Bank of Commerce Holdings (the “Holding Company”) is a financial holding company (“FHC”) registered under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and was incorporated in California on January 21, 1982 (under the name Redding Bancorp), for the purpose of organizing, as a wholly owned subsidiary, Redding Bank of Commerce (the “Bank”). The Holding Company elected to change to a FHC in 2000. As a financial holding company, the Holding Company is subject to the Financial Holding Company Act and to supervision by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“FRB”). The Holding Company’s principal business is to serve as a holding company for Redding Bank of Commerce™, Roseville Bank of Commerce™, Sutter Bank of Commerce™ and Bank of Commerce Mortgage™, a California corporation and for other banking or banking-related subsidiaries which the Holding Company may establish or acquire (collectively the “Company”). The Holding Company also has two unconsolidated subsidiaries, Bank of Commerce Holdings Trust I and II.
The Company will provide free of charge upon request, or through links to publicly available filings accessed through its Internet website, the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports, if any, as soon as reasonably practical after such reports have been filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The Internet addresses of the Company are www.reddingbankofcommerce.com , www.rosevillebankofcommerce.com and www.sutterbankofcommerce.com . Additionally, reports may be obtained through the Securities and Exchange Commission’s website at www.sec.gov .
The Bank was incorporated as a California banking corporation on November 25, 1981, and received its certificate of authority to begin banking operations on October 22, 1982. The Bank operates five full service branch facilities. The Bank established its first full service branch at 1177 Placer Street, Redding, California, and opened for business on October 22, 1982. On November 1, 1988, the Bank received a certificate of authority to establish and maintain a loan production office in Citrus Heights, California. On September 1, 1998, the Bank relocated the loan production office to 2400 Professional Drive in Roseville, California.
On March 1, 1994, the Bank received a certificate of authority to open a second full-service branch at 1951 Churn Creek Road in Redding, California. On June 30, 2000, the Bank received a certificate of authority to convert the loan production office in Roseville to a full service banking facility under the name Roseville Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Banking of Commerce. On June 15, 2001, the Bank acquired the deposit liabilities of First Plus Bank at Citrus Heights, California and has renamed the facility Roseville Bank of Commerce at Sunrise, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce. On February 22, 2002, the Roseville Bank of Commerce at Eureka Road, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce, relocated to its permanent location at 1504 Eureka Road, Suite 100, Roseville, California.
On March 18, 2004, RBC Mortgage Services, a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Holding Company, changed its name to Bank of Commerce Mortgage (the “Mortgage Company”), an affiliate of Redding Bank of Commerce. The principal business of the subsidiary is mortgage brokerage services. The subsidiary has an affiliated business arrangement with BWC Mortgage Services. Under the terms of the agreement, BWC Mortgage Services underwrites or brokers mortgage products, and manages the independent contractors, supporting staff and broker relationships with various secondary market lenders. Bank of Commerce Mortgage in turn provides office space, equipment and marketing support for the mortgage brokerage services. Bank of Commerce Mortgage, through this agreement, offers a full array of single-family and multi-family residential real estate mortgages including equity lines. Bank of Commerce Mortgage pays ten percent of gross premiums earned to BWC Mortgage Services. On July 1, 2004, Bank of Commerce Mortgage relocated to an off site location at 1024 Mistletoe Lane, Redding, California.
On May 18, 2004, by majority shareholder vote, the Holding Company (Redding Bancorp) amended the Articles of Incorporation to change the Company’s name to Bank of Commerce Holdings. The new name proves to be more reflective of the multiple financial holdings of the Company as well as more geographically open to expansion opportunities.
On May 24, 2004 the Company was approved to list on the NASDAQ National Market under the trading symbol BOCH (Bank of Commerce Holdings). The listing became live on June 15, 2004. On July 21, 2004, the Board of Directors declared a three-for-one stock split on the Company’s common stock. The decision to declare the stock split was intended to make it easier for our current and future investors to enjoy ownership in our Company.
On August 26, 2005, the Company received approval from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation to open a branch in the Yuba City market. The branch was entitled “Sutter Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce.” A lease was secured for 950 Tharp Road, Suite 800, Yuba City, California. The office was opened the second quarter of 2006.
The Company began construction of the Technology and Administrative Support Center (“TASC”) during 2006. The building will be approximately 12,000 square feet and will be built on property already owned by the Company. The budget for the building is approximately $3.9 million and is scheduled for completion April 1, 2007.
Junior Subordinated Debentures
During the first quarter 2003, Bank of Commerce Holdings formed a wholly-owned Delaware statutory business trust, Bank of Commerce Holdings Trust (the “grantor trust”), which issued $5.2 million of guaranteed preferred beneficial interests in Bank of Commerce Holdings’ junior subordinated debentures (the “Trust Notes”). These debentures qualify as Tier 1 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines. The proceeds from the issuance of the Trust Notes were transferred from the grantor trust to the Holding Company and from the Holding Company to the Bank as surplus capital. The Trust Notes accrue and pay distributions on a quarterly basis at 3 month London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) plus 3.30%. The rate at December 31, 2006 was 8.67%. The rate increases are capped at 2.75% annually and the lifetime cap is 12.5%. The final maturity on the Trust Notes is March 18, 2033, and the debt allows for prepayment after five years on the quarterly payment date. During the third quarter 2005, Bank of Commerce Holdings formed a wholly-owned Delaware statutory business trust, Bank of Commerce Holdings Trust II (the “grantor trust”), which issued $10.3 million of guaranteed preferred beneficial interests in Bank of Commerce Holdings’ junior subordinated debentures (the “Trust Notes”). All of the issuance will qualify as Tier 1 or Tier 2 capital under Federal Reserve Board guidelines. $5 million of the proceeds from the issuance of the Trust Notes were transferred from the grantor trust to the Holding Company and from the Holding Company to the Bank as surplus capital and $5 million of the issuance is retained at the Holding Company for investment purposes. The issuance is priced at a fixed rate for the first five years at 6.12%.
