this category over the last five years have totaled $16.9 million. The Bank also offers a special rate program for first-time homebuyers under which originations have totaled over $41.2 million for the past five years. The Bank does not originate or purchase sub-prime or option ARM loans.
Commercial Real Estate Loans. The Bank originates loans secured by mortgages on various commercial income producing properties, including multi-family apartment buildings, office buildings and retail and industrial properties.
Commercial real estate loans were 35.4% of the total loan portfolio at December 31, 2019. A substantial majority of the Bank’s commercial real estate loans are secured by properties located in the State of New Jersey.
The Bank originates commercial real estate loans with adjustable rates and with fixed interest rates for a period that is generally five to ten years or less, which may adjust after the initial period. Typically these loans are written for maturities of ten years or less and generally have an amortization schedule of 20 or 25 years. As a result, the typical amortization schedule will result in a substantial principal payment upon maturity. The Bank generally underwrites commercial real estate loans to a maximum 75% advance against either the appraised value of the property, or its purchase price (for loans to fund the acquisition of real estate), whichever is less. The Bank generally requires minimum debt service coverage of 1.20 times. There is a potential risk that the borrower may be unable to pay off or refinance the outstanding balance at the loan maturity date. The Bank typically lends to experienced owners or developers who have knowledge and expertise in the commercial real estate market.
Among the reasons for the Bank’s continued emphasis on commercial real estate lending is the desire to invest in assets bearing interest rates that are generally higher than interest rates on residential mortgage loans and more sensitive to changes in market interest rates. Commercial real estate loans, however, entail significant additional credit risk as compared to one- to four-family residential mortgage loans, as they typically involve larger loan balances concentrated with single borrowers or groups of related borrowers. In addition, the payment experience on commercial real estate loans secured by income-producing properties is typically dependent on the successful operation of the related real estate project, and thus may be more significantly impacted by adverse conditions in the real estate market or in the economy generally.
The Bank performs more extensive due diligence in underwriting commercial real estate loans than loans secured by owner-occupied one- to four-family residential properties due to the larger loan amounts and the riskier nature of such loans. The Bank assesses and mitigates the risk in several ways, including inspection of all such properties and the review of the overall financial condition of the borrower and guarantors, which may include, for example, the review of the rent rolls and the verification of income. If applicable, a tenant analysis and market analysis are part of the underwriting. Generally, for commercial real estate secured loans in excess of $1.0 million and for all other commercial real estate loans where it is deemed appropriate, the Bank requires environmental professionals to inspect the property and ascertain any potential environmental risks.
In accordance with regulatory guidelines, the Bank requires a full independent appraisal for commercial real estate properties. The appraiser must be selected from the Bank’s approved list, or otherwise approved by the Chief Credit Officer in instances such as an out-of-state or special use property. The Bank also employs an independent review appraiser to ensure that the appraisal meets the Bank’s standards. Financial statements are also required annually for review. The Bank’s policy also requires that a property inspection of commercial mortgages over $2.5 million be completed at least every 18 months, or more frequently when warranted.
The Bank’s largest commercial mortgage loan as of December 31, 2019 was a $38.2 million loan secured by a first mortgage lien on fifteen mixed-use retail, residential and office buildings located in Hoboken, NJ. This was for an acquisition and refinance of fifteen Bank mortgaged properties by a large publicly traded, investment grade REIT with extensive experience and a successful track record. The loan has strong debt-service coverage and a low loan-to-value ratio of 55%. The loan has a risk rating of “3” (loans rated 1-4 are deemed to be “acceptable quality”—see discussion of the Bank’s nine-point risk rating system for loans under “Allowance for Loan Losses” in the “Asset Quality” section) and was performing in accordance with its terms and conditions as of December 31, 2019. (For the Bank’s largest group borrower exposure —see discussion on “Loans to One Borrower”)
Multi-family Loans. The Bank underwrites loans secured by apartment buildings that have five or more units. The Bank considers multi-family lending a component of the commercial real estate lending portfolio. The underwriting standards and procedures that are used to underwrite commercial real estate loans are used to underwrite multi-family loans, except the loan-to-value ratio shall not exceed 80% of the appraised value of the property, the debt-service coverage should be a minimum of 1.15 times and an amortization period of up to 30 years may be used.
The Bank’s largest multi-family loan as of December 31, 2019 was a $41.0 million loan secured by a first leasehold mortgage lien on a 129-unit, six story class A luxury rental apartment building with 12,000 square feet of office/retail space located in Morristown, New Jersey. The project sponsor is one of the largest privately-held real estate owner/developers in the United States, and has extensive experience and a successful track record in the development and management of multi-family projects. The loan has a risk rating of “3” (loans rated 1-4 are deemed to be “acceptable quality”—see discussion of the Bank’s nine-point risk rating system for loans under “Allowance for Loan Losses” in the “Asset Quality” section) and was performing in accordance with its terms and conditions as of December 31, 2019. (For the Bank’s largest group borrower exposure —see discussion on “Loans to One Borrower”)
Construction Loans. The Bank originates commercial construction loans. Commercial construction lending includes both new construction of residential and commercial real estate projects and the rehabilitation of existing structures.
The Bank’s commercial construction financing includes projects constructed for investment purposes (rental property), projects for sale (single family/condominiums) and to a lesser extent, owner-occupied business properties. To mitigate the speculative nature of construction loans, the Bank generally requires significant pre-leasing on rental properties; requires that a percentage of the for-sale single-family residences or condominiums be under contract to support construction loan advances; and requires other covenants on residential for rental projects depending on whether the project is vertical or horizontal construction.
The Bank generally underwrites construction loans for a term of three years or less. The majority of the Bank’s construction loans are floating-rate loans with a maximum 75% loan-to-value ratio for the completed project. The Bank employs professional engineering firms to assist in the review of construction cost estimates and make site inspections to determine if the work has been completed prior to the advance of funds for the project.
Construction lending generally involves a greater degree of risk than commercial real estate or multi-family lending. Repayment of a construction loan is, to a great degree, dependent upon the successful and timely completion of the construction of the subject project and the successful marketing of the sale or lease of the project. Construction delays, slower than anticipated absorption or the financial impairment of the builder may negatively affect the borrower’s ability to repay the loan.
For all construction loans, the Bank requires an independent appraisal, which includes information on market rents and/or comparable sales for competing projects. The Bank also obtains personal guarantees and conducts environmental due diligence as appropriate.
The Bank also employs other means to mitigate the risk of the construction lending process. On commercial construction projects that the developer maintains for rental, the Bank typically holds back funds for tenant improvements until a lease is executed. For single family and condominium financing, the Bank generally requires payment for the release of a unit that exceeds the amount of the loan advance attributable to such unit.
The Bank’s largest construction loan at December 31, 2019 was a $35.5 million commitment secured by a first mortgage lien on property and improvements related to the construction of a 382,400 square foot industrial building on 29.7 acres located in the Township of Monroe, NJ. The loan had an outstanding balance of $25.7 million at December 31, 2019. This loan closed in mid-2019 with construction completion expected by the end of 2020. This project is 100% pre-leased. The project sponsor is an experienced and long standing real estate owner and developer with a successful track record in the development and management of commercial real estate. The loan has a risk rating of “3” (loans rated 1-4 are deemed “acceptable quality” – see discussion of the Bank’s nine-point risk rating system for loans under “Allowance for Loan Losses” in the “Asset Quality” section) and was performing in accordance with its terms and conditions as of December 31, 2019.
Commercial Loans. The Bank underwrites commercial loans to corporations, partnerships and other businesses. Commercial loans represented 22.5% of the total loan portfolio at December 31, 2019. The majority of the Bank’s commercial loan customers are local businesses with revenues of less than $50.0 million. The Bank primarily offers commercial loans for equipment purchases, lines of credit for working capital purposes, letters of credit and real estate loans where the borrower is the primary occupant of the property. Most commercial loans are originated on a floating-rate basis and the majority of fixed-rate commercial term loans are fully amortized over a five-year period. Owner-occupied commercial real estate loans are generally underwritten to terms consistent with those utilized for commercial real estate; however, the maximum loan-to-value ratio for owner-occupied commercial real estate loans is 80%.
The Bank also underwrites Small Business Administration (“SBA”) guaranteed loans and guaranteed or assisted loans through various state, county and municipal programs. These governmental guarantees are typically used in cases where the borrower requires additional credit support. The Bank has “Preferred Lender” status with the SBA, allowing a more streamlined application and approval process.
The underwriting of a commercial loan is based upon a review of the financial statements of the prospective borrower and guarantors. In most cases the Bank obtains a general lien on accounts receivable and inventory, along with the specific collateral such as real estate or equipment, as appropriate.
Commercial loans generally bear higher interest rates than mortgage loans, but they also involve a higher risk of default since their repayment is generally dependent on the cash flow of the borrower’s business. As a result, the availability of funds for the repayment of commercial loans may be substantially dependent on the success of the business itself and the general economic environment.
The Bank’s largest commercial loan as of December 31, 2019 was a $30.0 million working capital and bonding line of credit to a large and long standing general contractor specializing in heavy bridge and highway construction. The loan, which is annually renewable at the Bank’s option, is unsecured and primarily used for working capital and bonding purposes. The loan has a risk rating of “4” (loans rated 1-4 are deemed “acceptable quality” – see discussion of the Bank’s nine-point risk rating system for loans under “Allowance for Loan Losses” in the “Asset Quality” section). At December 31, 2019, there was no outstanding balance under the line. (For the Bank’s largest group borrower exposure —see discussion on “Loans to One Borrower”)
Consumer Loans. The Bank offers a variety of consumer loans on a direct basis to individuals. Consumer loans represented 5.4% of the total loan portfolio at December 31, 2019. Home equity loans and home equity lines of credit constituted 95.0% of the consumer loan portfolio and indirect marine loans constituted 1.5% of the consumer loan portfolio as of December 31, 2019. The remaining 3.5% of the consumer loan portfolio includes personal loans and unsecured lines of credit, direct auto loans and recreational vehicle loans. The Bank no longer purchases or originates indirect auto, marine or recreational vehicle loans.
Interest rates on home equity loans are fixed for a term not to exceed 20 years and the maximum loan amount is $650,000. A portion of the home equity loan portfolio includes “first-lien product loans,” under which the Bank has offered special rates to borrowers who refinance first mortgage loans on the home equity (first-lien) basis. At December 31, 2019, first-lien home equity loans outstanding totaled $228.5 million. The Bank’s home equity lines of credit are made at floating interest rates and the Bank provides lines of credit of up to $500,000. The approved home equity lines and utilization amounts as of December 31, 2019 were $363.0 million and $116.7 million, respectively, representing utilization of 32.2%.
Consumer loans generally entail greater credit risk than residential mortgage loans, particularly in the case of home equity loans and lines of credit secured by second lien positions, consumer loans that are unsecured or that are secured by assets that tend to depreciate, such as automobiles, boats and recreational vehicles. Collateral repossessed by the Bank from a defaulted consumer loan may not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance, and the remaining deficiency may warrant further substantial collection efforts against the borrower. In addition, consumer loan collections are dependent upon the borrower’s continued financial stability, which is more likely to be adversely affected by job loss, divorce, illness or personal bankruptcy. Furthermore, the application of various federal and state laws, including bankruptcy and insolvency laws, may limit the amount the Bank can recover on such loans.
Loan Originations, Purchases, and Repayments. The following table sets forth the Bank’s loan origination, purchase and repayment activities for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Originations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage
|
$
|
155,211
|
|
|
$
|
108,406
|
|
|
$
|
121,901
|
|
Commercial mortgage
|
577,603
|
|
|
448,137
|
|
|
525,900
|
|
Multi-family mortgage
|
154,235
|
|
|
126,159
|
|
|
51,371
|
|
Construction
|
381,775
|
|
|
360,413
|
|
|
354,594
|
|
Commercial
|
1,445,345
|
|
|
1,992,972
|
|
|
2,525,921
|
|
Consumer
|
114,230
|
|
|
120,369
|
|
|
121,790
|
|
Subtotal of loans originated
|
2,828,399
|
|
|
3,156,456
|
|
|
3,701,477
|
|
Loans purchased
|
—
|
|
|
1,344
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total loans originated and purchased
|
2,828,399
|
|
|
3,157,800
|
|
|
3,701,477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans sold
|
16,212
|
|
|
36,043
|
|
|
24,938
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repayments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage
|
176,112
|
|
|
149,326
|
|
|
188,103
|
|
Commercial mortgage
|
361,832
|
|
|
348,055
|
|
|
188,352
|
|
Multi-family mortgage
|
283,085
|
|
|
204,781
|
|
|
150,205
|
|
Construction
|
246,852
|
|
|
296,450
|
|
|
249,872
|
|
Commercial
|
1,492,822
|
|
|
2,006,342
|
|
|
2,403,945
|
|
Consumer
|
154,122
|
|
|
162,597
|
|
|
163,041
|
|
Total repayments
|
2,714,825
|
|
|
3,167,551
|
|
|
3,343,518
|
|
Total reductions
|
2,731,037
|
|
|
3,203,594
|
|
|
3,368,456
|
|
Other items, net(1)
|
(15,065)
|
|
|
(29,336)
|
|
|
(10,789)
|
|
Net increase (decrease)
|
$
|
82,297
|
|
|
$
|
(75,130)
|
|
|
$
|
322,232
|
|
(1) Other items, net include charge-offs, deferred fees and expenses, discounts and premiums.
Loan Approval Procedures and Authority. The Bank’s Board of Directors approves the Lending Policy on at least an annual basis and on an interim basis as modifications are warranted. The Lending Policy sets the Bank’s lending authority for each type of loan. The Bank’s lending officers are assigned dollar authority limits based upon their experience and expertise. All commercial loan approvals require dual signature authority.
The largest individual lending authority is $10.0 million, which is only available to the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Lending Officer and the Chief Credit Officer. The authority of the Chief Lending Officer and Chief Credit Officer may be increased to $15.0 million for permanent commercial real estate loans acting jointly. Loans in excess of these limits, or which when combined with existing credits of the borrower or related borrowers exceed these limits, are presented to the management Credit Committee for approval. The Credit Committee currently consists of eleven senior officers including the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Lending Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the Chief Credit Officer, the Chief Administrative Officer, the Credit Risk Manager and the Deputy Lending Officer, and requires a majority vote for credit approval.
While the Bank discourages loan policy exceptions, based upon reasonable business considerations exceptions to the policy may be warranted. The business reason and mitigants for the exception must be noted on the loan approval document. The policy exception requires the approval of the Chief Lending Officer, Deputy Lending Officer or the Department Manager of the lending department responsible for the underlying loan, if it is within his or her approval authority limit. All other policy exceptions must be approved by the Credit Committee. The Credit Administration Department reports the type and frequency of loan policy exceptions to the Board of Directors on a quarterly basis, or more frequently if necessary.
The Bank has adopted a risk rating system as part of the credit risk assessment of its loan portfolio. The Bank’s commercial real estate and commercial lending officers are required to maintain an appropriate risk rating for each loan in their portfolio. When the lender learns of important financial developments, the risk rating is reviewed accordingly. Risk ratings are subject to review by the Credit Department during the underwriting and loan review processes. Loan review examinations are
performed by an independent third party which validates the risk ratings on a sample basis. In addition, a risk rating can be adjusted at the weekly Credit Committee meeting and quarterly at management’s Credit Risk Management Committee, which meets to review all loans rated a “Pass/Watch” ("5") or worse. The Bank requires an annual review be performed for commercial and commercial real estate loans above certain dollar thresholds, depending on loan type, to help determine the appropriate risk ratings. The risk ratings play an important role in the establishment of the loan loss provision and to confirm the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses.
Loans to One Borrower. The regulatory limit on total loans to any borrower or attributed to any one borrower is 15% of the Bank’s unimpaired capital and surplus. As of December 31, 2019, the regulatory lending limit was $147.4 million. The Bank’s current internal policy limit on total loans to a borrower or related borrowers that constitute a group exposure is up to $100.0 million for loans with a risk rating of "2" or better, up to $90.0 million for loans with a risk rating of "3", and up to $65.0 million for loans with a risk rating of "4". For a select group of the most credit-worthy and diversified borrowers, the maximum group exposure limit is up to $130.0 million. Maximum group exposure limits may be lower depending on the type of loans involved. The Bank reviews these group exposures on a quarterly basis. The Bank also sets additional limits on size of loans by loan type.
At December 31, 2019, the Bank’s largest group exposure with an individual borrower and its related entities was $125.8 million, consisting of eight commercial real estate loans totaling $98.5 million, secured by five retail properties and two office buildings located in New Jersey and Pennsylvania, two construction loans totaling $11.9 million, secured by a retail and office building project located in Pennsylvania, an $8.4 million land loan secured by 31 acres in New Jersey, a $6.0 million unsecured line of credit, $600,000 under seven letters of credit and $400,000 under eleven ACH facilities. The loans have an average risk rating of “4”. The borrower, headquartered in New Jersey, is an experienced real estate owner and developer in the states of New Jersey and Pennsylvania. As of December 31, 2019, all of the loans in this lending relationship were performing in accordance with their respective terms and conditions.