Primary Market Areas
The Bank is principally supervised and regulated by the California Department of Financial Institutions and the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. The Company operates in three distinct markets. Redding Bank of Commerce has historically been the leading independent commercial bank in Redding, California, and Shasta County, California. This market has been expanding, but is still relatively small when compared to the greater Sacramento market, the location of Roseville Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce and Yuba City, the location of the Sutter Bank of Commerce, a division of Redding Bank of Commerce. Management believes that the three markets complement each other, with the Redding market providing the stability and the greater Sacramento and Yuba Sutter markets providing growth opportunities.
Products and Services
Through the Bank and mortgage subsidiaries, the Company provides a wide range of financial services and products. The services offered by the Bank include those traditionally offered by commercial banks of similar size and character in California. Products such as checking, interest-bearing checking (“NOW”) and savings accounts, money market deposit accounts, commercial, construction, and term loans, travelers checks, safe deposit boxes, collection services and electronic banking activities. The primary focus of the Bank is to provide services to the business and professional community of its major market area, including S Administration loans, payroll and accounting packages, benefit administration and billing services. The Bank currently does not offer trust services or international banking services. The services offered by the Mortgage Company include single and multi-family residential new financing, refinancing and equity lines of credit.
Most of the Bank’s customers are small to medium sized businesses, professionals and other individuals with medium to high net worth, and most of the Bank’s deposits are obtained from such customers. The Bank emphasizes servicing the needs of local businesses and professionals and individuals requiring specialized services. The primary business strategy of the Bank is to focus on its lending activities. The Bank’s principal lines of lending are (i) commercial, (ii) real estate construction and (iii) commercial real estate.
The majority of the loans of the Bank are direct loans made to individuals and ses in the major market area of the Bank. The Mortgage Company provides residential real estate new financing, refinancing and equity lines of credit, 100% sold in the secondary market. See “Risk Factors That May Affect Results-Dependence on Real Estate.” A relatively small portion of the loan portfolio of the Bank consists of loans to individuals for personal, family or household purposes. The Bank accepts the following as collateral for loans real estate: listed and unlisted securities, savings and time deposits, automobiles, machinery and equipment and other general business assets such as accounts receivable and inventory.
The commercial loan portfolio of the Bank consists of a mix of revolving credit facilities and intermediate term loans. The loans are generally made for working capital, asset acquisition, business-expansion purposes, and are generally secured by a lien on the borrowers’ assets. The Bank also makes unsecured loans to borrowers who meet the Bank’s underwriting criteria for such loans. The Bank manages its commercial loan portfolio by monitoring its borrowers’ payment performance and their respective financial condition, and makes periodic and appropriate adjustments, if necessary, to the risk grade assigned to each loan in the portfolio. The primary sources of repayment of the commercial loans of the Bank are the borrower’s conversion of short-term assets to cash and operating cash flow. The net assets of the borrower or guarantor and/or the liquidation of collateral are usually identified as a secondary source of repayment.
The principal factors affecting the Bank’s risk of loss from commercial lending include each borrower’s ability to manage its business affairs and cash flows, local and general economic conditions and real estate values in the Bank’s service area. The Bank manages risk through its underwriting criteria, which includes strategies to match the borrower’s cash flow to loan repayment terms, and periodic evaluations of the borrower’s operations. The Bank’s evaluations of its borrowers are facilitated by management’s knowledge of local market conditions and periodic reviews by a consultant of the credit administration policies of the Bank.
The real estate construction loan portfolio of the Bank consists of a mix of commercial and residential construction loans, which are principally secured by the underlying projects. The real estate construction loans of the Bank are predominately made for projects, which are intended to be owner occupied. The Bank also makes real estate construction loans for speculative projects. The principal sources of repayment of the Bank’s construction loans are sale of the underlying collateral or permanent financing provided by the Bank or another lending source. The principal risks associated with real estate construction lending include project cost overruns that absorb the borrower’s equity in the project and deterioration of real estate values as a result of various factors, including competitive pressures and economic downturns.
See “Risk Factors That May Affect Results-Lending Risks Associated with Commercial Banking and Construction Activities.” The Bank manages its credit risk associated with real estate construction lending by establishing maximum loan-to-value ratios on projects on an as-completed basis, inspecting project status in advance of controlled disbursements and matching maturities with expected completion dates. Generally, the Bank requires a loan-to-value ratio of no more than 80% on single-family residential construction loans.
The commercial and construction loan portfolio of the Bank consists of loans secured by a variety of commercial and residential real property. The Mortgage Company makes real estate mortgage loans for both owner-occupied properties and investor properties. The Mortgage Company brokers and sells the residential real estate loan directly in the secondary market, servicing included. The Bank does not provide for warehouse funding.
The specific underwriting standards of the Bank and methods for each of its principal lines of lending include industry-accepted analysis and modeling, and certain proprietary techniques. The Bank’s underwriting criteria is designed to comply with applicable regulatory guidelines, including required loan-to-value ratios. The credit administration policies of the Bank contain mandatory lien position and debt service coverage requirements, and the Bank generally requires a guarantee from the owners of its private corporate borrowers.
Government Supervision and Regulation
The following discussion describes the elements of an extensive regulatory framework applicable to financial holding companies and banks and specific information about the Holding Company and its subsidiaries. Federal regulation of banks, bank holding companies and financial holding companies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the Bank Insurance Fund rather than for the protection of stockholders and creditors.
General
The Holding Company is a financial holding company under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and subject to the Financial Holding Company Act (“FHCA”). The Holding Company reports to, registers with, and may be examined by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve Bank (“FRB”). The FRB also has the authority to examine the Holding Company’s subsidiaries. The Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”) and the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”). In addition to banking laws, regulations and regulatory agencies, the Holding Company and its subsidiaries and affiliates are subject to various other laws and regulations and regulation by other regulatory agencies, all of which directly or indirectly affect the operations and management of the Holding Company and its ability to make distributions to stockholders.
A financial holding company, and the companies under its control, are permitted to engage in activities considered to be “financial in nature” as defined by the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and the Federal Reserve Board interpretations (including, without limitation, insurance and securities activities), and therefore may engage in a broader range of activities than permitted for bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. A financial holding company may engage directly or indirectly in activities considered financial in nature, either de novo or by acquisition, provided the financial holding company gives the Federal Reserve Board after-the-fact notice of the new activities.
Dividends
The FRB generally prohibits a financial holding company from declaring or paying a cash dividend which would impose undue pressure on the capital of subsidiary banks or would be funded only through borrowing or other arrangements that might adversely affect a bank holding company’s financial position. The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) prohibits insured depository institutions from paying management fees to any controlling persons or, with certain limited exceptions, making capital distributions, including dividends, if, after such transaction, the institution would be undercapitalized.
In addition to the restrictions imposed under federal law, banks chartered under California law generally may only pay cash dividends to the extent such payments do not exceed the lesser of retained earnings of the bank or the bank’s net income for its last three fiscal years (less any distributions to stockholders during such period). In the event a bank desires to pay cash dividends in excess of such amount, the bank may pay a cash dividend with the prior approval of the Commissioner in an amount not exceeding the greatest of the bank’s retained earnings, the bank’s net income for its last fiscal year, or the bank’s net income for its current fiscal year.
Regulators also have authority to prohibit a depository institution from engaging in business practices which are considered to be unsafe or unsound, possibly including payment of dividends or other payments under certain circumstances even if such payments are not expressly prohibited by statute. The FRB’s policy is that a bank holding company should not continue its existing rate of cash dividends on its common stock unless its net income is sufficient to fully fund each dividend and its prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with its capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition.
Interstate Banking
A financial holding company may acquire banks in states other than its home state without regard to the permissibility of such acquisitions under state law, but subject to any state requirement that the bank has been organized and operating for a minimum period of time, not to exceed five years, and the requirement that the bank holding company, prior to or following the proposed acquisition, controls no more than 10% of the total amount of deposits of insured depository institutions in the United States and no more than 30% of such deposits in that state (or such lesser or greater amount set by state law). Banks may also merge across state lines, therefore creating interstate branches. Furthermore, a bank is now able to open new branches in a state in which it does not already have banking operations if the laws of such state permit such de novo branching.
Capital Standards
In the United States of America, banks, thrifts and bank holding companies are subject to minimum regulatory capital requirements. Specifically, U.S. banking organizations must maintain a minimum leverage ratio and two minimum risk-based ratios. The leverage ratio measures regulatory capital as a percentage of total on-balance-sheet assets as reported in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAP). The risk-based ratios measure regulatory capital as a percentage of both on- and off-balance-sheet credit exposures with some gross differentiation based on perceived credit risk. Under these guidelines, nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit equivalent amounts of off-balance-sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0% for assets with low credit risk, such as certain U.S. government securities, to 100% for assets with relatively higher credit risk, such as certain loans.
The current U.S. risk-based capital requirements are based on an internationally agreed framework for capital measurement that was developed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (“BSC”) in 1988. The international framework (the “1988 Accord”) accomplished several important objectives. It strengthened capital levels at large, internationally active banks and fostered international consistency and coordination. The 1988 Accord also reduced disincentives for banks to hold liquid, low risk assets. By requiring banks to hold capital against off-balance-sheet exposures, the 1988 Accord represented a significant step forward for regulatory capital measurement. The federal banking agencies require a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 8%, and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average risk-adjusted assets and off-balance-sheet items of 4%. The Company exceeds the minimum requirements. Over the past 15 years the world’s financial system has become increasingly more complex and the BSC has been working for several years to develop a new regulatory capital framework that recognizes new developments in financial products, incorporates advances in risk measurement and management practices, and more precisely assesses capital charges in relation to risk (the “New Accord”).
As of December 31, 2006, the most recent notification from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation categorized the Bank as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action.
Overview of the New Accord
The New Accord encompasses three elements: minimum regulatory capital requirements, supervisory review and market discipline. Under the first element, a banking organization must calculate capital requirements to credit risk, operational risk and market risk . The New Accord does not change the definition of what qualifies as regulatory capital, the minimum risk-based capital ratio, or the methodology for determining capital charges for market risk. The New Accord does provide several methodologies for determining capital requirements for both credit and operational risk. For credit risk there are two general approaches; the standardized approach (based on the 1988 Accord) and the internal ratings-based (IRB) approach, which uses the institution’s internal estimates of key risk drivers to derive capital requirements.
The New Accord provides three methodologies for determining capital requirements for operational risk: the basic indicator approach, the standardized approach, and the advanced measurement approaches (AMA). Under the first two methodologies, capital requirements for operational risk are fixed percentages of specified, objective risk measures (for example, gross income.) The AMA provides the flexibility for an institution to develop its own individualized approach for measuring operational risk, subject to supervisory oversight.