As of December 31, 2019, the Bank had $2.1 billion in loans outstanding to its 50 largest borrowers and their related entities.
ASSET QUALITY
General. One of the Bank’s key objectives has been and continues to be to maintain a high level of asset quality. In addition to maintaining sound credit standards for new loan originations, the Bank employs proactive collection and workout processes in dealing with delinquent or problem loans. The Bank actively markets properties that it acquires through foreclosure or otherwise in the loan collection process.
Collection Procedures. In the case of residential mortgage and consumer loans, collection activities begin on the sixteenth day of delinquency. Collection efforts include automated notices of delinquency, telephone calls, letters and other notices to delinquent borrowers. Foreclosure proceedings and other appropriate collection activities such as repossession of collateral are commenced within at least 90 to 120 days after a loan is delinquent provided a plan of repayment to cure the delinquency or other loss mitigation arrangement cannot be reached with the borrower. Periodic inspections of real estate and other collateral are conducted throughout the collection process. The Bank’s collection procedures for Federal Housing Association (“FHA”) and Veteran’s Administration (“VA”) one- to four-family mortgage loans follow the collection and loss mitigation guidelines outlined by those agencies.
Real estate and other assets acquired through foreclosure or in connection with a loan workout are held as foreclosed assets. The Bank carries other real estate owned and other foreclosed assets at the lower of their cost or their fair value less estimated selling costs. The Bank attempts to sell the property at foreclosure sale or as soon as practical after the foreclosure sale through a proactive marketing effort.
The collection procedures for commercial real estate and commercial loans include sending periodic late notices and letters to a borrower once a loan is past due. The Bank attempts to make direct contact with a borrower once a loan is 16 days past due, usually by telephone. The Chief Lending Officer and Chief Credit Officer review all commercial real estate and commercial loan delinquencies on a weekly basis. Generally, delinquent commercial real estate and commercial loans are transferred to the Asset Recovery Department for further action if the delinquency is not cured within a reasonable period of time, typically 90 days. The Chief Lending Officer and Chief Credit Officer have the authority to transfer performing commercial real estate or commercial loans to the Asset Recovery Department if, in their opinion, a credit problem exists or is likely to occur.
Loans deemed uncollectible are proposed for charge-off on a monthly basis. Any charge-off recommendation of $500,000 or greater is submitted to executive management.
Delinquent Loans and Non-performing Loans and Assets. Bank policy requires that the Chief Credit Officer to continuously monitor the status of the loan portfolios and report to the Board of Directors on at least a quarterly basis. These reports include information on impaired loans, delinquent loans, criticized and classified assets, and foreclosed assets. An impaired loan is defined as a non-homogeneous loan greater than $1.0 million for which it is probable, based on current information, that the Bank will not collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Impaired loans also include all loans modified as troubled debt restructurings (“TDRs”). A loan is deemed to be a TDR when a modification resulting in a concession is made by the Bank in an effort to mitigate potential loss arising from a borrower’s financial difficulty. Smaller balance homogeneous loans including residential mortgages and other consumer loans are evaluated collectively for impairment and are excluded from the definition of impaired loans, except for TDRs. Impaired loans are individually identified and reviewed to determine that each loan’s carrying value is not in excess of the fair value of the related collateral or the present value of the expected future cash flows. As of December 31, 2019, there were 158 impaired loans totaling $70.6 million, of which 147 loans totaling $48.3 million were TDRs. Included in this total were 133 TDRs related to 128 borrowers totaling $42.7 million that were performing in accordance with their restructured terms and which continued to accrue interest at December 31, 2019.
Interest income stops accruing on loans when interest or principal payments are 90 days in arrears or earlier when the timely collectability of such interest or principal is doubtful. When the accrual of interest on a loan is stopped, the loan is designated as a non-accrual loan and the outstanding unpaid interest previously credited is reversed. A non-accrual loan is returned to accrual status when factors indicating doubtful collection no longer exist, the loan has been brought current and the borrower demonstrates some period (generally six months) of timely contractual payments.
Federal and state regulations as well as the Bank’s policy require the Bank to utilize an internal risk rating system as a means of reporting problem and potential problem assets. Under this system, the Bank classifies problem and potential problem assets as “substandard,” “doubtful” or “loss” assets. An asset is considered “substandard” if it is inadequately protected by the current net worth and paying capacity of the obligor or of the collateral pledged, if any. “Substandard” assets include those characterized by the “distinct possibility” that the Bank will sustain “some loss” if the deficiencies are not corrected. Assets classified as “doubtful” have all of the weaknesses inherent in those classified “substandard” with the added characteristic that the weaknesses present make “collection or liquidation in full,” on the basis of currently existing facts, conditions, and values, “highly questionable and improbable.” Assets classified as “loss” are those considered “uncollectible” and of such little value that their continuance as assets without the establishment of a specific loss reserve is not warranted. Assets which do not currently expose the Bank to sufficient risk to warrant classification in one of the aforementioned categories, but possess potential weaknesses, are designated “special mention.”
Management estimates the amount of loan losses for groups of loans by applying quantitative loss factors to loan segments at the risk rating level, and applying qualitative adjustments to each loan segment at the portfolio level. Quantitative loss factors give consideration to historical loss experience by loan type based upon an appropriate look back period and adjusted for a loss emergence period. Qualitative adjustments give consideration to other qualitative or environmental factors such as trends and levels of delinquencies, impaired loans, charge-offs, recoveries and loan volumes, as well as national and local economic trends and conditions. Qualitative adjustments reflect risks in the loan portfolio not captured by the quantitative loss factors and, as such, are evaluated from a risk level perspective relative to the risk levels present over the look back period. The reserves resulting from the application of both of these sets of loss factors are combined to arrive at the allowance for loan losses. When the Bank classifies one or more assets, or portions thereof, as “loss,” the Bank is required either to establish a specific allowance for losses equal to 100% of the amount of the asset so classified or to charge-off such amount.
Management's determination as to the classification of assets and the amount of the valuation allowances is subject to review by the FDIC and the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance, each of which can require the establishment of additional general or specific loss allowances. The FDIC, in conjunction with the other federal banking agencies, issued an interagency policy statement on the allowance for loan and lease losses. The policy statement provides guidance for financial institutions on both the responsibilities of the board of directors and management for the maintenance of adequate allowances, and guidance for banking agency examiners to use in determining the adequacy of general valuation allowances. Generally, the policy statement reaffirms that institutions should have effective loan review systems and controls to identify, monitor and address asset quality problems; that loans deemed uncollectible are promptly charged off; and that the institution’s process for determining an adequate level for its valuation allowance is based on a comprehensive, adequately documented, and consistently applied analysis of the institution’s loan and lease portfolio. While management believes that on the basis of information currently available to it, the allowance for loans losses is adequate as of December 31, 2019, actual losses are dependent upon future events and, as such, further additions to the level of allowances for loan losses may become necessary.
Loans are classified in accordance with the risk rating system described previously. At December 31, 2019, $88.5 million of loans were classified as “substandard,” which consisted of $57.0 million in commercial loans, $13.5 million in commercial and multi-family mortgage loans, $10.2 million in residential loans and $1.7 million in consumer loans. At that same date,
there were $836,000 loans classified as “doubtful.” Also, there were no loans classified as “loss” at December 31, 2019. As of December 31, 2019, $128.7 million of loans were designated “special mention.”
The following table sets forth delinquencies in the loan portfolio as of the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2018
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2017
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
Number
of
Loans
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
15
|
|
|
$
|
2,579
|
|
|
36
|
|
|
$
|
8,543
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
$
|
5,557
|
|
|
31
|
|
|
$
|
5,853
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
$
|
4,325
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
$
|
8,105
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
5,270
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
8
|
|
|
5,887
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Construction loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total mortgage loans
|
15
|
|
|
2,579
|
|
|
42
|
|
|
13,813
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
5,557
|
|
|
43
|
|
|
9,033
|
|
|
27
|
|
|
4,325
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
13,992
|
|
Commercial loans
|
2
|
|
|
95
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
12,137
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
13,565
|
|
|
19
|
|
|
4,309
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
406
|
|
|
24
|
|
|
6,901
|
|
Consumer loans
|
12
|
|
|
337
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
1,148
|
|
|
15
|
|
|
610
|
|
|
21
|
|
|
1,266
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
487
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
2,491
|
|
Total loans
|
29
|
|
|
$
|
3,011
|
|
|
84
|
|
|
$
|
27,098
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
$
|
19,732
|
|
|
83
|
|
|
$
|
14,608
|
|
|
41
|
|
|
$
|
5,218
|
|
|
122
|
|
|
$
|
23,384
|
|
Non-Accrual Loans and Non-Performing Assets. The following table sets forth information regarding non-accrual loans and other non-performing assets. At December 31, 2019, there were 14 TDRs totaling $5.6 million that were classified as non-accrual, compared to 19 non-accrual TDRs which totaled $11.2 million at December 31, 2018. Loans are generally placed on non-accrual status when they become 90 days or more past due or if they have been identified as presenting uncertainty with respect to the collectability of interest or principal.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
2015
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-accruing loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
$
|
8,543
|
|
|
$
|
5,853
|
|
|
$
|
8,105
|
|
|
$
|
12,021
|
|
|
$
|
12,031
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
5,270
|
|
|
3,180
|
|
|
7,090
|
|
|
7,493
|
|
|
1,263
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
553
|
|
|
742
|
|
Construction loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
2,517
|
|
|
2,351
|
|
Commercial loans
|
25,160
|
|
|
15,391
|
|
|
17,243
|
|
|
16,787
|
|
|
23,875
|
|
Consumer loans
|
1,221
|
|
|
1,266
|
|
|
2,491
|
|
|
3,030
|
|
|
4,109
|
|
Total non-accruing loans
|
40,194
|
|
|
25,690
|
|
|
34,929
|
|
|
42,401
|
|
|
44,371
|
|
Accruing loans - 90 days or more delinquent
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
165
|
|
Total non-performing loans
|
40,194
|
|
|
25,690
|
|
|
34,929
|
|
|
42,401
|
|
|
44,536
|
|
Foreclosed assets
|
2,715
|
|
|
1,565
|
|
|
6,864
|
|
|
7,991
|
|
|
10,546
|
|
Total non-performing assets
|
$
|
42,909
|
|
|
$
|
27,255
|
|
|
$
|
41,793
|
|
|
$
|
50,392
|
|
|
$
|
55,082
|
|
Total non-performing assets as a percentage of total assets
|
0.44
|
%
|
|
0.28
|
%
|
|
0.42
|
%
|
|
0.53
|
%
|
|
0.62
|
%
|
Total non-performing loans to total loans
|
0.55
|
%
|
|
0.35
|
%
|
|
0.48
|
%
|
|
0.61
|
%
|
|
0.68
|
%
|
Non-performing commercial mortgage loans increased $2.1 million to $5.3 million at December 31, 2019, from $3.2 million at December 31, 2018. Non-performing commercial mortgage loans consisted of six loans at December 31, 2019. The largest non-performing commercial mortgage loan was a $3.8 million loan secured by a first mortgage on a property located in Hackettstown, New Jersey. The loan is presently in default. There is no contractual commitment to advance additional funds to this borrower.
Non-performing commercial loans increased $9.8 million, to $25.2 million at December 31, 2019, from $15.4 million at December 31, 2018. Non-performing commercial loans at December 31, 2019 consisted of 33 loans. The largest non-performing commercial loan relationship was a Shared National Credit ("SNC") relationship, which consisted of three loans to
a restaurant group with total outstanding balances of $11.6 million at December 31, 2019. All of these loans are unsecured/non-real estate secured. These loans are currently paying in accordance with their restructured terms.
There were no non-performing construction loans at December 31, 2019 or 2018.
At December 31, 2019, the Company held $2.7 million of foreclosed assets, compared with $1.6 million at December 31, 2018. Foreclosed assets at December 31, 2019 are carried at fair value based on recent appraisals and valuation estimates, less estimated selling costs. During the year ended December 31, 2019, there were eleven additions to foreclosed assets with an aggregate carrying value of $2.3 million and six properties sold with an aggregate carrying value of $1.0 million. Foreclosed assets at December 31, 2019, consisted of $2.7 million of residential real estate.
Non-performing assets totaled $42.9 million, or 0.44% of total assets at December 31, 2019, compared to $27.3 million, or 0.28% of total assets at December 31, 2018. If the non-accrual loans had performed in accordance with their original terms, interest income would have increased by $1.7 million during the year ended December 31, 2019. The amount of cash basis interest income that was recognized on impaired loans during the year ended December 31, 2019 was not material.
Allowance for Loan Losses. The allowance for loan losses is a valuation account that reflects an evaluation of the probable losses in the loan portfolio. The allowance for loan losses is maintained through provisions for loan losses that are charged to income. Charge-offs against the allowance for loan losses are taken on loans where it is determined the collection of loan principal is unlikely. Recoveries made on loans that have been charged-off are credited to the allowance for loan losses.
Management’s evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses includes a review of all loans on which the collectability of principal may not be reasonably assured. For residential mortgage and consumer loans, this is determined primarily by delinquency status. For commercial mortgage, multi-family, construction and commercial loans, an extensive review of financial performance, payment history and collateral values is conducted on a quarterly basis.
As part of its evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses, each quarter management prepares an analysis that categorizes the entire loan portfolio by certain risk characteristics such as loan type (residential mortgage, commercial mortgage, construction, commercial, etc.) and loan risk rating.
When assigning a risk rating to a loan, management utilizes a nine point internal risk rating system. Loans deemed to be “acceptable quality” are rated 1 through 4, with a rating of 1 established for loans with minimal risk. Loans deemed to be of “questionable quality” are rated 5 (watch) or 6 (special mention). Loans with adverse classifications (substandard, doubtful or loss) are rated 7, 8 or 9, respectively. Commercial mortgage, multi-family, construction and commercial loans are rated individually and each lending officer is responsible for risk rating loans in their portfolio. These risk ratings are then reviewed by the department manager and/or the Chief Lending Officer and the Credit Department. The risk ratings are also confirmed through periodic loan review examinations, which are currently performed by an independent third party, and periodically by the Credit Committee in the credit renewal or approval process. In addition, the Bank requires an annual review be performed for commercial and commercial real estate loans above certain dollar thresholds, depending on loan type, to help determine the appropriate risk rating.
Each quarter, the lending groups prepare individual Credit Risk Management Reports for the Credit Administration Department. These reports review all commercial loans and commercial mortgage loans that have been determined to involve above-average risk (risk rating of 5 or worse). The Credit Risk Management Reports contain the reason for the risk rating assigned to each loan, status of the loan and any current developments. These reports are submitted to a committee chaired by the Chief Credit Officer. Each loan officer reviews the loan and the corresponding Credit Risk Management Report with the committee and the risk rating is evaluated for appropriateness.
Management estimates the amount of loan losses for groups of loans by applying quantitative loss factors to loan segments at the risk rating level, and applying qualitative adjustments to each loan segment at the portfolio level. Quantitative loss factors give consideration to historical loss experience by loan type based upon an appropriate look-back period and adjusted for a loss emergence period; these factors are evaluated at least annually. The most recent periodic review and recalculation of quantitative loss factors was completed in the third quarter of 2019 using historical loss data through June 30, 2019 and was applied effective September 30, 2019. Qualitative adjustments give consideration to other qualitative or environmental factors such as:
a.levels of and trends in delinquencies and impaired loans;
b.levels of and trends in charge-offs and recoveries;
c.trends in volume and terms of loans;
d.effects of any changes in lending policies, procedures and practices;
e.changes in the quality or results of the Bank’s loan review system;
f.experience, ability, and depth of lending management and other relevant staff;
g.national and local economic trends and conditions;
h.industry conditions;
i.effects of changes in credit concentration; and
j.changes in collateral values.
Qualitative adjustments reflect risks in the loan portfolio not captured by the quantitative loss factors and, as such, are evaluated from a risk level perspective relative to the risk levels present over the look-back period. Qualitative adjustments are recalibrated at least annually and evaluated at least quarterly. The range of adjustments to historical loss rates applicable to qualitative factors were updated in the third quarter of 2019 in conjunction with the review and recalculation of quantitative loss factors. The reserves resulting from the application of both of these sets of loss factors are combined to arrive at the general allowance for loan losses.
The reserve factors applied to each loan risk rating are inherently subjective in nature. Reserve factors are assigned to each of the risk rating categories. This methodology permits adjustments to the allowance for loan losses in the event that, in management’s judgment, significant conditions impacting the credit quality and collectability of the loan portfolio as of the evaluation date are not otherwise adequately reflected in the analysis.