The second pillar of the New Accord, supervisory review, highlights the need for banking organizations to assess their capital adequacy positions relative to overall risk (rather than to the minimum capital requirement), and the need for supervisors to review and take appropriate actions in response to those assessments. The third pillar of the New Accord imposes public disclosure requirements on institutions that are intended to allow market participants to assess key information about an institutions risk profile and its associated level of capital.
In order for a financial holding company to qualify as “well-run,” both it and the insured depository institutions that it controls must meet the “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” criteria set forth in Regulation Y. To qualify as “well-capitalized,” the bank must, on a consolidated basis: (i) maintain a total risk-based capital ratio of 10% or greater, (ii) maintain a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6% or greater and (iii) not be subject to any order by the FRB to meet a specified capital level. Its lead insured depository institution must be well-capitalized (as that term is defined in the capital adequacy regulations of the applicable bank regulator), 80% of the total risk-weighted assets held by its insured depository institutions must be held by institutions that are well-capitalized, and none of its insured depository institutions may be undercapitalized.
To qualify as “well-managed”: (i) each of its lead depository institutions and its depository institutions holding 80% of the total risk-weighted assets of all its depository institutions at their most recent examination or review must have received a composite rating, rating for management and rating for compliance which were at least satisfactory, (ii) none of the bank holding company’s depository institutions may have received one of the two lowest composite ratings and (iii) neither the bank holding company nor any of its depository institutions during the previous 12 months may have been subject to a formal enforcement order or action.
Fiscal and Monetary Policies
The Company’s business and earnings are affected significantly by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies. The Company is particularly affected by the policies of the FRB, which regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Among the instruments of monetary policy available to the FRB are (a) conducting open market operations in United States government securities, (b) changing the discount rates of borrowings of depository institutions, (c) imposing or changing reserve requirements against depository institutions’ deposits, and (d) imposing or changing reserve requirements against certain borrowings by banks and their affiliates. These methods are used in varying degrees and combinations to directly affect the availability of bank loans and deposits, as well as the interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits. The policies of the FRB may have a material effect on the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition.
Privacy Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act
Federal banking regulators, as required under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the GLB Act), have adopted rules limiting the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose nonpublic information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. The rules require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to nonaffiliated third parties. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial services companies and conveyed to outside vendors.
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley) implemented a broad range of corporate governance and accounting measures to increase corporate responsibility, to provide for enhanced penalties for accounting and auditing improprieties at publicly traded companies, and to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of disclosures under federal securities laws. The Company is subject to Sarbanes-Oxley because it is required to file periodic reports with the SEC under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Among other things, Sarbanes-Oxley and/or its implementing regulations have established new membership requirements and additional responsibilities for our audit committee, imposed restrictions on the relationship between the Company and its outside auditors (including restrictions on the types of non-audit services our auditors may provide to us), imposed additional responsibilities for our external financial statements on our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, expanded the disclosure requirements for our corporate insiders, required our management to evaluate the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures and its internal control over financial reporting, and required our auditors to issue a report on our internal control over financial reporting.
Patriot Act
The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (Patriot Act) is intended to strengthen the ability of U.S. law enforcement agencies and intelligence communities to work together to combat terrorism on a variety of fronts. The Patriot Act has significant implications for depository institutions, brokers, dealers and other businesses involved in the transfer of money. The Patriot Act requires the Company to implement new or revised policies and procedures relating to anti-money laundering, compliance, suspicious activities, and currency transaction reporting and due diligence on customers. The Patriot Act also requires federal bank regulators to evaluate the effectiveness of an applicant in combating money laundering in determining whether to approve a proposed bank acquisition.
Future Legislation
Various legislation, including proposals to change substantially the financial institution regulatory system, is from time to time introduced in Congress. This legislation may change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Company in substantial and unpredictable ways. If enacted, this legislation could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance among banks, savings associations, credit unions, and other financial institutions. The Company cannot predict whether any of this potential legislation will be enacted and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on the Company’s business, results of operations or financial condition.
State Regulation and Supervision
The Bank is a California chartered bank insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), and as such is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”) and the FDIC. As a non-member of the Federal Reserve System, the primary federal regulator of the Holding Company is the Federal Reserve Board. The regulations of these agencies affect most aspects of the Bank’s business and prescribe permissible types of loans and investments, the amount of required reserves, requirements for branch offices, the permissible scope of the Bank’s activities and various other requirements. The Bank is also subject to applicable provisions of California law, insofar as such provisions are not in conflict with or preempted by federal banking law. In addition, the Bank is subject to certain regulations of the FRB dealing primarily with check-clearing activities, establishment of banking reserves, Truth-in-Lending (Regulation Z), Truth-in-Savings (Regulation DD), and Equal Credit Opportunity (Regulation B).
Under California law, a state chartered bank is subject to various restrictions on, and requirements regarding, its operations and administration including the maintenance of branch offices and automated teller machines, capital and reserve requirements, deposits and borrowings, shareholder rights and duties, and investment and lending activities. Whenever it appears that the contributed capital of a California bank is impaired, the Commissioner is required to order the bank to correct such impairment. If a bank is unable to correct the impairment, the bank is required to levy and collect an assessment upon its common shares. If such assessment becomes delinquent, the common shares are to be sold by the bank.
Prompt Corrective Action and Other Enforcement Mechanisms
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”) requires each federal banking agency to take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of insured depository institutions, including but not limited to those that fall below one or more prescribed minimum capital ratios. The law required each federal banking agency to promulgate regulations defining the following five categories in which an insured depository institution will be placed, based on the level of its capital ratios: well capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized.
As of December 31, 2006, the most recent notification from the FDIC categorized the Bank as “well capitalized” under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. Under the prompt corrective action provisions of FDICIA, an insured depository institution generally will be classified in the following categories based on the capital measures indicated below:
“Well capitalized” — Bank only
|
“Adequately capitalized” | |
Total risk-based capital of 10%;
|
Total risk-based capital of 8%; | |
Tier 1 risk-based capital of 6%; and
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital of 4%; and | |
Leverage ratio of 5%.
|
Leverage ratio of 4%. |
“Undercapitalized”
|
“Significantly undercapitalized” | |
Total risk-based capital less than 8%;
|
Total risk-based capital less than 6%; | |
Tier 1 risk-based capital less than 4%; or
|
Tier 1 risk-based capital less than 3%; or | |
Leverage ratio less than 4%.
|
Leverage ratio less than 3%. | |
“Critically undercapitalized” |
||
Tangible equity to total assets less than 2%. |
An institution that, based upon its capital levels, is classified as “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized” or “undercapitalized” may be treated as though it were in the next lower capital category if the appropriate federal banking agency, after notice and opportunity for hearing, determines that an unsafe or unsound condition or an unsafe or unsound practice warrants such treatment. At each successive lower capital category, an insured depository institution is subject to more restrictions.
The federal banking agencies, however, may not treat an institution as “critically undercapitalized” unless its capital ratio actually warrants such treatment. If an insured depository institution is undercapitalized, it will be closely monitored by the appropriate federal banking agency. Undercapitalized institutions must submit an acceptable capital restoration plan with a guarantee of performance issued by the holding company. Further restrictions and sanctions are required to be imposed on insured depository institutions that are critically undercapitalized. The most important additional measure is that the appropriate federal banking agency is required to either appoint a receiver for the institution within 90 days, or obtain the concurrence of the FDIC in another form of action.
Safety and Soundness Standards
FDICIA also implemented certain specific restrictions on transactions and required federal banking regulators to adopt overall safety and soundness standards for depository institutions related to internal control, loan underwriting, documentation, and asset growth. Among other things, FDICIA limits the interest rates paid on deposits by undercapitalized institutions, restricts the use of brokered deposits, limits the aggregate extensions of credit by a depository institution to an executive officer, director, principal shareholder or related interest, and reduces deposit insurance coverage for deposits offered by undercapitalized institutions for deposits by certain employee benefits accounts.
The federal banking agencies may require an institution to submit to an acceptable compliance plan as well as have the flexibility to pursue other more appropriate or effective courses of action given the specific circumstances and severity of an institution’s noncompliance with one or more standards.
Community Reinvestment Act and Fair Lending Developments
The Bank is subject to certain fair lending requirements and reporting obligations involving home mortgage lending operations and Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) activities. The CRA generally requires the federal banking agencies to evaluate the record of a financial institution in meeting the credit needs of their local communities, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. In addition to substantive penalties and corrective measures that may be required for a violation of certain fair lending laws, the federal banking agencies may take compliance with such laws and CRA into account when regulating and supervising other activities.
Recently Enacted Accounting Rules
On February 16, 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued SFAS No. 155, “Accounting for Certain Hybrid Instruments” (SFAS No. 155), which permits, but does not require, fair value accounting for any hybrid financial instrument that contains an embedded derivative that would otherwise require bifurcation in accordance with SFAS 133. The statement also subjects beneficial interests issued by securitization vehicles to the requirements of SFAS 133. The statement is effective as of January 1, 2007, with earlier adoption permitted.
In March 2006, the FASB issued SFAS No. 156, Accounting for Servicing of Financial Assets an amendment of FASB Statement No. 140, Accounting for Transfers and Servicing of Financial Assets and Extinguishments of Liabilities (“SFAS No. 156”). SFAS No. 156 requires all separately recognized servicing assets and liabilities to be initially measured at fair value. In addition, entities are permitted to choose to either subsequently measure servicing rights at fair value and report changes in fair value in earnings, or amortize servicing rights in proportion to and over the estimated net servicing income or loss, and assess the rights for impairment. Beginning with the fiscal year in which an entity adopts SFAS No. 156, it may elect to subsequently measure a class of servicing assets and liabilities at fair value. Post adoption, an entity may make this election as of the beginning of any fiscal year. An entity that elects to subsequently measure a class of servicing assets and liabilities at fair value should apply that election to all new and existing recognized servicing assets and liabilities within that class. The effect of re-measuring an existing class of servicing assets and liabilities at fair value is to be reported as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the period of adoption. SFAS No. 156 is effective as of the beginning of an entity’s first fiscal year that begins after September 15, 2006. We do not expect that the adoption of FAS 156 will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
On July 13, 2006, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) issued Financial Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Income Tax Uncertainties (FIN 48). FIN 48 supplements Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes (FAS 109), by defining the threshold for recognizing tax benefits in the financial statements as “more-likely-than-not” to be sustained by the applicable taxing authority. The benefit recognized for a tax position that meets the “more-likely-than-not” criterion is measured based on the largest benefit that is more than 50% likely to be realized, taking into consideration the amounts and probabilities of the outcomes upon settlement. The Company will adopt FIN 48 on January 1, 2007, as required. Any necessary adjustment must be recorded directly to the beginning balance of retained earnings in the period of adoption and reported as a change in accounting principle. We are currently in the process of identifying the impact of this guidance on our consolidated financial statements.