In addition, the Company separately calculates an allowance for loan losses on impaired loans. The Company defines an impaired loan as a non-homogeneous loan greater than $1.0 million for which it is probable, based on current information, that the Bank will not collect all amounts due under the contractual terms of the loan agreement. The Company may recognize impairment of a loan based upon: (1) the present value of expected cash flows discounted at the effective interest rate; or (2) if a loan is collateral dependent, the fair value of collateral; or (3) the market price of the loan. The Company uses third-party appraisals to determine the fair value of the underlying collateral in its analysis of collateral dependent impaired loans. A third-party appraisal is generally ordered as soon as a loan is designated as a collateral dependent impaired loan and updated annually, or more frequently if required. A specific allocation of the allowance for loan losses is established for each impaired loan with a carrying balance greater than the collateral’s fair value, less estimated costs to sell.
The provision for loan losses is established after considering the allowance for loan loss analysis, the amount of the allowance for loan losses in relation to the total loan balance, loan portfolio growth, loan portfolio composition, loan delinquency and non-performing loan trends and peer group analysis.
Management believes the primary risks inherent in the portfolio are a decline in the economy, generally, a decline in real estate market values, rising unemployment or a protracted period of unemployment at elevated levels, increasing vacancy rates in commercial investment properties and possible increases in interest rates in the absence of economic improvement. Any one or a combination of these events may adversely affect borrowers’ ability to repay the loans, resulting in increased delinquencies, loan losses and future levels of provisions. Accordingly, the Company has provided for loan losses at the current level to address the current risk in its loan portfolio. Management considers it important to maintain the ratio of the allowance for loan losses to total loans at an acceptable level given current economic conditions, interest rates and the composition of the portfolio. Management will continue to review the entire loan portfolio to determine the extent, if any, to which further additional loan loss provisions may be deemed necessary. The allowance for loan losses is maintained at a level that represents management’s best estimate of probable losses related to specifically identified loans as well as probable losses inherent in the remaining loan portfolio. There can be no assurance that the allowance for loan losses will be adequate to cover all losses that may in fact be realized in the future or that additional provisions for loan losses will not be required.
Analysis of the Allowance for Loan Losses. The following table sets forth the analysis of the allowance for loan losses for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
2016
|
|
2015
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period
|
$
|
55,562
|
|
|
$
|
60,195
|
|
|
$
|
61,883
|
|
|
$
|
61,424
|
|
|
$
|
61,734
|
|
|
Charge offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
44
|
|
|
277
|
|
|
421
|
|
|
1,033
|
|
|
1,296
|
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
222
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
72
|
|
|
35
|
|
|
1,086
|
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
105
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
Commercial loans
|
14,023
|
|
|
28,986
|
|
|
7,187
|
|
|
4,862
|
|
|
2,863
|
|
|
Consumer loans
|
743
|
|
|
755
|
|
|
1,253
|
|
|
1,020
|
|
|
3,478
|
|
|
Total
|
15,032
|
|
|
30,018
|
|
|
8,941
|
|
|
6,950
|
|
|
8,828
|
|
|
Recoveries:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
46
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
102
|
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
376
|
|
|
431
|
|
|
59
|
|
|
504
|
|
|
86
|
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
67
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
6
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
57
|
|
|
Commercial loans
|
665
|
|
|
428
|
|
|
800
|
|
|
570
|
|
|
2,413
|
|
|
Consumer loans
|
808
|
|
|
768
|
|
|
787
|
|
|
811
|
|
|
1,508
|
|
|
Total
|
1,895
|
|
|
1,685
|
|
|
1,653
|
|
|
2,009
|
|
|
4,168
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
13,137
|
|
|
28,333
|
|
|
7,288
|
|
|
4,941
|
|
|
4,660
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
13,100
|
|
|
23,700
|
|
|
5,600
|
|
|
5,400
|
|
|
4,350
|
|
|
Balance at end of period
|
$
|
55,525
|
|
|
$
|
55,562
|
|
|
$
|
60,195
|
|
|
$
|
61,883
|
|
|
$
|
61,424
|
|
|
Ratio of net charge-offs to average loans outstanding during the period
|
0.18
|
%
|
|
0.39
|
%
|
|
0.10
|
%
|
|
0.07
|
%
|
|
0.07
|
%
|
|
Allowance for loan losses to total loans
|
0.76
|
%
|
|
0.77
|
%
|
|
0.82
|
%
|
|
0.88
|
%
|
|
0.94
|
%
|
|
Allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans
|
138.14
|
%
|
|
216.28
|
%
|
|
172.34
|
%
|
|
145.95
|
%
|
|
137.92
|
%
|
|
Allocation of Allowance for Loan Losses. The following table sets forth the allocation of the allowance for loan losses by loan category for the periods indicated. This allocation is based on management’s assessment, as of a given point in time, of the risk characteristics of each of the component parts of the total loan portfolio and is subject to changes as and when the risk factors of each such component part change. The allocation is neither indicative of the specific amounts or the loan categories in which future charge-offs may be taken, nor is it an indicator of future loss trends. The allocation of the allowance to each category does not restrict the use of the allowance to absorb losses in any category.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
2016
|
|
|
|
2015
|
|
|
|
Amount of
Allowance
for Loan
Losses
|
|
Percent of
Loans in
Each
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
Amount of
Allowance
for Loan
Losses
|
|
Percent of
Loans in
Each
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
Amount of
Allowance
for Loan
Losses
|
|
Percent of
Loans in
Each
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
Amount of
Allowance
for Loan
Losses
|
|
Percent of
Loans in
Each
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
Amount of
Allowance
for Loan
Losses
|
|
Percent of
Loans in
Each
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans
|
$
|
3,414
|
|
|
14.69
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,971
|
|
|
15.16
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,328
|
|
|
15.59
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,540
|
|
|
17.30
|
%
|
|
$
|
5,110
|
|
|
19.20
|
%
|
Commercial mortgage loans
|
12,831
|
|
|
35.14
|
|
|
12,639
|
|
|
31.70
|
|
|
13,136
|
|
|
29.62
|
|
|
12,234
|
|
|
28.24
|
|
|
12,798
|
|
|
26.25
|
|
Multi-family mortgage loans
|
3,374
|
|
|
16.70
|
|
|
4,745
|
|
|
18.46
|
|
|
4,919
|
|
|
19.15
|
|
|
7,481
|
|
|
20.02
|
|
|
7,841
|
|
|
18.88
|
|
Construction loans
|
5,892
|
|
|
5.86
|
|
|
6,323
|
|
|
5.36
|
|
|
5,669
|
|
|
5.35
|
|
|
4,371
|
|
|
3.77
|
|
|
6,345
|
|
|
5.06
|
|
Commercial loans
|
28,263
|
|
|
22.28
|
|
|
25,693
|
|
|
23.37
|
|
|
29,814
|
|
|
23.81
|
|
|
29,143
|
|
|
23.28
|
|
|
25,829
|
|
|
21.94
|
|
Consumer loans
|
1,751
|
|
|
5.33
|
|
|
2,191
|
|
|
5.95
|
|
|
2,329
|
|
|
6.48
|
|
|
3,114
|
|
|
7.39
|
|
|
3,501
|
|
|
8.67
|
|
Unallocated
|
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
55,525
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
55,562
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
60,195
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
61,883
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
61,424
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
INVESTMENT ACTIVITIES
General. The Board of Directors annually approves the Investment Policy for the Bank and the Company. The Chief Financial Officer and the Treasurer are authorized by the Board to implement the Investment Policy and establish investment strategies. Each of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Assistant Treasurer is authorized to make investment decisions consistent with the Investment Policy. Investment transactions for the Bank are reported to the Board of Directors of the Bank on a monthly basis.
The Investment Policy is designed to generate a favorable rate of return, consistent with established guidelines for liquidity, safety, duration and diversification, and to complement the lending activities of the Bank. Investment decisions are made in accordance with the policy and are based on credit quality, interest rate risk, balance sheet composition, market expectations, liquidity, income and collateral needs.
The Investment Policy does not currently permit the purchase of any securities that are below investment grade.
The investment strategy is to maximize the return on the investment portfolio consistent with the Investment Policy. The investment strategy considers the Bank’s and the Company’s interest rate risk position as well as liquidity, loan demand and other factors. Acceptable investment securities include U.S. Treasury and Agency obligations, collateralized mortgage obligations (“CMOs”), corporate debt obligations, municipal bonds, mortgage-backed securities, commercial paper, mutual funds, bankers’ acceptances and Federal funds. Securities purchased for the investment portfolio require a minimum credit rating of “A” by Moody’s or Standard & Poor’s at the time of purchase.
Securities in the investment portfolio are classified as held to maturity debt securities, available for sale debt securities, equity securities, or held for trading. Securities that are classified as held to maturity debt securities are securities that the Bank or the Company has the intent and ability to hold until their contractual maturity date and are reported at cost. Securities that are classified as available for sale debt securities are reported at fair value. Available for sale securities debt securities include U.S. Treasury and Agency obligations, U.S. Agency and privately-issued CMOs, corporate debt obligations. Sales of securities may occur from time to time in response to changes in market rates and liquidity needs and to facilitate balance sheet reallocation to effectively manage interest rate risk. Equity securities are traded in active markets with readily accessible quoted market prices, carried at fair value. At the present time, there are no securities that are classified as held for trading.
Management conducts a periodic review and evaluation of the securities portfolio to determine if any securities with a market value below book value were other-than-temporarily impaired. If such an impairment was deemed other-than-temporary, management would measure the total credit-related component of the unrealized loss, and the Company would recognize that portion of the loss as a charge to current period earnings. The remaining portion of the unrealized loss would be recognized as an adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income (loss). The fair value of the securities portfolio is significantly affected by changes in interest rates. In general, as interest rates rise, the fair value of fixed-rate securities decreases and as interest rates fall, the fair value of fixed-rate securities increases.
CMOs are a type of debt security issued by a special-purpose entity that aggregates pools of mortgages and mortgage-related securities and creates different classes of CMO securities with varying maturities and amortization schedules as well as a residual interest with each class possessing different risk characteristics. In contrast to pass-through mortgage-backed securities from which cash flow is received (and prepayment risk is shared) pro rata by all securities holders, the cash flow from the mortgages or mortgage-related securities underlying CMOs is paid in accordance with predetermined priority to investors holding various tranches of such securities or obligations. A particular tranche of CMOs may therefore carry prepayment risk that differs from that of both the underlying collateral and other tranches. Accordingly, CMOs attempt to moderate risks associated with conventional mortgage-related securities resulting from unexpected prepayment activity. In declining interest rate environments, the Bank attempts to purchase CMOs with principal lock-out periods, reducing prepayment risk in the investment portfolio. During rising interest rate periods, the Bank’s strategy is to purchase CMOs that are receiving principal payments that can be reinvested at higher current yields. Investments in CMOs involve a risk that actual prepayments will differ from those estimated in pricing the security, which may result in adjustments to the net yield on such securities. Additionally, the fair value of such securities may be adversely affected by changes in the market interest rates. Management believes these securities may represent attractive alternatives relative to other investments due to the wide variety of maturity, repayment and interest rate options available.
At December 31, 2019, the Bank held $17,000 in privately-issued CMOs in the investment portfolio. The Bank and the Company do not invest in collateralized debt obligations, mortgage-related securities secured by sub-prime loans, or any preferred equity securities.
Amortized Cost and Fair Value of Securities. The following table sets forth certain information regarding the amortized cost and fair values of the Company’s securities as of the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
|
2017
|
|
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
Amortized Cost
|
|
Fair Value
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to Maturity Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
$
|
122
|
|
|
$
|
187
|
|
|
$
|
190
|
|
|
$
|
382
|
|
|
$
|
396
|
|
FHLB obligations
|
1,800
|
|
|
1,806
|
|
|
1,396
|
|
|
1,374
|
|
|
410
|
|
|
403
|
|
FHLMC obligations
|
1,900
|
|
|
1,897
|
|
|
2,195
|
|
|
2,162
|
|
|
1,600
|
|
|
1,564
|
|
FNMA obligations
|
900
|
|
|
898
|
|
|
899
|
|
|
869
|
|
|
1,799
|
|
|
1,763
|
|
FFCB obligations
|
1,999
|
|
|
2,000
|
|
|
499
|
|
|
491
|
|
|
499
|
|
|
491
|
|
State and municipal obligations
|
437,074
|
|
|
451,353
|
|
|
463,801
|
|
|
464,363
|
|
|
462,942
|
|
|
470,484
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
9,838
|
|
|
9,890
|
|
|
10,448
|
|
|
10,291
|
|
|
10,020
|
|
|
9,938
|
|
Total held-to-maturity debt securities
|
$
|
453,629
|
|
|
$
|
467,966
|
|
|
$
|
479,425
|
|
|
$
|
479,740
|
|
|
$
|
477,652
|
|
|
$
|
485,039
|
|
Available for Sale Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S Treasury obligations
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
936,196
|
|
|
947,430
|
|
|
1,048,415
|
|
|
1,034,969
|
|
|
993,548
|
|
|
988,367
|
|
FHLMC obligations
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
FHLB obligations
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
19,014
|
|
|
19,005
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations
|
3,907
|
|
|
4,079
|
|
|
2,828
|
|
|
2,912
|
|
|
3,259
|
|
|
3,388
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
25,032
|
|
|
25,410
|
|
|
25,039
|
|
|
25,198
|
|
|
26,047
|
|
|
26,394
|
|
Total available for sale debt securities
|
$
|
965,135
|
|
|
$
|
976,919
|
|
|
$
|
1,076,282
|
|
|
$
|
1,063,079
|
|
|
$
|
1,041,868
|
|
|
$
|
1,037,154
|
|
Equity securities
|
$
|
825
|
|
|
$
|
825
|
|
|
$
|
635
|
|
|
$
|
635
|
|
|
$
|
417
|
|
|
$
|
658
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average expected life of
securities(1)
|
3.41 years
|
|
|
|
4.72 years
|
|
|
|
4.34 years
|
|
|
(1) Average expected life is based on prepayment assumptions utilizing prevailing interest rates as of the reporting dates and excludes equity securities.
The aggregate carrying values and fair values of securities by issuer, where the aggregate book value of such securities exceeds ten percent of stockholders’ equity are as follows (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortized
Cost
|
|
Fair
Value
|
At December 31, 2019:
|
|
|
|
FNMA
|
$
|
415,859
|
|
|
$
|
420,592
|
|
FHLMC
|
438,869
|
|
|
444,161
|
|
The following table sets forth certain information regarding the carrying value, weighted average yields and contractual maturities of the Company’s debt securities portfolio as of December 31, 2019. No tax equivalent adjustments were made to the weighted average yields. Amounts are shown at amortized cost for held to maturity debt securities and at fair value for available for sale debt securities.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One Year or Less
|
|
|
|
More Than One
Year to Five Years
|
|
|
|
More Than Five
Years to Ten Years
|
|
|
|
After Ten Years
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted
Average
Yield (1)
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted
Average
Yield (1)
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted
Average
Yield (1)
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted
Average
Yield (1)
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
Weighted
Average
Yield(1)
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to Maturity Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
5.31
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
118
|
|
|
5.31
|
%
|
Agency obligations
|
6,599
|
|
|
1.89
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
6,599
|
|
|
1.89
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
2,802
|
|
|
1.80
|
|
|
7,036
|
|
|
2.28
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
9,838
|
|
|
2.14
|
|
State and municipal obligations
|
6,787
|
|
|
2.84
|
|
|
92,080
|
|
|
2.63
|
|
|
249,399
|
|
|
2.59
|
|
|
88,808
|
|
|
2.85
|
|
|
437,074
|
|
|
2.66
|
|
Total held to maturity debt securities
|
$
|
16,188
|
|
|
2.27
|
%
|
|
$
|
99,234
|
|
|
2.61
|
%
|
|
$
|
249,399
|
|
|
2.59
|
%
|
|
$
|
88,808
|
|
|
2.85
|
%
|
|
$
|
453,629
|
|
|
2.63
|
%
|
Available for Sale Debt Securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
State and municipal obligations
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,079
|
|
|
2.90
|
%
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,079
|
|
|
2.90
|
%
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
7,743
|
|
|
1.81
|
|
|
26,435
|
|
|
2.31
|
|
|
194,451
|
|
|
2.48
|
|
|
718,801
|
|
|
2.75
|
|
|
947,430
|
|
|
2.67
|
|
Agency obligations
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Corporate obligations
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
3,074
|
|
|
3.00
|
|
|
22,336
|
|
|
4.98
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
25,410
|
|
|
4.74
|
|
Total available for sale debt securities(2)
|
$
|
7,743
|
|
|
1.81
|
%
|
|
$
|
29,509
|
|
|
2.38
|
%
|
|
$
|
220,866
|
|
|
2.74
|
%
|
|
$
|
718,801
|
|
|
2.75
|
%
|
|
$
|
976,919
|
|
|
2.73
|
%
|
(1) Yields are not tax equivalent.
(2) Totals exclude $825,000 equity securities at fair value.
SOURCES OF FUNDS
General. Primary sources of funds consist of principal and interest cash flows received from loans and mortgage-backed securities, contractual maturities on investments, deposits, FHLBNY advances and proceeds from sales of loans and investments. These sources of funds are used for lending, investing and general corporate purposes, including acquisitions and common stock repurchases.