On September 15, 2006, the FASB issued FAS 157, Fair Value Measurements , which defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value in generally accepted accounting principles (GAAP), and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. FAS 157 applies under other accounting pronouncements that require or permit fair value measurements, the FASB having previously concluded in those accounting pronouncements that fair value is the relevant measurement attribute. FAS 157 is effective for the year beginning January 1, 2008, with early adoption permitted on January 1, 2007. We do not expect that the adoption of FAS 157 will have a material effect on our consolidated financial statements.
On September 29, 2006, the FASB issued FAS 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined Benefit Pension and Other Postretirement Plans — An Amendment of FASB Statements No. 87, 88, 106, and 132R, requiring an employer to recognize on its balance sheet the funded status of pension and other postretirement plans, measure a plan’s assets and its obligations that determine its funded status as of the end of the employer’s fiscal year and recognize changes in a plan’s funded status in the year in which the changes occur in comprehensive income. The requirement to recognize the funded status of our plans is effective December 31, 2006. The funded status will be determined by comparing the fair value of plan assets and the projected benefit obligation or accumulated postretirement benefit obligation, as applicable, including actuarial gains and losses, prior service cost, and any remaining transition amounts. To the extent the fair value of plan assets is larger, the plan is considered over funded and an asset is recorded. Any previously recorded prepaid pension asset would be adjusted to reflect the funded status of the plan with the offset to accumulated other comprehensive income. Conversely, if a plan is under funded, a liability would be reported. The requirement to measure plan assets and benefit obligations as of the date of the employer’s fiscal year-end statement of financial position is effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2008. We do not expect adoption of FAS 158 to have a material impact on our consolidated balance sheet.
Competition
The commercial banking business in which the Company engages in is highly competitive. Generally, the lines of activity and markets served involve competition with other banks, thrifts, credit unions and other non-bank financial institutions, such as investment banking firms, investment advisory firms, brokerage firms, investment companies and insurance entities which offer financial services, located both domestically and through alternative deliver channels such as the Internet. The methods of competition center around various factors, such as customer services, interest rates on loans and deposits, lending limits and customer convenience.
The mortgage brokerage business in which the Company engages in is highly competitive. The mortgage brokerage business competes with other banks, thrifts, government agencies, mortgage brokers and other non-bank organizations offering mortgage banking services. Among the competitive advantages, major banks have an ability to finance wide ranging advertising campaigns and to allocate their securities into securities of higher yield. Such institutions offer certain services such as trust services and international banking services that are not offered directly by the Bank (but are offered indirectly through correspondent relationships). Because of their greater total capitalization, major banks have substantially higher legal lending limits than the Bank.
In order to compete with major banks and other competitors in its primary service areas, the Company relies upon the experience of its executive and senior officers in serving business clients, and upon its specialized services, local promotional activities and the personal contacts made by its officers, directors and employees. For customers whose loan demand exceeds the Company’s legal lending limit, the Company may arrange for such loans on a participation basis with correspondent banks. Competitive pressures in the banking industry significantly increase changes in the interest rate environment, reducing net interest margins, and less than favorable economic conditions can result in a deterioration of credit quality and an increase in the provisions for loan losses.
Employees
As of February 1, 2007, the Company employed 115 full-time equivalent employees. Of these employees, 34 were employed in the Roseville/Sutter market and 81 were in the Redding market. None of the employees within the Company are subject to a collective bargaining agreement. Management considers its employee relations to be excellent.
ITEM 1A.
Forward Looking Statements and Risk Factors That May Affect Results
This report includes forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements are based on management’s beliefs and assumptions, and on information available to management as of the date of this document. Forward-looking statements include the information concerning possible or assumed future results of operations of the Company set forth under the heading “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” Forward-looking statements also include statements in which words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intend,” “plan,” “believes,” “estimate,” “consider” or similar expressions or conditional verbs such as “will”, “should”, “would” and “could” are intended to identify such forward looking statements.. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of future performance. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including the risks discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results” and elsewhere in this report. The Company’s actual future results and shareholder values may differ materially from those anticipated and expressed in these forward-looking statements. Many of the factors that will determine these results and values, including those discussed under the heading “Risk Factors That May Affect Results,” are beyond the Company’s ability to control or predict. Investors are cautioned not to put undue reliance on any forward-looking statements. In addition, the Company does not have any intention or and assumes no obligation to update forward-looking statements after the date of the filing of this report, even if new information, future events or other circumstances have made such statements incorrect or misleading. Except as specifically noted herein all references to the “Company” refer to Bank of Commerce Holdings, a California corporation, and its consolidated subsidiaries.
Overview
As a financial holding company, our earnings are significantly affected by general business and economic conditions. These conditions include short-term and long-term interest rates, inflation, monetary supply, fluctuations in both debt and equity capital markets, and the strength of the United States economy and local economies in which we operate. For example, an economic downturn, increase in unemployment, or other events that negatively impact household and/or corporate incomes could decrease the demand for the Company’s loan and non-loan products and services and increase the number of customers who fail to pay interest or principal on their loans. Geopolitical conditions can also affect our earnings. Acts or threats of terrorism, actions taken by the United States or other governments in response to acts or threats of terrorism and our military conflicts including the aftermath of the war with Iraq could impact business conditions in the United States.
The Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System regulates the supply of money and credit in the United States. Its policies determine in large part our cost of funds for lending and investing and the return we earn on those loans and investments, both of which impact our net interest margin, and can materially affect the value of financial instruments we hold. Its policies can also affect our borrowers, potentially increasing the risk of failure to repay their loans. Changes in Federal Reserve Board policies are beyond our control and hard to predict or anticipate.
We operate in a highly competitive industry that could become even more competitive because of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Banks, securities firms and insurance companies can now merge creating a financial holding company that can offer virtually any type of financial service, including banking, securities underwriting, insurance (agency and underwriting) and merchant banking. Technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and automatic payment systems. Many of our competitors have fewer regulatory constraints and some have lower cost structures.
The holding company, subsidiary bank and non-bank subsidiary are heavily regulated at the federal and state levels. This regulation is intended to protect depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, not investors. Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory agencies continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies including changes in interpretation and implementation could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways including limiting the types of financial services and products we may offer.
Our failure to comply with the laws, regulations or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies and damage our reputation.
Our success depends, in part, on our ability to adapt our products and services to evolving industry standards. There is increasing pressure on financial services companies to provide products and services at lower prices. This can reduce our net interest margin and revenues from fee-based products and services. In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies, including internet-based services, could require us to make substantial expenditures to modify or adapt our existing products and services. Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract and retain key people. Competition for the best people can be intense.
Lending Risks Associated with Commercial Banking and Construction Activities
The business strategy of the Company is to focus on commercial, single family and multi-family real estate loans, construction loans and commercial business loans. Loans secured by commercial real estate are generally larger and involve a greater degree of credit and transaction risk than residential mortgage (one-to-four family) loans. Because payments on loans secured by commercial and multi-family real estate properties are often dependent on successful operation or management of the underlying properties, repayment of such loans may be subject to a greater extent to the then prevailing conditions in the real estate market or the economy. Moreover, real estate construction financing is generally considered to involve a higher degree of credit risk than long-term financing on improved, owner-occupied real estate. Risk of loss on a construction loan is dependent largely upon the accuracy of the initial estimate of the property’s value at completion of construction or development compared to the estimated cost (including interest) of construction. If the estimate of value proves to be inaccurate, the Company may be confronted with a project which, when completed, has a value which is insufficient to assure full repayment of the construction loan. Although the Company manages lending risks through its underwriting and credit administration policies, no assurance can be given that such risks would not materialize, in which event the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, cash flows and business prospects could be materially adversely affected.
Dependence on Real Estate
At December 31, 2006, approximately 70% of the loans of the Company were secured by real estate. The value of the Company’s real estate collateral has been, and could in the future be adversely affected by any economic recession and any resulting adverse impact on the real estate market in California. See “Economic Conditions and Geographic Concentration.”
The Company’s primary lending focus has historically been commercial real estate, commercial lending and, to a lesser extent, construction lending. At December 31, 2006, commercial real estate and construction loans comprised approximately 42% and 27%, respectively, of the total loans in the portfolio of the Company. At December 31, 2006, all of the Company’s real estate mortgage, real estate construction loans, and commercial real estate loans, were secured fully or in part by deeds of trust on underlying real estate. The Company’s dependence on real estate increases the risk of loss in the loan portfolio of the Company and its holdings of other real estate owned if economic conditions in California deteriorate in the future. Deterioration of the real estate market in California could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Economic Conditions and Geographic Concentration.”
Risks Specific to Operations in California
Our operations are located entirely in the State of California, which in recent years has experienced economic disruptions that are unique to the state. Any fiscal and political uncertainty surrounding the state government’s financial condition, for example may have a material adverse effect on our customer’s businesses or on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Interest Rate Risk
The income of the Company is highly dependent on “interest rate differentials” and the resulting net interest margins (i.e., the difference between the interest rates earned on the Bank’s interest-earning assets such as loans and securities, and the interest rates paid on the Bank’s interest-bearing liabilities such as deposits and borrowings). These rates are highly sensitive to many factors, which are beyond the Company’s control, including general economic conditions, inflation, recession and the policies of various governmental and regulatory agencies, in particular, the FRB. Because of the Company’s practice of using variable rate pricing on the majority of its loan portfolio and noninterest bearing demand
deposit accounts the Company is asset sensitive. As a result, the Company is generally adversely affected by declining interest rates. In addition, changes in monetary policy, including changes in interest rates, influence the origination of loans, the purchase of investments and the generation of deposits.
These changes also affect the rates received on loans and securities and paid on deposits, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. See “Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosure about Market Risk.”
Potential Volatility of Deposits
At December 31, 2006, time certificates of deposit in excess of $100,000 represented approximately 33.5% of the dollar value of the total deposits of the Company. As such, these deposits are considered volatile and could be subject to withdrawal. Withdrawal of a material amount of such deposits could adversely affect the liquidity of the Company, profitability, business prospects, results of operations and cash flows. The Company monitors activity of volatile liability deposits on a quarterly basis. Approximately $60.8 million of the $147.2 million in time certificates of deposit over $100,000 act as core deposits with over five years history of rollover with the Company.
Dividends
Because the Company conducts no other significant activity than the management of its investment in the Bank and Mortgage Company, the Company is dependent on these subsidiaries for income. The ability of the Bank and Mortgage Company to pay cash dividends in the future depends on the profitability, growth and capital needs of the Bank and Mortgage Company. In addition, the California Financial Code restricts the ability of the Bank to pay dividends. No assurance can be given that the Company or the Bank will pay any dividends in the future or, if paid, such dividends will not be discontinued.
Government Regulation and Legislation
The Company and the Bank are subject to extensive state and federal regulation, supervision and legislation, which govern almost all aspects of the operations of the Company and the Bank. The business of the Company is particularly susceptible to being affected by the enactment of federal and state legislation which may have the effect of increasing or decreasing the cost of doing business, modifying permissible activities or enhancing the competitive position of other financial institutions. Such laws are subject to change from time to time and are primarily intended for the protection of consumers, depositors and the deposit insurance funds, and not for the protection of shareholders of the Company. The Company cannot predict what effect any presently contemplated or future changes in the laws or regulations or their interpretations would have on the business and prospects of the Company, but it could be material and adverse. See “Supervision and Regulation.”