Deposits. The Bank offers a variety of deposits for retail and business accounts. Deposit products include savings accounts, checking accounts, interest-bearing checking accounts, money market deposit accounts and certificate of deposit accounts at varying interest rates and terms. The Bank also offers investment, insurance and IRA products. Business customers are offered several checking account and savings plans, cash management services, remote deposit capture services, payroll origination services, escrow account management and business credit cards. The Bank focuses on relationship banking for retail and business customers to enhance the customer experience. Deposit activity is influenced by state and local economic conditions, changes in interest rates, internal pricing decisions and competition. Deposits are primarily obtained from the areas surrounding the Bank’s branch locations. To attract and retain deposits, the Bank offers competitive rates, quality customer service and a wide variety of products and services that meet customers’ needs, including online and mobile banking.
Deposit pricing strategy is monitored monthly by the management Asset/Liability Committee and Pricing Committee. Deposit pricing is set weekly by the Bank’s Treasury Department. When setting deposit pricing, the Bank considers competitive market rates, FHLBNY advance rates and rates on other sources of funds. Core deposits, defined as savings accounts, interest and non-interest bearing checking accounts and money market deposit accounts, represented 89.7% of total deposits at December 31, 2019 and 89.0% of total deposits at December 31, 2018. As of December 31, 2019 and 2018, time deposits maturing in less than one year amounted to $606.9 million and $584.5 million, respectively.
The following table indicates the amount of certificates of deposit by time remaining until maturity at December 31, 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
3 Months
or Less
|
|
Over 3 to
6 Months
|
|
Over 6 to
12 Months
|
|
Over 12
Months
|
|
|
|
( In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit of $100,000 or more
|
$
|
173,815
|
|
|
$
|
126,936
|
|
|
$
|
91,007
|
|
|
$
|
46,793
|
|
|
$
|
438,551
|
|
Certificates of deposit less than $100,000
|
67,060
|
|
|
76,894
|
|
|
71,158
|
|
|
80,364
|
|
|
295,476
|
|
Total certificates of deposit
|
$
|
240,875
|
|
|
$
|
203,830
|
|
|
$
|
162,165
|
|
|
$
|
127,157
|
|
|
$
|
734,027
|
|
Certificates of Deposit Maturities. The following table sets forth certain information regarding certificates of deposit.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period to Maturity from December 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than
One Year
|
|
One to
Two
Years
|
|
Two to
Three
Years
|
|
Three to
Four Years
|
|
Four to
Five Years
|
|
Five Years
or More
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00 to 0.99%
|
$
|
78,695
|
|
|
$
|
1
|
|
|
$
|
3
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
—
|
|
|
$
|
78,699
|
|
|
$
|
190,118
|
|
|
$
|
283,569
|
|
1.00 to 2.00%
|
325,042
|
|
|
51,472
|
|
|
21,402
|
|
|
9,406
|
|
|
7,213
|
|
|
806
|
|
|
415,341
|
|
|
297,284
|
|
|
342,692
|
|
2.01 to 3.00%
|
202,887
|
|
|
4,398
|
|
|
4,707
|
|
|
11,405
|
|
|
16,219
|
|
|
121
|
|
|
239,737
|
|
|
263,090
|
|
|
8,544
|
|
3.01 to 4.00%
|
246
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
250
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Over 4.01%
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
|
—
|
|
Total
|
$
|
606,870
|
|
|
$
|
55,875
|
|
|
$
|
26,112
|
|
|
$
|
20,811
|
|
|
$
|
23,432
|
|
|
$
|
927
|
|
|
$
|
734,027
|
|
|
$
|
750,492
|
|
|
$
|
634,809
|
|
Borrowed Funds. At December 31, 2019, the Bank had $1.13 billion of borrowed funds. Borrowed funds consist primarily of FHLBNY advances and repurchase agreements. Repurchase agreements are contracts for the sale of securities owned or borrowed by the Bank, with an agreement to repurchase those securities at an agreed-upon price and date. The Bank uses wholesale repurchase agreements, as well as retail repurchase agreements as an investment vehicle for its commercial sweep checking product. Bank policies limit the use of repurchase agreements to collateral consisting of U.S. Treasury obligations, U.S. government agency obligations or mortgage-related securities.
As a member of the FHLBNY, the Bank is eligible to obtain advances upon the security of the FHLBNY common stock owned and certain residential mortgage loans, provided certain standards related to credit-worthiness have been met. FHLBNY advances are available pursuant to several credit programs, each of which has its own interest rate and range of maturities.
The following table sets forth the maximum month-end balance and average balance of FHLBNY advances and securities sold under agreements to repurchase for the periods indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Years Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum Balance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLBNY advances
|
$
|
1,190,006
|
|
|
$
|
1,256,525
|
|
|
$
|
1,288,448
|
|
FHLBNY line of credit
|
451,000
|
|
|
487,000
|
|
|
472,000
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
96,914
|
|
|
153,715
|
|
|
210,702
|
|
Average Balance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLBNY advances
|
939,916
|
|
|
1,136,988
|
|
|
1,237,979
|
|
FHLBNY line of credit
|
325,481
|
|
|
259,197
|
|
|
179,003
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
71,234
|
|
|
139,729
|
|
|
164,982
|
|
Weighted Average Interest Rate:
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLBNY advances
|
2.11
|
%
|
|
1.90
|
%
|
|
1.78
|
%
|
FHLBNY line of credit
|
2.40
|
|
|
2.09
|
|
|
1.17
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
0.49
|
|
|
1.04
|
|
|
1.26
|
|
The following table sets forth certain information as to borrowings at the dates indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
|
|
2019
|
|
2018
|
|
2017
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLBNY advances
|
$
|
766,409
|
|
|
$
|
1,037,960
|
|
|
$
|
1,127,335
|
|
FHLBNY line of credit
|
298,000
|
|
|
283,000
|
|
|
472,000
|
|
Securities sold under repurchase agreements
|
60,737
|
|
|
121,322
|
|
|
143,179
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
$
|
1,125,146
|
|
|
$
|
1,442,282
|
|
|
$
|
1,742,514
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average interest rate of FHLBNY advances
|
2.14
|
%
|
|
2.08
|
%
|
|
1.74
|
%
|
Weighted average interest rate of FHLBNY line of credit
|
1.84
|
%
|
|
2.60
|
%
|
|
1.53
|
%
|
Weighted average interest rate of securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
0.53
|
%
|
|
0.85
|
%
|
|
1.00
|
%
|
WEALTH MANAGEMENT SERVICES
As part of the Company’s strategy to increase fee related income, the Bank’s wholly owned subsidiary, Beacon Trust Company and its registered investment advisor subsidiary, Beacon Investment Advisory Services, Inc., (“Beacon”) are engaged in providing wealth management services. Those services include investment management, trust and estate administration, financial planning, tax compliance and planning, and private banking. These services may be introduced to existing customers through the Bank’s extensive branch and lending network.
Beacon focuses on delivering personalized solutions based on the needs and objectives for each client. The majority of the fee income generated by Beacon is based on assets under management.
On April 1, 2019, Beacon Trust Company ("Beacon") completed its acquisition of certain assets of Tirschwell & Loewy, Inc. ("T&L"), a New York City-based registered investment adviser. Beacon is a wholly owned subsidiary of Provident Bank which, in turn, is wholly owned by the Company. This acquisition expanded the Company’s wealth management business by $822.4 million of assets under management at the time of acquisition.
SUBSIDIARY ACTIVITIES
PFS Insurance Services, Inc., formerly Provident Investment Services, Inc., is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank, and a New Jersey licensed insurance producer that sells insurance and investment products, including annuities to customers through a third-party networking arrangement.
Dudley Investment Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank which operates as a New Jersey Investment Company. Dudley Investment Corporation owns all of the outstanding common stock of Gregory Investment Corporation.
Gregory Investment Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary of Dudley Investment Corporation. Gregory Investment Corporation operates as a Delaware Investment Company. Gregory Investment Corporation owns all of the outstanding common stock of PSB Funding Corporation.
PSB Funding Corporation is a majority owned subsidiary of Gregory Investment Corporation. It was established as a New Jersey corporation to engage in the business of a real estate investment trust for the purpose of acquiring mortgage loans and other real estate related assets from the Bank.
Bergen Avenue Realty, LLC, a New Jersey limited liability company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank formed to manage and sell real estate acquired through foreclosure.
Bergen Avenue Realty PA, LLC, a Pennsylvania limited liability company is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank formed to manage and sell real estate acquired through foreclosure in Pennsylvania.
Beacon Trust Company, a New Jersey limited purpose trust company, is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Bank.
Beacon Investment Advisory Services, Inc. is a wholly owned subsidiary of Beacon Trust Company, incorporated under Delaware law and is a registered investment advisor.
PERSONNEL
As of December 31, 2019, the Company had 968 full-time and 47 part-time employees. None of the Company’s employees are represented by a collective bargaining group. The Company believes its working relationship with its employees is good.
REGULATION and SUPERVISION
General
As a bank holding company controlling the Bank, the Company is subject to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (“BHCA”), as amended, and the rules and regulations of the Federal Reserve Board under the BHCA. The Company is also subject to the provisions of the New Jersey Banking Act of 1948 (the “New Jersey Banking Act”) and the accompanying regulations of the Commissioner of the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance (“Commissioner”) applicable to bank holding companies. The Company and the Bank are required to file reports with, and otherwise comply with, the rules and regulations of the Federal Reserve Board and the Commissioner. The Federal Reserve Board and the Commissioner conduct periodic examinations to assess the Company’s compliance with various regulatory requirements. Additionally, the Company files certain reports with, and otherwise complies with, the rules and regulations of the SEC under the federal securities laws and the listing requirements of the New York Stock Exchange.
The Bank is a New Jersey chartered savings bank, and its deposit accounts are insured up to applicable limits by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The Bank is subject to extensive regulation, examination and supervision by the Commissioner as the issuer of its charter and by the FDIC as its deposit insurer. The Bank files reports with the Commissioner and the FDIC concerning its activities and financial condition, and it must obtain regulatory approval prior to entering into certain transactions, such as mergers with, or acquisitions of, other depository institutions and opening or acquiring branch offices. The Commissioner and the FDIC conduct periodic examinations to assess the Bank’s compliance with various regulatory requirements. This regulation and supervision establishes a comprehensive framework of activities in which a savings bank can engage and is intended primarily for the protection of the deposit insurance fund and depositors. This framework also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement authority, including the ability to set policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes.
As of December 31, 2019, the Bank had consolidated assets of $9.81 billion. The Company expects that it will exceed $10 billion in total consolidated assets in 2020, which will result in increased supervision and regulation of the Company. In particular, the company will become subject to the direct supervision of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). Additionally, under existing federal laws and regulations, when the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets, the Company will (1) receive less debit card fee income; (2) be subject to more stringent compliance requirements under the “Volcker Rule,” (i.e., a provision of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (“Dodd-Frank Act”) which prohibits banking entities from engaging in proprietary trading or investing in or sponsoring hedge funds or private equity funds); and (3)
generally be subject to higher FDIC assessment rates. Certain enhanced prudential standards will also become applicable such as additional risk management requirements, both from a framework and corporate governance perspective. These and other supervisory and regulatory implications of crossing the $10 billion threshold will likely result in increased regulatory costs, though the Company has incurred increased regulatory costs in connection with its preparations over the last several years for exceeding the $10 billion asset threshold.
On May 24, 2018, the Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act (“Economic Growth Act”) was enacted, which repealed or modified several important provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that have impacted the Company. Key aspects of the Economic Growth Act that have the potential to affect the Company’s business and results of operations include:
•Raising the total asset threshold from $10 billion to $250 billion at which bank holding companies are required to conduct annual company-run stress tests mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act; and
•Raising the total asset threshold from $10 billion to $50 billion at which publicly traded bank holding companies are required to establish risk committees for the oversight of the enterprise-wide risk management practices of the institution.
When the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets, the Company will no longer qualify for certain regulatory relief provided under the Economic Growth Act, but the Company expects to benefit from the above amendments which raised the above asset thresholds for conducting annual company-run stress tests. However, notwithstanding this regulatory relief, the Company intends to continue to employ stress testing protocols commensurate with the risk of the institution as part of its enterprise risk management framework. The Company currently has, and will continue to maintain, a risk committee of its board of directors.
In addition, the Economic Growth Act also enacted several important changes in certain technical compliance areas for which the banking agencies have now issued corresponding guidance and/or proposed or final rules, including:
•Prohibiting federal banking regulators from imposing higher capital standards on High Volatility Commercial Real Estate (“HVCRE”) exposures unless they are for acquisition, development or construction (“ADC”), and clarifying ADC status;
•Requiring the federal banking agencies to amend the liquidity coverage ratio rule (“LCR”) such that all qualifying investment-grade, liquid and readily-marketable municipal securities are treated as level 2B liquid assets (i.e., assets with a lesser degree of liquidity and more volatility than level 2A assets, which include, for example, certain government securities, covered bonds and corporate debt securities), making them more attractive investment alternatives;
•Exempting from appraisal requirements certain transactions involving real property in rural areas and valued at less than $400,000; and
•Directing the CFPB to provide guidance on the applicability of the Truth in Lending Act (“TILA”) Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) Integrated Disclosure rule (the “TRID Rule”) to mortgage assumption transactions and construction-to-permanent home loans, as well the extent to which lenders can rely on model disclosures that do not reflect recent regulatory changes.
The material laws and regulations applicable to the Company and the Bank are summarized below and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
New Jersey Banking Regulation
Activity Powers. The Bank derives its lending, investment and other activity powers primarily from the applicable provisions of the New Jersey Banking Act and its related regulations. Under these laws and regulations, savings banks, including the Bank, generally may, subject to certain limits, invest in:
(1) Real estate mortgages;
(2) Consumer and commercial loans;
(3) Specific types of debt securities, including certain corporate debt securities and obligations of federal, state and local governments and agencies;
(4) Certain types of corporate equity securities; and
(5) Certain other assets.
A savings bank may also invest pursuant to a “leeway” power that permits investments not otherwise permitted by the New Jersey Banking Act, subject to certain restrictions imposed by the FDIC. “Leeway” investments must comply with a number of limitations on the individual and aggregate amounts of such investments. A savings bank may also exercise trust
powers upon the approval of the Commissioner. New Jersey savings banks may exercise those powers, rights, benefits or privileges authorized for national banks or out-of-state banks or for federal or out-of-state savings banks or savings associations, provided that before exercising any such power, right, benefit or privilege, prior approval by the Commissioner by regulation or by specific authorization is required. The exercise of these lending, investment and activity powers is limited by federal law and the related regulations. See “Federal Banking Regulation” below.
Loans-to-One-Borrower Limitations. With certain specified exceptions, a New Jersey chartered savings bank may not make loans or extend credit to a single borrower and to entities related to the borrower in an aggregate amount that would exceed 15% of the bank’s capital funds. A New Jersey chartered savings bank may lend an additional 10% of the bank’s capital funds if secured by collateral meeting the requirements of the New Jersey Banking Act. The Bank currently complies with applicable loans-to-one-borrower limitations.
Dividends. Under the New Jersey Banking Act, a stock savings bank may declare and pay a dividend on its capital stock only to the extent that the payment of the dividend would not impair the capital stock of the savings bank. In addition, a stock savings bank may not pay a dividend unless the savings bank would, after the payment of the dividend, have a surplus of not less than 50% of its capital stock, or the payment of the dividend would not reduce the surplus. Federal law may also limit the amount of dividends that may be paid by the Bank.
Minimum Capital Requirements. Regulations of the Commissioner impose on New Jersey chartered depository institutions, including the Bank, minimum capital requirements similar to those imposed by the FDIC on insured state banks. At December 31, 2019, the Bank was considered “well capitalized” under FDIC guidelines.
Loans to a Bank’s Insiders. Provisions of the New Jersey Banking Act also impose conditions and limitations on the liabilities owed to a savings bank by its directors and executive officers and by corporations and partnerships controlled by such persons that are comparable in many respects to the conditions and limitations imposed on the loans and extensions of credit to insiders and their related interests under Regulation O, as discussed below. The New Jersey Banking Act also provides that a savings bank that is in compliance with Regulation O is deemed to be in compliance with such provisions of the New Jersey Banking Act.
Examination and Enforcement. The New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance may examine the Company and the Bank whenever it deems an examination advisable. The Department examines the Bank at least every two years. The Commissioner may order any savings bank to discontinue any violation of law or unsafe or unsound business practice and may direct any director, officer, attorney or employee of a savings bank engaged in an objectionable activity, after the Commissioner has ordered the activity to be terminated, to show cause at a hearing before the Commissioner why such person should not be removed.