Economic Conditions and Geographic Concentration
The Company’s operations are located and concentrated in California, particularly the counties of El Dorado, Placer, Sutter, Shasta and Sacramento, and are likely to remain so for the foreseeable future. At December 31, 2006, approximately 70% of the Bank’s loan portfolio consisted of real estate related loans, all of which were related to collateral located in California. A change in California economic and business conditions may adversely affect the performance of these loans. Deterioration in economic conditions could have a material adverse effect on the quality of the loan portfolio of the Bank and the demand for its products and services. In addition, during periods of economic slowdown or recession, the Bank may experience a decline in collateral values and an increase in delinquencies and defaults. A decline in collateral values and an increase in delinquencies and defaults increase the possibility and severity of losses. California real estate is also subject to certain natural disasters, such as earthquakes, floods and mudslides, which are typically not covered by the standard hazard insurance policies maintained by borrowers. Uninsured disasters may make it difficult or impossible for borrowers to repay loans made by the Company.
Reliance on Key Employees and Others
As of February 1, 2007, the Company employed 115 employees. The Company considers employee relations to be excellent. A collective bargaining group represents none of the employees of the Company or its subsidiaries. Failure of the Company to attract and retain qualified personnel could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. The Company does maintain life insurance with respect to five of its officers with regard to a salary continuation plan.
Adequacy of Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (ALLL)
The Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses was $4.9 million, or 1.18% of total loans at December 31, 2006. Material future additions to the allowance for loan losses might be necessary if material adverse changes in economic conditions occur and the performance of the loan portfolio of the Company deteriorates. In addition, future additions to the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses on other real estate owned may also be required in order to reflect changes in the markets for real estate in which the Company’s other real estate owned is located and other factors which may result in adjustments which are necessary to ensure that the Company’s foreclosed assets are carried at the lower of cost or fair value, less estimated costs to dispose of the properties. Moreover, the FDIC and the DFI, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the Company’s allowance for loan and lease losses and the carrying value of its assets. The Bank was most recently examined by the DFI in this regard during the first quarter of 2005. Increases in the provisions for loan losses and foreclosed assets could adversely affect the Bank’s financial condition and results of operations. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Asset Quality” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (ALLL).”
Certain Ownership Restrictions under California and Federal Law
Federal law prohibits a person or group of persons “acting in concert” from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company unless the FRB has been given 60 days prior written notice of such proposed acquisition and within that time period the FRB has not issued a notice disapproving the proposed acquisition or extending for up to another 30 days, the period during which such a disapproval may be issued. An acquisition may be made before the expiration of the disapproval period if the FRB issues written notice of its intent not to disapprove the action. Under a rebuttal presumption established by the FRB, the acquisition of more than 10% of a class of voting stock of a bank with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act (such as the common stock), would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute the acquisition of control. In addition, any “company” would be required to obtain the approval of the FRB under the BHCA, before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is, or is deemed to be, a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding shares of the Company’s common stock, or such lesser number of shares as constitute control. See “Supervision and Regulation-Regulation and Supervision of Bank Holding Companies.”
Under the California Financial Code, no person shall, directly or indirectly, acquire control of a California licensed bank or a bank holding company unless the Commissioner has approved such acquisition of control. A person would be deemed to have acquired control of the Company and the Bank under this state law if such person, directly or indirectly, has the power (i) to vote 25% or more of the voting power of the Company or (ii) to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the Company. For purposes of this law, a person who directly or indirectly owns or controls 10% or more of the common stock would be presumed to direct or cause the direction of the management and policies of the Company and thereby control the Company.
Shares Eligible for Future Sale
As of February 28, 2007, the Company had 8,849,542 shares of Common Stock outstanding, of which 6,030,767 shares are eligible for sale in the public market without restriction and 2,818,775 shares are eligible for sale in the public market pursuant to Rule 144 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”). Future sales of substantial amounts of the Company’s common stock, or the perception that such sales could occur, could have a material adverse effect on the market price of the common stock. In addition, options to acquire 377,745 shares of the issued and outstanding shares of common stock at exercise prices ranging from $2.75 to $11.59 have been issued to directors and certain employees of the Company under the Company’s 1998 Stock Option Plan. No prediction can be made as to the effect, if any, that future sales of shares, or the availability of shares for future sale, will have on the market price of the Company’s common stock.
Technology and Computer Systems
Advances and changes in technology can significantly affect the business and operations of the Company. The Company faces many challenges including the increased demand for providing computer access to bank accounts and the systems to perform banking transactions electronically. The Company’s ability to compete depends on its ability to continue to adapt its technology on a timely and cost-effective basis to meet these requirements. In addition, the Company’s business and operations are susceptible to negative impacts from computer system failures, communication and energy disruption and unethical individuals with the technological ability to cause disruptions or failures of the Company’s data processing systems.
Environmental Risks
The Company, in its ordinary course of business, acquires real property securing loans that are in default, and there is a risk that hazardous substance or waste, contaminants or pollutants could exist on such properties. The Company may be required to remove or remediate such substances from the affected properties at its expense, and the cost of such removal or remediation may substantially exceed the value of the affected properties or the loans secured by such properties. Furthermore, the Company may not have adequate remedies against the prior owners or other responsible parties to recover its costs. Finally, the Company may find it difficult or impossible to sell the affected properties either before or following any such removal. In addition, the Company may be considered liable for environmental liabilities concerning its borrowers’ properties, if, among other things, it participates in the management of its borrowers’ operations. The occurrence of such an event could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
ITEM 1(b). UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None to report.