Federal Banking Regulation
Capital Requirements. Federal regulations require federally insured depository institutions to meet several minimum capital standards: a common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-based assets ratio of 4.5%, a Tier 1 capital to risk-based assets ratio of 6.0%, a total capital to risk-based assets of 8.0%, and a 4.0% Tier 1 capital to total assets leverage ratio.
In determining the amount of risk-weighted assets for purposes of calculating risk-based capital ratios, all assets, including certain off-balance sheet assets (e.g., recourse obligations, direct credit substitutes, residual interests) are multiplied by a risk weight factor assigned by the regulations based on the risks believed inherent in the type of asset. Higher levels of capital are required for asset categories believed to present greater risk. Common equity Tier 1 capital is generally defined as common stockholders’ equity and retained earnings. Tier 1 capital is generally defined as common equity Tier 1 and additional Tier 1 capital. Additional Tier 1 capital includes certain noncumulative perpetual preferred stock and related surplus and minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries. Total capital includes Tier 1 capital (common equity Tier 1 capital plus additional Tier 1 capital) and Tier 2 capital. Tier 2 capital is comprised of capital instruments and related surplus, meeting specified requirements, and may include cumulative preferred stock and long-term perpetual preferred stock, mandatory convertible securities, intermediate preferred stock and subordinated debt. Also included in Tier 2 capital is the allowance for loan and lease losses limited to a maximum of 1.25% of risk-weighted assets and, for institutions that have exercised an opt-out election regarding the treatment of Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, up to 45% of net unrealized gains on available-for-sale equity securities with readily determinable fair market values. Calculation of all types of regulatory capital is subject to deductions and adjustments specified in the regulations. In assessing an institution’s capital adequacy, the FDIC takes into consideration, not only these numeric factors, but qualitative factors as well, and has the authority to establish higher capital requirements for individual institutions where deemed necessary.
In addition to establishing the minimum regulatory capital requirements, federal regulations limit capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments to management if the institution does not hold a “capital conservation buffer”
consisting of 2.5% of common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted asset above the amount necessary to meet its minimum risk-based capital requirements.
On July 15, 2019, the federal banking agencies adopted a final rule simplifying certain aspects of the capital rules, the key elements of which apply solely to banking organizations that are not subject to the advanced approaches capital rule (i.e., banks with $250 billion or more in total assets or $10 billion or more in total foreign exposures). Under the rule, non-advanced approaches banking organizations such as the Bank will apply a simpler regulatory capital treatment for mortgage servicing assets (“MSAs”); certain deferred tax assets (“DTAs”) arising from temporary differences; investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions other than those currently applied; and capital issued by a consolidated subsidiary of a banking organization and held by third parties (often referred to as minority interest) that is includable in regulatory capital. Specifically, the rule eliminates: (i) the capital rule’s 10 percent common equity tier 1 capital deduction threshold that applies individually to MSAs, temporary difference DTAs, and significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions in the form of common stock; (ii) the aggregate 15 percent common equity tier 1 capital deduction threshold that subsequently applies on a collective basis across such items; (iii) the 10 percent common equity tier 1 capital deduction threshold for non-significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions; and (iv) the deduction treatment for significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions not in the form of common stock. The capital rule no longer has distinct treatments for significant and non-significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions, but instead require that non-advanced approaches banking organizations deduct from common equity tier 1 capital any amount of MSAs, temporary difference DTAs, and investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions that individually exceeds 25 percent of common equity tier 1 capital.
Additionally, in December 2019, the federal banking agencies issued a final rule on the capital treatment of HVCRE exposures which brought the regulatory definition of HVCRE exposure in line with the statutory definition of HVCRE ADC in the Economic Growth Act. The final rule also clarifies the capital treatment for loans that finance the development of land under the revised HVCRE exposure definition and establishes the requirements for certain exclusions from HVCRE exposure capital treatment.
The following table shows the Bank’s Tier 1 leverage ratio, common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, and total risk-based capital ratio, at December 31, 2019:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
Percent of
Assets(1)
|
|
Capital
Requirements (1)
|
|
Capital
Requirements with Capital Conservation Buffer (1)
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 leverage capital
|
$
|
923,471
|
|
|
9.81
|
%
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
Common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital
|
923,471
|
|
|
12.09
|
|
|
4.50
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital
|
923,471
|
|
|
12.09
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
Total risk-based capital
|
979,136
|
|
|
12.82
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
|
10.50
|
|
(1) For purposes of calculating regulatory Tier 1 leverage capital, assets are based on adjusted total leverage assets. In calculating common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and total risk-based capital, assets are based on total risk-weighted assets.
As of December 31, 2019, the Bank was considered “well capitalized” under FDIC guidelines.
The Volcker Rule. A provision of the Dodd-Frank Act (known as the “Volcker Rule”) prohibits insured depository institutions and their holding companies from engaging in proprietary trading except in limited circumstances, and it prohibits them from owning equity interests in excess of three percent of Tier 1 Capital in private equity and hedge funds. On December 10, 2013, five U.S. financial regulators, including the Federal Reserve and the OCC, adopted regulations implementing the Volcker Rule. Those regulations prohibit banking entities from (1) engaging in short-term proprietary trading for their own accounts, and (2) having certain ownership interests in and relationships with hedge funds or private equity funds, which are referred to as “covered funds.” The regulations also require each regulated entity to establish an internal compliance program that is consistent with the extent to which it engages in activities covered by the Volcker Rule. Historically, this meant that reporting requirements were tied to a bank’s total assets, where banks with assets at or below $10 billion had less stringent reporting requirements and banks with more than $10 billion had increasingly more stringent requirements as the size of the bank increased.
In November 2019, five federal banking agencies issued a final rule revising certain aspects of the Volcker Rule. The final rule simplifies and streamlines compliance requirements for firms that do not have significant trading activities and enhances requirements for firms that do. Under the new rule, compliance requirements will be based on the amount of assets and liabilities that a bank trades. Firms with significant trading activities (i.e., those with $20 billion or more in trading assets and liabilities, will have heightened compliance obligations). The new rule became effective on January 1, 2020, but banking entities will not be required to comply with the new rules until January 1, 2021.
On January 30, 2020, five federal financial regulators issued a notice of proposed rule making to modify the “covered funds” portion of the Volcker rule by streamlining the rule, addressing the treatment of certain foreign funds, and permitting banking entities to offer financial services and engage in other permissible activities that do not raise concerns that the Volcker rule was intended to address.
Although the Bank does not engage in proprietary trading, if the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets in 2020, as anticipated, the Bank will likely incur costs in developing and implementing revised controls as part of an internal compliance to conform with the covered funds portions of the Volcker rule.
Current Expect Credit Loss ("CECL") Treatment. In June 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) issued an accounting standard update, “Financial Instruments-Credit Losses (Topic 326), Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments,” which replaces the current “incurred loss” model for recognizing credit losses with an “expected loss” model referred to as the CECL model. Under the CECL model, we will be required to present certain financial assets carried at amortized cost, such as loans and leases held for investment and held-to-maturity debt securities, at the net amount expected to be collected. The measurement of expected credit losses is to be based on information about past events, including historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the reported amount. On December 21, 2018, the federal banking agencies approved a final rule modifying their regulatory capital rules and providing an option to phase in over a period of three years the day-one regulatory capital effects of the CECL model. The final rule also revises the agencies’ other rules to reflect the update to the accounting standards. The final rule took effect April 1, 2019.
The new CECL standard will become effective for the Bank for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019. We expect to recognize a one-time cumulative-effect adjustment to our allowance for loan losses as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which we adopt the new standard, consistent with regulatory expectations set forth in interagency guidance issued at the end of 2016. We also expect to incur both transition costs and ongoing costs in developing and implementing the CECL methodology, and that the methodology will result in increased capital costs upon initial adoption as well as over time.
In October 2019, four federal banking agencies issued a request for comment on a proposed interagency policy statement on the new CECL methodology. The policy statement proposes to harmonize the agencies’ policies on allowances for credit losses with the FASB’s new accounting standards. Specifically, the statement (1) updates concepts and practices from prior policy statements issued in December 2006 and July 2001 and specifies which prior guidance documents are no longer relevant; (2) describes the appropriate CECL methodology, in light of Topic 326, for determining allowances for credit losses (“ACLs”) on financial assets measured at amortized cost, net investments in leases, and certain off-balance sheet credit exposures; and (3) describes how to estimate an ACL for an impaired available-for-sale debt security in line with Topic 326. The Company has taken the proposed policy statement into account in its implementation of the CECL methodology effective January 1, 2020.
Activity Restrictions on State-Chartered Banks. Federal law and FDIC regulations generally limit the activities and investments of state-chartered FDIC insured banks and their subsidiaries to those permissible for national banks and their subsidiaries, unless such activities and investments are specifically exempted by law or consented to by the FDIC.
Before making a new investment or engaging in a new activity that is not permissible for a national bank or otherwise permissible under federal law or FDIC regulations, an insured bank must seek approval from the FDIC to make such investment or engage in such activity. The FDIC will not approve the activity unless the bank meets its minimum capital requirements and the FDIC determines that the activity does not present a significant risk to the FDIC insurance fund. Certain activities of subsidiaries that are engaged in activities permitted for national banks only through a “financial subsidiary” are subject to additional restrictions.
Federal law permits a state-chartered savings bank to engage, through financial subsidiaries, in any activity in which a national bank may engage through a financial subsidiary and on substantially the same terms and conditions. In general, the law permits a national bank that is well-capitalized and well-managed to conduct, through a financial subsidiary, any activity permitted for a financial holding company other than insurance underwriting, insurance investments, real estate investment or development or merchant banking. The total assets of all such financial subsidiaries may not exceed the lesser of 45% of the bank’s total assets or $50 billion. The bank must have policies and procedures to assess the financial subsidiary’s risk and protect the bank from such risk and potential liability, must not consolidate the financial subsidiary’s assets with the bank’s and
must exclude from its own assets and equity all equity investments, including retained earnings, in the financial subsidiary. The Bank currently meets all conditions necessary to establish and engage in permitted activities through financial subsidiaries.
Federal Home Loan Bank System. The Bank is a member of the FHLB system which consists of eleven regional FHLBs, each subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (“FHFA”). The FHLB provides a central credit facility primarily for member institutions. As a member of the FHLB of New York, the Bank is required to purchase and hold shares of capital stock in that FHLB in an amount as required by that FHLB’s capital plan and minimum capital requirements. The Bank is in compliance with these requirements. The Bank has received dividends on its FHLBNY stock, although no assurance can be given that these dividends will continue to be paid. For the year ended December 31, 2019, dividends paid by the FHLBNY to the Bank totaled $4.4 million.
Deposit Insurance. As a member institution of the FDIC, deposit accounts at the Bank are generally insured by the FDIC’s Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) up to a maximum of $250,000 for each separately insured depositor.
Under the FDIC’s risk-based assessment system, insured institutions were originally assigned a risk category based on supervisory evaluations, regulatory capital levels and certain other factors. An institution’s assessment rate depended upon the category to which it was assigned, and certain adjustments specified by FDIC regulations. Institutions deemed less risky paid lower assessments. No institution may pay a dividend if it is in default of its federal deposit insurance assessment.
The Dodd-Frank Act required the FDIC to revise its procedures to base its assessments upon each insured institution’s total assets less tangible equity instead of deposits. The FDIC finalized a rule, effective April 1, 2011, that set the assessment range (inclusive of possible adjustments) at 2.5 to 45 basis points of total assets less tangible equity. However, as described below, there have been changes to both the FDIC’s assessment range and its risk-based assessment procedures.
The FDIC established a long range target size for the DIF of 2% of insured deposits. The FDIC’s regulations also provided for a lower assessment rate schedule when the DIF reached 1.15% of total insured deposits. The 1.15% ratio was achieved as of June 30, 2016. As a result, effective July 1, 2016, the assessment range (inclusive of possible adjustments) was lowered to 1.5 to 30 basis points for banks of less than $10 billion in consolidated assets. The Dodd-Frank Act required banks with greater than $10 billion in assets to pay to increase the DIF reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35%. Consequently, also effective July 1, 2016, banks of greater than $10 billion assets paid a surcharge of 4.5 basis points on assets above $10 billion. In November 2018, the FDIC indicated that the 1.35% ratio had been achieved, that surcharges on banks with more than $10 billion in assets would cease and that institutions below that size would receive credits for the portion of their assessment that contributed to the reserve ratio between 1.15% and 1.35%, effective when the ratio reaches 1.38%. Also on July 1, 2016, the FDIC eliminated the risk categories.
Most institutions are now assessed based on financial ratios derived from statistical models that estimate the probability of a bank’s failure within three years. Banks of greater than $10 billion are assessed based on a rate derived from a scorecard which assesses certain factors such as examination ratings, financial measures related to the bank’s ability to withstand stress and measures of loss severity to the DIF if the bank should fail. When the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets for four consecutive calendar quarters, it will be classified as a large institution for deposit insurance assessment purposes. Generally, such a reclassification would result in a higher FDIC insurance premium.
On December 12, 2019, the FDIC issued a proposed rule on brokered deposits. The proposed rule aims to clarify and modernize the FDIC’s existing regulatory framework for brokered deposits. Notable aspects of the proposed rule include language (1) defining the operative prongs of the definition of a “deposit broker”; (2) creating three general tests to determine the applicability of the “primary purpose” exception; (3) establishing an application process for entities that wish to make use of the primary purpose exception; and (4) allowing wholly-owned subsidiaries of IDIs to make use of the “IDI” (or the “own bank”) exception. For insured entities that accept deposits classified as “brokered” under the FDIC’s current regulatory framework, a change in that regulatory framework could result in a change in those entities’ DIF assessment rate, depending on the size of the entities’ brokered deposit activity.
Enforcement. The FDIC has extensive enforcement authority over insured savings banks, including the Bank. This enforcement authority includes, among other things, the ability to assess civil money penalties, to issue cease and desist orders and to remove directors and officers. In general, these enforcement actions may be initiated in response to violations of law and to unsafe or unsound practices.
Transactions with Affiliates. Transactions between an insured bank, such as the Bank, and any of its affiliates are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and its implementing regulations. An affiliate of a bank is any company or entity that controls, is controlled by or is under common control with the bank. A subsidiary of a bank that is not also a depository institution, financial subsidiary or other entity defined by the regulation generally is not treated as an affiliate of the bank for purposes of Sections 23A and 23B.
Section 23A:
•Limits the extent to which a bank or its subsidiaries may engage in “covered transactions” with any one affiliate to an amount equal to 10% of such bank’s capital stock and retained earnings, and limits all such transactions with all affiliates to an amount equal to 20% of such capital stock and retained earnings; and
•Requires that all such transactions be on terms that are consistent with safe and sound banking practices.
The term “covered transaction” includes the making of loans, purchase of assets, issuance of guarantees and other similar types of transactions. Further, most loans by a bank to any of its affiliates must be secured by collateral in amounts ranging from 100 to 130 percent of the loan amounts. In addition, any covered transaction by a bank with an affiliate and any purchase of assets or services by a bank from an affiliate must be on terms that are substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the bank, as those that would be provided to a non-affiliate.
Prohibitions Against Tying Arrangements. Banks are subject to statutory prohibitions on certain tying arrangements. A depository institution is prohibited, subject to certain exceptions, from extending credit to or offering any other service, or fixing or varying the consideration for such extension of credit or service, on the condition that the customer obtain some additional service from the institution or its affiliates or that the customer not obtain services of a competitor of the institution.
Privacy Standards. FDIC regulations require the Company and the Bank to disclose their privacy policies, including identifying with whom they share “non-public personal information” to customers at the time of establishing the customer relationship and annually thereafter.
The FDIC regulations also require the Company and the Bank to provide their customers with initial and annual notices that accurately reflect their privacy policies and practices. In addition, the Company and the Bank are required to provide their customers with the ability to “opt-out” of having the Company and the Bank share their non-public personal information with unaffiliated third parties before they can disclose such information, subject to certain exceptions.
Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Laws. All FDIC insured institutions have a responsibility under the Community Reinvestment Act and related regulations to help meet the credit needs of their entire communities, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and borrowers (i.e. assessment(s)). In connection with its examination of a state chartered savings bank, the FDIC is required to assess the institution’s record of compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act ("CRA"). Among other things, the current CRA regulations rate an institution based upon its actual performance in meeting community needs. In particular, the current examination and evaluation process focuses on three tests:
•A lending test, to evaluate the institution’s record of making home mortgage, small business, small farm, and consumer loans, if applicable, in its assessment area(s), with consideration given towards, amongst other factors, borrower characteristics and geographic distribution;
•An investment test, to evaluate the institution’s record of helping to meet the credit needs of its assessment area(s) through qualified investments characterized as a lawful investment, deposit, membership share, or grant that has as its primary purpose community development; and
•A service test, to evaluate the institution’s systems for delivering retail banking services through its branches, ATMs and other offices and access facilities, including the distribution of its branches, ATMs and other offices/access facilities, and the institution’s record of opening and closing branches.
An institution’s failure to comply with the provisions of the CRA could, at a minimum, result in regulatory restrictions on its activities, including, but not limited to, engaging in acquisitions and mergers. The Bank received a “Satisfactory” CRA rating in its most recently completed federal examination, which was conducted by the FDIC as of July 2018.
On December 12, 2019, the FDIC and the OCC issued a proposed rule to modernize their respective agencies’ regulations under the CRA. The proposed rule would (1) clarify which activities qualify for CRA credit and (2) require banks to identify an additional assessment area based on where they receive a significant portion of their domestic retail deposits, thus creating two assessment areas: a deposit-based assessment area and a facility-based assessment area.
In addition, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and the Fair Housing Act prohibit lenders from discriminating in their lending practices on the basis of the borrower’s characteristics as specified in those statutes. An institution’s failure to comply with the Equal Credit Opportunity Act and/or the Fair Housing Act could result in enforcement actions by the FDIC, as well as other federal regulatory agencies and the Department of Justice.
Safety and Soundness Standards. Each federal banking agency, including the FDIC, has adopted guidelines establishing general standards relating to internal controls, information and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit
underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings, compensation, fees and benefits. In general, the guidelines require, among other things, appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage the risks and exposures specified in the guidelines. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director, or principal stockholder.
In addition, FDIC regulations require a bank that is given notice by the FDIC that it is not satisfying any of such safety and soundness standards to submit a compliance plan to the FDIC. If, after being so notified, a bank fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan or fails in any material respect to implement an accepted compliance plan, the FDIC may issue an order directing corrective and other actions of the types to which a significantly undercapitalized institution is subject under the “prompt corrective action” provisions discussed below. If a bank fails to comply with such an order, the FDIC may seek to enforce such an order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil monetary penalties.
Prompt Corrective Action. Federal law requires the FDIC and the other federal banking regulators to promptly resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions. Federal law also establishes five categories, consisting of “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” and “critically undercapitalized.” The FDIC’s regulations define the five capital categories as follows:
An institution will be treated as “well capitalized” if:
•Its ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 10%;
•Its ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 8%;
•Its ratio of common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 6.5%; and
•Its ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is at least 5%, and it is not subject to any order or directive by the FDIC to meet a specific capital level.
An institution will be treated as “adequately capitalized” if:
•Its ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 8%; or
•Its ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 6%;
•Its ratio of common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets is at least 4.5%; and
•Its ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets is at least 4% and it is not a well-capitalized institution.
An institution will be treated as “undercapitalized” if:
•Its total risk-based capital is less than 8%; or
•Its Tier 1 risk-based-capital is less than 6%;
•Its ratio of common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets is less than 4.5%; or
•Its leverage ratio is less than 4%
An institution will be treated as “significantly undercapitalized” if:
•Its total risk-based capital is less than 6%;
•Its Tier 1 capital is less than 4%;
•Its ratio of common equity to risk-weighted assets is less than 3%; or
•Its leverage ratio is less than 3%.
An institution that has a tangible capital to total assets ratio equal to or less than 2% would be deemed “critically undercapitalized.” The FDIC is required, with some exceptions, to appoint a receiver or conservator for an insured state bank if that bank is critically undercapitalized. The FDIC may also appoint a conservator or receiver for an insured state bank on the basis of the institution’s financial condition or upon the occurrence of certain events, including:
•Insolvency, or when the assets of the bank are less than its liabilities to depositors and others;
•Substantial dissipation of assets or earnings through violations of law or unsafe or unsound practices;
•Existence of an unsafe or unsound condition to transact business;
•Likelihood that the bank will be unable to meet the demands of its depositors or to pay its obligations in the normal course of business; and
•Insufficient capital, or the incurring or likely incurring of losses that will substantially deplete all of the institution’s capital with no reasonable prospect of replenishment of capital without federal assistance.
Consumer Financial Protection. Bank regulatory agencies are increasingly focusing attention on consumer protection laws and regulations. To promote fairness and transparency for mortgages, credit cards, and other consumer financial products and services, the Dodd-Frank Act established the CFPB. This agency is responsible for interpreting and enforcing federal consumer financial laws, as defined by the Dodd-Frank Act, that, among other things, govern the provision of deposit accounts along with mortgage origination and servicing. Some federal consumer financial laws enforced by the CFPB include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Truth in Lending Act ("TILA"), the Truth in Savings Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act ("RESPA"), the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act. The CFPB is also authorized to prevent any institution under its authority from engaging in an unfair, deceptive, or abusive act or practice in connection with consumer financial products and services. As a residential mortgage lender, the Company and its bank subsidiaries are subject to multiple federal consumer protection statutes and regulations, including, but not limited to, TILA, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, RESPA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Fair Debt Collection Act and the Flood Disaster Protection Act. Failure to comply with these and similar statutes and regulations can result in the Corporation and its bank subsidiaries becoming subject to formal or informal enforcement actions, the imposition of civil money penalties and consumer litigation.
The CFPB has exclusive examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to compliance with federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations by institutions under its supervision and is authorized, individually or jointly with the federal bank regulatory agencies (the Agencies), to conduct investigations to determine whether any person is, or has, engaged in conduct that violates such laws or regulations. The CFPB may bring an administrative enforcement proceeding or civil action in Federal district court. In addition, in accordance with a memorandum of understanding entered into between the CFPB and the Department of Justice (DOJ), the two agencies have agreed to coordinate efforts related to enforcing the fair lending laws, which includes information sharing and conducting joint investigations. As an independent bureau within the FRB, the CFPB may impose requirements that are more severe than those of the other bank regulatory agencies. When the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets in 2020, it will be subject to the supervisory and enforcement authority of the CFPB.
The Dodd-Frank Act also permits states to adopt stricter consumer protection laws and state attorneys general to enforce consumer protection rules issued by the CFPB. As a result of these aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act, going forward, the Bank will operate in a stringent consumer compliance environment and is incurring additional costs related to consumer protection compliance, including but not limited to potential costs associated with CFPB examinations, regulatory and enforcement actions and consumer-oriented litigation, which is likely to increase as a result of the consumer protection provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The CFPB, other financial regulatory agencies, including the OCC, as well as the Department of Justice have recently pursued a number of enforcement actions against depository institutions with respect to compliance with fair lending laws.
Anti-Money Laundering. The Bank must comply with the anti-money laundering (“AML”) provisions of the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) as amended by the USA PATRIOT Act and implementing regulations issued by the FDIC and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”) of the U.S. Department of the Treasury.
The USA PATRIOT Act gives the federal government powers to address terrorist threats through enhanced domestic security measures, expanded surveillance powers, increased information sharing, and broadened anti-money laundering requirements. By way of amendments to the Bank Secrecy Act, Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act included measures intended to encourage information sharing among bank regulatory agencies and law enforcement bodies. Further, certain provisions of Title III imposed affirmative obligations on a broad range of financial institutions, including banks, thrifts, brokers, dealers, credit unions, money transfer agents and parties registered under the Commodity Exchange Act.
The bank regulatory agencies have increased the regulatory scrutiny of the Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering programs maintained by financial institutions. Significant penalties and fines, as well as other supervisory orders may be imposed on a financial institution for non-compliance with these requirements. In addition, the federal bank regulatory agencies must consider the effectiveness of financial institutions engaging in a merger transaction in combating money laundering activities. The Bank has adopted policies and procedures which are in compliance with these requirements.
In December 2019, three federal banking agencies and FinCEN issued a joint statement clarifying the compliance procedures and reporting requirements that banks must follow for customers engaged in the growth or cultivation of hemp, including a clear statement that banks need not file a Suspicious Activity Report (“SAR”) on customers engaged in the growth
or cultivation of hemp in accordance with applicable laws and regulations. This statement does not apply to cannabis-related business; therefore, the statement pertains only to customers who are unlawfully growing or cultivating hemp and are not otherwise engaged in unlawful or suspicious activity.
Loans to a Bank’s Insiders. A bank’s loans to its executive officers, directors, any owner of 10% or more of its stock (each, an insider) and any of certain entities affiliated with any such person (an insider’s related interest) are subject to the conditions and limitations imposed by Section 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act and the Federal Reserve Board’s Regulation O. Under these restrictions, the aggregate amount of the loans to any insider and the insider’s related interests may not exceed the loans-to-one-borrower limit applicable to national banks, which is comparable to the loans-to-one-borrower limit applicable to loans by the Bank. All loans by a bank to all insiders and insiders’ related interests in the aggregate may not exceed the bank’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. With certain exceptions, loans to an executive officer, other than loans for the education of the officer’s children and certain loans secured by the officer’s residence may not exceed at any one time the higher of 2.5% of the bank’s unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus or $25,000, but in no event more than $100,000. Regulation O also requires that any proposed loan to an insider or a related interest of that insider be approved in advance by a majority of the board of directors of the bank, with any interested directors not participating in the voting, if such loan, when aggregated with any existing loans to that insider and the insider’s related interests, would exceed either (1) $500,000; or (2) the greater of $25,000 or 5% of the bank’s unimpaired capital and surplus.
Generally, loans to insiders must be made on substantially the same terms as, and follow credit underwriting procedures that are not less stringent than, those prevailing at the time for, comparable transactions with other persons, and not involve more than the normal risk of payment or present other unfavorable features. An exception may be made for extensions of credit made pursuant to a benefit or compensation plan of a bank that is widely available to employees of the bank and that does not give any preference to insiders of the bank over other employees of the bank.
In addition, federal law prohibits extensions of credit to a bank’s insiders and their related interests by any other institution that has a correspondent banking relationship with the bank, unless such extension of credit is on substantially the same terms as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with other persons and does not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.
The Bank does not, as a matter of policy, make loans to its directors or to their immediate family members and related interests.
Federal Reserve System
Under Federal Reserve Board regulations, the Bank is required to maintain non-interest earning reserves against its transaction accounts. For 2020, the Federal Reserve Board regulations generally require that reserves of 3% must be maintained against aggregate transaction accounts over $16.9 million and up to $127.5 million, and 10% against that portion of total transaction accounts in excess of up to $127.5 million. The first $16.9 million of otherwise reservable balances are exempted from the reserve requirements. The Bank is in compliance with these requirements. These requirements are adjusted annually by the Federal Reserve Board. Because required reserves must be maintained in the form of either vault cash, a non-interest bearing account at a Federal Reserve Bank or a pass-through account as defined by the Federal Reserve Board, the effect of this reserve requirement is to reduce the Bank’s interest-earning assets. The Bank is authorized to borrow from the Federal Reserve Bank discount window.
Income on Interchange Fees
When the Company exceeds $10 billion in assets in 2020, the Company will become subject to the interchange fee cap mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. As such, the fees the Company may receive for an electronic debit transaction will be capped at the statutory limit. Historically, the Company has been exempt from the interchange fee cap under the “small issuer” exemption, which applies to any debit card issuer with total worldwide assets (including those of its affiliates) of less than $10 billion as of the end of the previous calendar year. Pursuant to FRB regulations mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, interchange fees on debit card transactions are limited to a maximum of $0.21 per transaction plus 5 basis points of the transaction amount. A debit card issuer may recover an additional one cent per transaction for fraud prevention purposes if the issuer complies with certain fraud-related requirements prescribed by the FRB.
Internet Banking
Technological developments continue to significantly alter the ways in which financial institutions and their customers conduct their business. The growth of the Internet has caused banks to adopt and refine alternative distribution and marketing systems. The federal bank regulatory agencies have targeted various aspects of Internet banking, including the security and
systems. There can be no assurance that the bank regulatory agencies will not adopt new regulations that will materially affect the Bank’s Internet operations or restrict any such further operations.
Holding Company Regulation
Federal Regulation. The Company is regulated as a bank holding company, and as such, is subject to examination, regulation and periodic reporting under the Bank Holding Company Act, as administered by the Federal Reserve Board.
The Federal Reserve Board has adopted capital adequacy guidelines for bank holding companies on a consolidated basis. The Dodd-Frank Act directed the Federal Reserve Board to issue consolidated capital requirements for depository institution holding companies that are not less stringent, both quantitatively and in terms of components of capital, than those applicable to institutions themselves. The previously discussed final rule regarding regulatory capital requirements implemented the Dodd-Frank Act as to bank holding company capital standards. Consolidated regulatory capital requirements identical to those applicable to the subsidiary banks applied to bank holding companies (with greater than $1 billion of assets) as of January 1, 2015. The rule limits a banking organization’s capital distributions and certain discretionary bonus payments if the banking organization does not hold a “capital conservation buffer,” of 2.5% in addition to the amount necessary to meet its minimum risk-based capital requirements.
The following table shows the Company’s Tier 1 leverage capital ratio, common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio, Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and the total risk-based capital ratio as of December 31, 2019.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2019
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Capital
|
|
Percent of
Assets(1)
|
|
Capital
Requirements (1)
|
|
Capital
Requirements with Capital Conservation Buffer (1)
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 leverage capital
|
$
|
973,214
|
|
|
10.34
|
%
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
|
4.00
|
%
|
Common Equity Tier 1 risk-based capital
|
973,214
|
|
|
12.74
|
|
|
4.50
|
|
|
7.00
|
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital
|
973,214
|
|
|
12.74
|
|
|
6.00
|
|
|
8.50
|
|
Total risk-based capital
|
1,028,879
|
|
|
13.47
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
|
10.50
|
|
(1) For purposes of calculating regulatory Tier 1 leverage capital, assets are based on adjusted total leverage assets. In calculating common equity Tier 1 capital, Tier 1 risk-based capital and total risk-based capital, assets are based on total risk-weighted assets.
As of December 31, 2019, the Company was “well capitalized” under Federal Reserve Board guidelines.
Regulations of the Federal Reserve Board provide that a bank holding company must serve as a source of strength to any of its subsidiary banks and must not conduct its activities in an unsafe or unsound manner. Federal Reserve Board policies generally provide that bank holding companies should pay dividends only out of current earnings and only if the prospective rate of earnings retention in the holding company appears consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. Federal Reserve Board guidance sets forth the supervisory expectation that bank holding companies will inform and consult with Federal Reserve Board staff in advance of issuing a dividend that exceeds earnings for the quarter and should inform the Federal Reserve Board and should eliminate, defer or significantly reduce dividends if: (i) net income available to stockholders for the past four quarters, net of dividends previously paid during that period, is not sufficient to fully fund the dividends; (ii) prospective rate of earnings retention is not consistent with the bank holding company’s capital needs and overall current and prospective financial condition; or (iii) the bank holding company will not meet, or is in danger of not meeting, its minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios. Under the prompt corrective action provisions discussed above, a bank holding company parent of an undercapitalized subsidiary bank would be directed to guarantee, within limitations, the capital restoration plan that is required of such an undercapitalized bank. If the undercapitalized bank fails to file an acceptable capital restoration plan or fails to implement an accepted plan, the Federal Reserve Board may prohibit the bank holding company parent of the undercapitalized bank from paying any dividends or making any other form of capital distribution without the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board.
As a bank holding company, the Company is required to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board to acquire all, or substantially all, of the assets of any bank or bank holding company. Prior Federal Reserve Board approval will be required for the Company to acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting securities of any bank or bank holding company if, after giving effect to such acquisition, it would, directly or indirectly, own or control more than 5% of any class of voting shares of such bank or bank holding company.
Federal Reserve Board regulations require a bank holding company to give the Federal Reserve Board 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 will be equal to 10% or more of the company’s consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve Board may disapprove such a purchase or redemption if it determines that the proposal would constitute an unsafe and unsound practice, or would violate any law, regulation, Federal Reserve Board order or directive, or any condition imposed by, or written agreement with, the Federal Reserve Board. The regulations provide that such notice and approval is not required for a bank holding company that would be treated as “well capitalized” under applicable regulations of the Federal Reserve Board, is well-managed, and that is not the subject of any unresolved supervisory issues. Notwithstanding the aforementioned regulations, Federal Reserve Board guidance indicates that bank holding companies should inform Federal Reserve staff of certain proposed repurchases of redemptions of common stock, sufficiently in advance to allow for supervisory review and possible objection.
In addition, a bank holding company which does not opt to become a financial holding company under applicable federal law is generally prohibited from engaging in, or acquiring direct or indirect control of any company engaged in non-banking activities. One of the principal exceptions to this prohibition is for activities found by the Federal Reserve Board to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be permissible. Some of the principal activities that the Federal Reserve Board has determined by regulation to be so closely related to banking as to be permissible are:
•Making or servicing loans;
•Performing certain data processing services;
•Providing discount brokerage services, or acting as fiduciary, investment or financial advisor;
•Leasing personal or real property;
•Making investments in corporations or projects designed primarily to promote community welfare; and
•Acquiring a savings and loan association.
Bank holding companies that qualify and opt to become a financial holding company may engage in activities that are financial in nature or incident to activities which are financial in nature. Financial holding companies may engage in a broader array of activities including insurance and investment banking.
Bank holding companies may qualify to become a financial holding company if at the time of the election and on a continuing basis:
•Each of its depository institution subsidiaries is “well capitalized”;
•Each of its depository institution subsidiaries is “well managed”; and
•Each of its depository institution subsidiaries has at least a “Satisfactory” Community Reinvestment Act rating at its most recent examination.
The Company filed an election to qualify as a financial holding company under federal regulations on January 31, 2014 which was deemed effective by the Federal Reserve Board on March 5, 2015.
Under federal law, depository institutions are liable to the FDIC for losses suffered or anticipated by the FDIC in connection with the default of a commonly controlled depository institution or any assistance provided by the FDIC to such an institution in danger of default. This law would potentially be applicable to the Company if it ever acquired as a separate subsidiary, a depository institution in addition to the Bank.
New Jersey Regulation. Under the New Jersey Banking Act, a company owning or controlling a savings bank is regulated as a bank holding company. The New Jersey Banking Act defines the terms “company” and “bank holding company” as such terms are defined under the BHCA. Each bank holding company controlling a New Jersey chartered bank or savings bank must file certain reports with the Commissioner and is subject to examination by the Commissioner.
Acquisition of Control. Under federal law and under the New Jersey Banking Act, no person may acquire control of the Company or the Bank without first obtaining approval of such acquisition of control from the Federal Reserve Board and the Commissioner.
On January 30, 2020, the Federal Reserve finalized a rule to codify and simplify its interpretations and opinions regarding regulatory presumptions of control. The rule, which will be effective April 1, 2020, will likely have a meaningful impact on control determinations related to investments in banks and bank holding companies and investments by bank holding companies in nonbank companies.
Federal Securities Laws. The Company’s common stock is registered with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The Company is subject to the information, proxy solicitation, insider trading restrictions and other requirements under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Investment Adviser Regulation
Beacon Investment Advisory Services, Inc. is an investment adviser registered with the SEC. As such, it is required to make certain filings with and is subject to periodic examination by, the SEC.
Delaware Corporate Law
The Company is incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware. As a result, the rights of its stockholders are governed by the Delaware General Corporate Law and the Company’s Certificate of Incorporation and Bylaws.
TAXATION
Federal Taxation
General. The Company is subject to federal income taxation in the same general manner as other corporations, with some exceptions discussed below. The following discussion of federal taxation is intended only to summarize certain pertinent federal income tax matters and is not a comprehensive description of the tax rules applicable to the Company.
On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act ("Tax Act") was enacted. Included as part of the law, was a permanent reduction in the federal corporate income tax rate from 35% to 21% effective January 1, 2018. Based upon the change in the tax rate, the Company revalued its net deferred tax asset at December 31, 2017 to reflect the reduced rate that will apply in future periods when theses deferred taxes are settled or realized. As a result of the enactment of the Tax Act, the Company recognized an additional tax expense of $3.9 million for the year ended December 31, 2017.
Method of Accounting. For federal income tax purposes, the Company currently reports its income and expenses on the accrual method of accounting and uses a tax year ending December 31 for filing its consolidated federal income tax returns.
Bad Debt Reserves. Prior to the Small Business Protection Act of 1996 (the “1996 Act”), the Bank was permitted to establish a reserve for bad debts and to make annual additions to the reserve. These additions could, within specified formula limits, be deducted in arriving at taxable income. The Bank was required to use the direct charge-off method to compute its bad debt deduction beginning with its 1996 federal income tax return. Savings institutions were required to recapture any excess reserves over those established as of December 31, 1987 (base year reserve).
Taxable Distributions and Recapture. Prior to the 1996 Act, bad debt reserves created prior to January 1, 1988 were subject to recapture into taxable income should the Bank fail to meet certain asset and definitional tests. Federal legislation has eliminated these recapture rules. Retained earnings at December 31, 2019 included approximately $51.8 million for which no provisions for income tax had been made. This amount represents an allocation of income to bad debt deductions for tax purposes only. Events that would result in taxation of these reserves include failure to qualify as a bank for tax purposes, distributions in complete or partial liquidation, stock redemptions and excess distributions to shareholders. At December 31, 2019, the Bank had an unrecognized tax liability of $13.4 million with respect to this reserve.
Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax. The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), imposed an alternative minimum tax (AMT) at a rate of 20% on a base of regular taxable income plus certain tax preferences (alternative minimum taxable income or AMTI). The AMT was payable to the extent such AMTI was in excess of an exemption amount and the AMT exceeded the regular income tax. Net operating losses could offset no more than 90% of AMTI. Certain payments of alternative minimum tax could be used as credits against regular tax liabilities in future years. The Company was not subject to the alternative minimum tax and has no such amounts available as credits for carryover. The Tax Act repealed the corporate AMT effective for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017.
Net Operating Loss Carryovers. Under the general rule, for tax periods ending December 31, 2017 and prior a financial institution may carry back net operating losses to the preceding two taxable years and forward to the succeeding 20 taxable years. At December 31, 2018, the Company had approximately $1.7 million of Federal Net Operating Losses ("NOLs"). These NOLs were generated by entities the Company acquired in previous years and are subject to an annual Code Section 382 limitation. The Tax Act limits the NOL deduction for a given year to 80% of taxable income, effective with respect to losses arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017. It also repealed the pre-enactment carryback provision for NOLs and provides for the indefinite carryforward of NOLs arising in tax years ending after December 31, 2017.
Corporate Dividends-Received Deduction. The Company may exclude from its income 100% of dividends received from the Bank as a member of the same affiliated group of corporations.
State Taxation
New Jersey State Taxation. The Company and the Bank file New Jersey Corporation Business Tax returns. Generally, the income of financial institutions in New Jersey, which is calculated based on federal taxable income subject to certain adjustments, is subject to New Jersey tax. The Company and the Bank are subject to the corporation business tax at 9% of apportioned taxable income. As a result of legislation that New Jersey enacted on July 1, 2018, the Company and the Bank are subject to an additional temporary surtax effective for tax years 2018 through 2021, and are required to file combined tax returns beginning 2019.
Prior to the new legislation, New Jersey tax law did not allow a taxpayer to file a tax return on a combined or consolidated basis with another member of the affiliated group where there is common ownership for tax periods prior to December 31, 2018.
Pennsylvania State Taxation. The Bank is subject to Pennsylvania Mutual Thrift Institutions Tax. Mutual thrift institutions tax is imposed at the rate of 11.5% on net taxable income of mutual thrift institutions in Pennsylvania, including savings banks without capital stock, building and loan associations, savings and loan associations, and savings institutions having capital stock.
New York State Taxation. In 2014, New York State enacted significant and comprehensive reforms to its corporate tax system that went into effect January 1, 2015. The legislation resulted in significant changes to the method of calculating income taxes for banks, including changes to future period tax rates, rules relating to the sourcing of income, and the elimination of the banking corporation tax so that banking corporations are taxed under New York State’s corporate franchise tax. The corporate franchise tax is based on the combined entire net income of the Company and its affiliates allocable and apportionable to New York State and taxed at a rate of 6.5%. The amount of revenues that are sourced to New York State under the new legislation can be expected to fluctuate over time. In addition, the Company and its affiliates are subject to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (“MTA”) Surcharge allocable to business activities carried on in the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District. The MTA surcharge for 2018 was 28.6% of a recomputed New York State franchise tax, calculated using a 6.5% tax rate on allocated and apportioned entire net income. The examination of the Company's 2016 and 2015 New York State tax returns was completed in the first quarter of 2019, and did not have a material impact on the Company's effective income tax rate. The Company's 2017 and 2018 New York State returns are currently under audit.
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
In the ordinary course of operating our business, we are exposed to a variety of risks inherent to the financial services industry. The following discusses the significant risk factors that could affect our business and operations. If any of the following conditions or events actually occur, our business, financial condition or results of operations could be negatively affected, the market price of your investment in the Company’s common stock could decline, and you could lose all or a part of your investment in the Company’s common stock.
Changes to the underlying drivers of our net interest income could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.
Our financial condition and results of operations are significantly affected by changes in market interest rates, and the degree to which these changes disparately impact short-term and long-term interest rates and influence the behavior of our customer base. Our results of operations substantially depend on our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income we earn on our interest earning assets and the interest expense we pay on our interest-bearing liabilities. A flattening yield curve, or one that inverts, could negatively impact our net interest margin and earnings.
Our interest-bearing liabilities may be subject to repricing or maturing more quickly than our interest-earning assets. If short-term rates increase rapidly, we may have to increase the rates we pay on our deposits and borrowed funds more quickly than we can increase the interest rates we earn on our loans and investments, resulting in a negative effect on interest spreads and net interest income. In addition, the effect of rising rates could be compounded if deposit customers move funds into higher yielding accounts or are lost to competitors offering higher rates on their deposit products. In the event of a 300 basis point increase in interest rates, whereby rates ramp up evenly over a twelve-month period, and assuming management took no actions to mitigate the effect of such change, we are projecting that our net interest income for such period would decrease 2.5% or $7.1 million. Conversely, should market interest rates fall below current levels, our net interest income could also be negatively affected if competitive pressures prevented us from reducing rates on our deposits, while the yields on our assets decrease through loan prepayments and interest rate adjustments.
Changes in interest rates also affect the value of our interest-earning assets and in particular our securities portfolio. Generally, the value of securities fluctuates inversely with changes in interest rates. At December 31, 2019, our available for sale debt securities portfolio totaled $976.9 million. Unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale are reported as
a separate component of stockholders’ equity. Decreases in the fair value of securities available for sale resulting from increases in interest rates therefore could have a temporary adverse effect on stockholders’ equity.
If our allowance for loan losses is not sufficient to cover actual loan losses, our earnings could decrease.
We make various assumptions and judgments about the collectability of our loan portfolio, including the creditworthiness of our borrowers and the value of the real estate and other assets serving as collateral for the repayment of many of our loans. In determining the amount of the allowance for loan losses, we rely on our loan monitoring program, our loan quality reviews, our credit risk rating process, loan portfolio trends, our experience and our evaluation of economic conditions, among other factors. If our assumptions prove to be incorrect, or if delinquencies or non-accrual and non-performing loans increase, the allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover losses inherent in our loan portfolio, resulting in additions to our allowance. Material additions to the allowance would materially decrease our net income. In addition, bank regulators periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or recognize further loan charge-offs.
CECL may introduce added volatility.
In 2016, the Financial Accounting Standards Board released an updated standard for determining credit losses, which fundamentally changes how financial institutions calculate their allowance reserves. The new standard, which is effective for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, requires us to adopt a CECL model that measures projected credit losses over the estimated life of the asset and subject to quantitative and qualitative loss factors we derive using a macroeconomic forecast that we deem most likely to occur. This approach is a significant departure from the prior accounting standard, which estimated potential credit losses based on conditions existing as of the reporting date. This new standard may increase not only the amount of allowance for credit losses but also the volatility of our provisions for loan losses. These factors could materially affect our financial condition and future results of operations.
Commercial real estate, commercial & industrial and construction loans expose us to increased risk and earnings volatility.
We consider our commercial real estate loans, commercial & industrial loans and construction loans to be higher risk categories in our loan portfolio. These loans are particularly sensitive to economic conditions. At December 31, 2019, our portfolio of commercial real estate loans, including multi-family loans, totaled $3.80 billion, or 52.3% of total loans, our commercial & industrial loans totaled $1.63 billion, or 22.5% of portfolio loans, and our construction loans totaled $429.8 million, or 5.9% of total loans. We plan to continue to emphasize the origination of these types of loans.
Commercial real estate loans generally involve a higher degree of credit risk because they typically have larger balances and are more affected by adverse conditions in the economy. Payments on loans secured by commercial real estate also often depend on the successful operation and management of the businesses that occupy these properties. Furthermore, these loans may be affected by factors outside the borrower’s control, such as adverse conditions in the real estate market or the economy or changes in government regulation. In the case of commercial & industrial loans, although we strive to maintain high credit standards and limit exposure to any one borrower, the collateral for these loans often consists of accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. This type of collateral typically does not yield substantial recovery in the event we need to foreclose on it and may rapidly deteriorate, disappear, or be misdirected in advance of foreclosure. This adds to the potential that our charge-offs will be more volatile than we have experienced in the past, which could significantly negatively affect our earnings in any quarter. In addition, some of our construction loans pose higher risk levels than the levels expected at origination, as projects may stall or sell at prices lower than expected. In addition, many of our borrowers also have more than one commercial real estate or construction loan outstanding with us. Consequently, an adverse development with respect to one loan or one credit relationship may expose us to significantly greater risk of loss.
Our continuing concentration of business in a relatively confined region may increase our risk.
Our success is significantly affected by general economic conditions in northern and central New Jersey, and eastern Pennsylvania. Unlike some larger banks that are more geographically diversified, we provide banking, financial, and wealth management services to customers mostly located in our primary markets. Consequently, a downturn in economic conditions in our local markets would have a significant impact on our loan portfolios, the ability of borrowers to meet their loan payment obligations and the value of the collateral securing our loans. Adverse local economic conditions caused by inflation, recession, unemployment, state or local government action, or other factors beyond our control would impact these local economic conditions and could negatively affect the financial results of our business.
We have a significant amount of real estate loans. Depressed real estate values and real estate sales could have a negative effect on the ability of many of our borrowers to make timely repayments of their loans, which would have an adverse impact on our earnings and overall financial condition. Changes in the federal tax laws enacted in 2017 under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act may have an adverse effect on the market for, and the valuation of, residential properties, and on the demand for such loans
in the future, and could make it harder for borrowers to make their loan payments. These changes have a disproportionate effect on taxpayers in states with high residential home prices and high state and local taxes, like New Jersey. If home ownership becomes less attractive, demand for mortgage loans could decrease. The value of the properties securing loans in our loan portfolio may be adversely impacted as a result of the changing economics of home ownership, which could require an increase in our provision for loan losses, which would reduce our profitability and could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Additionally, we target our business development and marketing strategy for loans to serve primarily the banking and financial services needs of small- to medium-sized businesses in northern and central New Jersey and eastern Pennsylvania. These businesses generally have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities. If general economic conditions negatively impact these businesses, our results of operations and financial condition may be adversely affected.
Strong competition within our market area may limit our growth and profitability.
Competition in the banking and financial services industry is intense and expanding with entrants into our market providing new and innovative technology-driven financial solutions. Our profitability depends upon our continued ability to successfully compete in our market area. We compete with commercial banks, savings institutions, mortgage banking firms, credit unions, finance companies, investment advisers, wealth managers, mutual funds, insurance companies, online lenders, large non-bank participants, and brokerage and investment banking firms operating both locally and elsewhere.
In particular, over the past decade, our local markets have experienced the effects of substantial banking consolidation, and large out-of-state competitors have grown significantly. Many of these competitors have substantially greater resources and lending limits than we do, and may offer certain deposit and loan pricing, services or credit criteria that we do not or cannot provide. There are also a number of strong locally-based competitors with large capital positions in our market who may deploy aggressive strategies to drive growth, take our customers and win market share.
Furthermore, key components of the financial services value chain have been replicated by digital innovation, commonly referred to as Fintech. As customer preferences and expectations continue to evolve, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for nonbanks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. In addition, some of the largest technology firms are engaging in joint ventures with the largest banks to provide and or expand financial service offerings with a technological sophistication and breadth of marketing that smaller institutions do not have. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and may have lower cost structures. Additionally, due to their size, many competitors may be able to achieve economies of scale and, as a result, may offer a broader range of products and services as well as better pricing for those products and services than we can. The adoption of these Fintech solutions within our market area may cause greater and faster disruption to our business model if we are unable to keep pace with, or invest wisely in, these enabling technologies.
Failure to keep pace with technological changes could adversely affect our business.
The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success depends, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. 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. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have a material adverse impact on our business and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to liquidity risk.
Liquidity risk is the potential that we will be unable to meet our obligations as they become due, capitalize on growth opportunities as they arise because of an inability to liquidate assets or obtain adequate funding on a timely basis at a reasonable cost, or meet regulatory-imposed expectations for liquidity levels. Liquidity is required to fund various obligations, including loan originations and commitments, withdrawals by depositors, repayments of borrowings, operating expenses and capital expenditures. Liquidity is derived primarily from deposit growth and retention; principal and interest payments, sales, maturities, and prepayments of loans and investment securities; net cash provided from operations; and access to other funding sources.
Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities could be impaired by factors specific to us or the financial services industry in general. Factors detrimental to our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level
of our business activity due to a market downturn, lack of competitiveness, or adverse regulatory action against us. Our ability to borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a severe disruption of the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry.
We operate in a highly regulated environment and may be adversely affected by changes in laws and regulations.
We are subject to the extensive regulation, supervision and examination of various regulatory authorities, but primarily by the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance, our chartering authority, and by the FDIC, as insurer of our deposits. As a bank holding company, we are subject to regulation and oversight by the Federal Reserve Board. Such regulation and supervision govern the activities in which a bank and its holding company may engage and are intended primarily for the protection of the insurance fund and depositors. These regulatory authorities have extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities, including the requirement for additional capital, the imposition of restrictions on our operations, the classification of our assets, the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses, and our management of risks posed by our reliance on third party vendors. Any change in such regulation and oversight, whether in the form of regulatory policy, regulations, or legislation, could have a material impact on our operations.
The potential exists for additional federal or state laws and regulations regarding capital requirements, lending and funding practices and liquidity standards, and bank regulatory agencies are expected to remain active in responding to concerns and trends identified in examinations, including the potential issuance of formal enforcement orders. Actions taken to date, as well as potential actions, may not have the beneficial effects that are intended. In addition, new laws, regulations, and other regulatory changes could increase our costs of regulatory compliance and of doing business, and otherwise affect our operations. New laws, regulations, and other regulatory changes, may significantly affect the markets in which we do business, the markets for and value of our loans and investments, and our ongoing operations, costs and profitability.
We anticipate that our total consolidated assets will exceed $10 billion in 2020; if that occurs, we will be subject to additional regulation and increased supervision, including by the CFPB.
Provident's total assets were $9.81 billion at December 31, 2019. Banks with assets in excess of $10 billion are subject to requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations including the examination authority of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau to assess our compliance with federal consumer financial laws, imposition of higher FDIC premiums, reduced debit card interchange fees, and enhanced risk management frameworks, all of which increase operating costs and reduce earnings.
As we approach $10 billion in assets, we continue to incur additional costs to prepare for the implementation of these imposed requirements. We may be required to invest more significant management attention and resources to evaluate and continue to make any changes necessary to comply with enhanced regulatory expectations. Further, federal financial regulators may require us to accelerate our actions and investments to prepare for compliance before we exceed $10 billion in total consolidated assets, and may suspend or delay certain regulatory actions, such as approving a merger agreement, if they deem our preparations to be inadequate. Upon reaching this threshold, we face the risk that we may fail to meet these requirements, which may negatively impact our results of operations and financial condition. While we cannot predict what effect any presently contemplated or future changes in the laws or regulations or their interpretations would have on us, these changes could be material.
We face regulatory scrutiny based on our commercial real estate lending.
The FDIC, the OCC and the FRB (collectively, the “Agencies”) have issued joint guidance entitled “Concentrations in Commercial Real Estate Lending, Sound Risk Management Practices” (the “CRE Guidance”). Although the CRE Guidance did not establish specific lending limits, it provides that a bank’s commercial real estate lending exposure may receive increased supervisory scrutiny where total non-owner occupied commercial real estate loans, including loans secured by apartment buildings, investor commercial real estate and construction and land loans (“CRE Loans”), represent 300% or more of an institution’s total risk-based capital and the outstanding balance of the CRE Loan portfolio has increased by 50% or more during the preceding 36 months. While our level of CRE Loans equaled 425.6% of total risk-based capital at December 31, 2019, our CRE Loan portfolio has not increased by 50% or more during the preceding 36 months.
In December 2015, the Agencies released a new statement on prudent risk management for commercial real estate lending (the “2015 Statement”). In the 2015 Statement, the Agencies express concerns about easing commercial real estate underwriting standards, direct financial institutions to maintain underwriting discipline and exercise risk management practices to identify, measure and monitor lending risks, and indicate that the Agencies will continue “to pay special attention” to commercial real estate lending activities and concentrations going forward. If our regulators were to impose restrictions on the amount of commercial real estate loans we can hold in our loan portfolio, or require higher capital ratios as a result of the level
of commercial real estate loans held, our earnings or our ability to engage in certain merger and acquisition activity could be adversely affected.
We may not be able to detect money laundering and other illegal or improper activities fully or on a timely basis, which could expose us to additional liability and could have a material adverse effect on us.
We are required to comply with anti-money laundering, anti-terrorism and other laws and regulations in the United States. These laws and regulations require us, among other things, to adopt and enforce “know-your-customer” policies and procedures and to report suspicious and large transactions to applicable regulatory authorities. These laws and regulations have become increasingly complex and detailed, require improved systems and sophisticated monitoring and compliance personnel and have become the subject of enhanced government supervision.
While we have adopted policies and procedures aimed at detecting and preventing the use of our banking network for money laundering and related activities, those policies and procedures may not completely eliminate instances in which we may be used by customers to engage in money laundering and other illegal or improper activities. To the extent we fail to fully comply with applicable laws and regulations, the FDIC, along with other banking agencies, has the authority to impose fines and other penalties and sanctions on us. In addition, our business and reputation could suffer if customers use our banking network for money laundering or illegal or improper purposes.
Acquisitions may be delayed, impeded, or prohibited due to regulatory issues.
Acquisitions by the Company, particularly those of financial institutions, are subject to approval by a variety of federal and state regulatory agencies (collectively, "regulatory approvals"). The process for obtaining these required regulatory approvals has become substantially more difficult in recent years. Regulatory approvals could be delayed, impeded, restrictively conditioned or denied due to existing or new regulatory issues the Company has, or may have, with regulatory agencies, including, without limitation, issues related to BSA compliance, CRA issues, fair lending laws, fair housing laws, consumer protection laws, unfair, deceptive, or abusive acts or practices regulations, and other similar laws and regulations. We may fail to pursue, evaluate or complete strategic and competitively significant acquisition opportunities as a result of our inability, or perceived or anticipated inability, to obtain regulatory approvals in a timely manner, under reasonable conditions or at all. The regulatory approvals may contain conditions on the completion of the merger that adversely affect our business following the closing, or which are not anticipated or cannot be met. Difficulties associated with potential acquisitions that may result from these factors could have a material adverse impact on our business, and, in turn, our financial condition and results of operations.
A failure in or breach of our operational or security systems or infrastructure, or those of third parties, could disrupt our businesses, and adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, as well as cause reputational harm.
The Bank collects, processes and stores sensitive consumer data by utilizing computer systems and telecommunications networks operated by both the Bank and third-party service providers. Our operational and security systems, infrastructure, including our computer systems, data management, and internal processes, as well as those of third parties, are integral to our business. We rely on our employees and third parties in our day-to-day and ongoing operations, who may, as a result of human error, misconduct or malfeasance, or failure or breach of third- party systems or infrastructure, expose us to risk. We have taken measures to implement backup systems and other safeguards to support our operations, but our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by any significant disruptions to us or to third parties with whom we interact. In addition, our ability to implement backup systems and other safeguards with respect to third-party systems is more limited than with our own systems.
We handle a substantial volume of customer and other financial transactions every day. Our financial, accounting, data processing, check processing, electronic funds transfer, loan processing, online and mobile banking, automated teller machines, or ATMs, backup or other operating or security systems and infrastructure may fail to operate properly or become disabled or damaged as a result of a number of factors including events that are wholly or partially beyond our control. This could adversely affect our ability to process these transactions or provide these services. There could be sudden increases in customer transaction volume, electrical, telecommunications or other major physical infrastructure outages, natural disasters, events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including terrorist acts, and cyber attacks. We continuously update these systems to support our operations and growth. This updating entails significant costs and creates risks associated with implementing new systems and integrating them with existing ones. Operational risk exposures could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, and cause reputational harm.
A cyber-attack, data breach, or a technology failure of ours could adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or manage our exposure to risk, result in the disclosure or misuse of confidential or proprietary information, increase our costs to maintain and update our operational and security systems and infrastructure, and adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, as well as cause reputational harm.
Our business is highly dependent on the security and efficacy of our infrastructure, computer and data management systems. Cyber security risks for financial institutions have significantly increased in recent years in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the Internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists and other external parties, including foreign state actors. Our operations rely on the secure processing, transmission, storage and retrieval of confidential, proprietary and other information in our computer and data management systems and networks. We rely on digital technologies, computer, database and email systems, software, and networks to conduct our operations.
Financial institutions have been subject to, and are likely to continue to be the target of, cyber-attacks, including computer viruses, malicious or destructive code, phishing attacks, denial of service or other security breaches that could result in the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss or destruction of confidential, proprietary and other information of the institution, its employees, customers or third parties, or otherwise materially disrupt network access or business operations. For example, denial of service attacks have been launched against a number of large financial institutions and several large retailers have disclosed substantial cyber security breaches affecting debit and credit card accounts of their customers. We have experienced cyber security incidents in the past, although not material, and we anticipate that, as a larger bank, we could experience further incidents. There can be no assurance that we will not suffer material losses or other material adverse consequences relating to technology failure, cyber-attacks or other information or security breaches.
In addition, there have been instances where financial institutions have been victims of fraudulent activity in which criminals pose as customers to initiate wire and automated clearinghouse transactions from customer accounts. Although the Bank has policies and procedures in place to verify the authenticity of its customers, the Bank cannot assure that such policies and procedures will prevent all fraudulent transfers. Such activity could result in financial liability and harm to our reputation.
Misconduct by our employees could also result in fraudulent, improper or unauthorized activities on behalf of customers or improper use of confidential information. The Bank may not be able to prevent employee errors or misconduct, and the precautions the Bank takes to detect these types of activity might not be effective in all cases. Employee errors or misconduct could subject the Bank to civil claims for negligence or regulatory enforcement actions, including fines and restrictions on our business.
As cyber threats and other fraudulent activity continues to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to continue to modify and enhance our protective measures, or to investigate and remediate any information security vulnerabilities or incidents. Any of these matters could result in our loss of customers and business opportunities, significant disruption to our operations and business, misappropriation or destruction of our confidential information and/or that of our customers, or damage to our customers’ computers or systems, and could result in a violation of applicable privacy laws and other laws, litigation exposure, regulatory fines, penalties or intervention, loss of confidence in our security measures, reputational damage, reimbursement or other compensatory costs, and additional compliance costs. In addition, any of the matters described above could adversely impact our results of operations and financial condition.
We rely on third-party providers and other suppliers for a number of services that are important to our business. A breach, failure, interruption, cessation of an important service by any third-party could have a material adverse effect on our business, as well as cause reputational harm.
We are dependent for the majority of our technology, including our core operating system, on third-party providers. The Bank collects, processes and stores sensitive consumer data by utilizing computer systems and telecommunications networks operated by third-party service providers, which are integral to our business. We handle a substantial volume of customer and other financial transactions every day. Our financial, accounting, data processing, check processing, electronic funds transfer, loan processing, online and mobile banking, automated teller machines, or ATMs, backup or other operating or security systems and infrastructure may fail to operate properly or become disabled or damaged as a result of a number of factors including events that are wholly or partially beyond our control.
We have taken measures to implement backup systems and other safeguards to support our operations, but our ability to conduct business may be adversely affected by any significant disruptions to third parties with whom we interact. In addition, our ability to implement backup systems and other safeguards with respect to third-party systems is more limited than with our own systems. If these third parties were to discontinue providing services to us, we may experience significant disruption to our business. In addition, each of these third parties faces the risk of cyber-attack, information breach or loss, or technology failure. If any of our third-party service providers experience such difficulties, or if there is any other disruption in our
relationships with them, we may be required to find alternative sources of such services. We are dependent on these third-party providers securing their information systems, over which we have limited control, and a breach of their information systems could adversely affect our ability to process transactions, service our clients or manage our exposure to risk and could result in the disclosure of sensitive, personal customer information, which could have a material adverse impact on our business through damage to our reputation, loss of business, remedial costs, additional regulatory scrutiny or exposure to civil litigation and possible financial liability. Assurance cannot be provided that we could negotiate terms with alternative service sources that are as favorable or could obtain services with similar functionality as found in existing systems without the need to expend substantial resources, if at all, thereby resulting in a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.
We continuously update these systems to support our operations and growth. This updating entails significant costs and creates risks associated with implementing new systems and integrating them with existing ones. Operational risk exposures could adversely impact our results of operations, liquidity and financial condition, and cause reputational harm. Insurance coverage may not be available for such losses, or where available, such losses may exceed insurance limits. This risk of loss also includes the potential legal actions that could arise as a result of an operational deficiency or as a result of noncompliance with applicable regulatory standards, adverse business decisions or their implementation, and customer attrition due to potential negative publicity. While we maintain a risk management program that is designed to minimize risk, we could suffer losses, face regulatory action, and suffer damage to our reputation as a result of our failure to properly anticipate and manage these risks.
A general economic slowdown or uncertainty that produces either reduced returns or excessive market volatility could adversely impact our overall profitability, including our wealth management fee income.
A general economic slowdown could affect our core banking business. Headwinds facing the U.S. economy strengthened during 2019, despite the continuation of the current U.S. economic expansion, noting in particular that manufacturing activity slowed more sharply than the rest of the economy. The consensus forecast indicates that the U.S. economy will continue to slow down towards its long-run potential rate of growth, but the risk of a recession is rising. Adverse changes in the economy could negatively affect the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans or force us to offer lower interest rates to encourage new borrowing activity.
Furthermore, uncertainty and market volatility regardless of overall market conditions could affect the value of the assets under management in our wealth management business resulting in lower fee income. Conditions that produce extended market volatility could affect our ability to provide our clients with an adequate return, thereby impacting our ability to attract new clients or causing existing clients to seek more stable investment opportunities with alternative wealth advisors.
Changes in U.S. trade policies, including the imposition of tariffs and retaliatory tariffs, may adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations
There continues to be discussion and dialogue regarding potential changes to U.S. trade policies, legislation, treaties and tariffs with countries such as China and the European Union. Tariffs and retaliatory tariffs have been imposed, and additional tariffs and retaliatory tariffs have been proposed. Such tariffs, retaliatory tariffs or other trade restrictions on products and materials that our customers import or export could cause the prices of our customers’ products to increase, which could reduce demand for such products, or reduce our customers’ margins, and adversely impact their revenues, financial results and ability to service debt. This in turn, could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, to the extent changes in the political environment have a negative impact on us or on the markets in which we operate our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially and adversely impacted in the future. It remains unclear what the U.S. government or foreign governments will or will not do with respect to tariffs already imposed, additional tariffs that may be imposed, or international trade agreements and policies.
Acts of terrorism, severe weather, natural disasters, public health issues and other external events could impact our ability to conduct business.
Our business is subject to risk from external events that could affect the stability of our deposit base, impair the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans, impair the value of collateral securing loans, cause significant property damage, result in loss of revenue, and/or cause us to incur additional expenses. For example, financial institutions have been, and continue to be, targets of terrorist threats aimed at compromising their operating and communication systems. The metropolitan New York and Philadelphia areas remain central targets for potential acts of terrorism, including cyber terrorism, which could affect not only our operations but those of our customers. Additionally, there could be sudden increases in customer transaction volume, electrical, telecommunications or other major physical infrastructure outages, natural disasters, events arising from local or larger scale political or social matters, including terrorist acts, and cyber attacks. The emergence of widespread health emergencies or pandemics, such as the potential spread of the coronavirus ("Covid-19") , could lead to regional quarantines, business shutdowns, labor shortages, disruptions to supply chains, and overall economic instability. Events such as these may
become more common in the future and could cause significant damage such as disrupt power and communication services, impact the stability of our facilities and result in additional expenses, impair the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans, reduce the value of collateral securing the repayment of our loans, which could result in the loss of revenue. While we have established and regularly test disaster recovery procedures, the occurrence of any such event could have a material adverse effect on our business, operations and financial condition.
Uncertainty about the future of LIBOR may adversely affect our business.
The London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) is a global financial benchmark and reference rate that we use to set interest rates for a significant portion of our commercial loan portfolio. At December 31, 2019, loans that tied to the LIBOR rate totaled $1.75 billion. The marketplace that sets the LIBOR rate has announced that it will no longer support LIBOR after 2021.
Provident has not yet determined which alternative rate is most applicable, and there can be no assurances on which benchmark rate(s) may replace LIBOR or how LIBOR will be determined for purposes of financial instruments that are currently referencing LIBOR if and when it ceases to exist. If LIBOR is discontinued after 2021 as expected, there may be uncertainty or differences in the calculation of the applicable interest rate or payment amount depending on the terms of the governing instruments, and such discontinuation may increase operational and other risks to the Company and the industry.
In addition, the implementation of LIBOR alternatives may increase compliance costs and operational costs.
A State Bank in New Jersey could be disruptive to our overall strategies and potentially reduce the level of public funds held on deposit with us.
We maintain a large and relatively stable level of deposits from local government entities, primarily through relationships we have cultivated with New Jersey municipalities. These deposits are a relatively low-cost source used to fund our loans and investments. The State of New Jersey is considering creating a State Bank, whose purpose would be to promote small businesses, fair educational lending, housing, infrastructure improvements, community development, economic development, commerce and industry in the State. As currently proposed, it intends to permit State funds, including funds from State institutions and any State public source, to be held by the State Bank. There can be no assurance that legislation to create a State Bank will pass or whether it will pass as currently proposed.
Given the degree of our funding reliance on many New Jersey-based public entities and the potential scope of the proposed State Bank’s lending activities, we are uncertain of the impact this proposal may have on us. If we are unable to retain the current level of public funds on deposit, we may need to increase the costs associated with our funding needs, which could have a negative impact on our net income.
Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments
There are no unresolved comments from the staff of the SEC to report.