CZBS Citizens Bancshares Corp (PK)

ITEM 1.          DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS

The Company

General

Citizens Bancshares Corporation (the “Company”) was incorporated as a Georgia business corporation in 1972 and became a bank holding company by acquiring all of the common stock of Citizens Trust Bank (the “Bank”). The Company was organized to facilitate the Bank’s ability to serve its customers’ requirements for financial services. The holding company structure provides flexibility for expansion of the Company’s banking business through the possible acquisition of other financial service institutions and the provision of additional banking-related services that the traditional commercial bank may not provide under present laws. For example, banking regulations require that the Bank maintain a minimum ratio of capital to assets. In the event that the Bank’s growth is such that this minimum ratio is not maintained, the Company may borrow funds, subject to capital adequacy guidelines of the Federal Reserve, and contribute them to the capital of the Bank and otherwise raise capital in a manner that is unavailable to the Bank under existing banking regulations.

Over the years, the Company has completed several acquisitions. On January 30, 1998, the Company merged with First Southern Bancshares, Inc., whose banking subsidiary, First Southern Bank simultaneously merged into the Bank. On March 10, 2000, the Company acquired certain assets and all of the deposits of Mutual Federal Savings Bank, a failing bank, from the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. On February 28, 2003, the Company acquired CFS Bancshares, Inc., a savings and loan holding company located in Birmingham, Alabama, whose banking subsidiary, Citizens Federal Savings Bank, simultaneously merged into the Bank. This acquisition has resulted in a significant expansion of the Company’s market area. On March 27, 2009, the Bank acquired the Lithonia, Georgia branch of The Peoples Bank.

The Company may make additional acquisitions in the future in the event that such acquisitions are deemed to be in the best interests of the Company and its shareholders. Such acquisitions, if any, will be subject to certain regulatory approvals and requirements. See “Business – Bank Holding Company Regulations.”

The Bank

General

The Bank, a state bank headquartered in Atlanta, Georgia, was organized in 1921 and is a member of the Federal Reserve System.

The Bank’s home office is located at 75 Piedmont Avenue, N.E., Atlanta, Georgia 30303. In addition to its home office, the Bank operated ten branch offices located in Atlanta, East Point, Lithonia, Decatur, Stone Mountain and Columbus, Georgia, and Birmingham and Eutaw, Alabama at December 31, 2013. The Bank conducts a general commercial banking business that serves Fulton, DeKalb and Muscogee Counties, Georgia, as well as Jefferson and Greene Counties, Alabama, acts as an issuing agent for U.S. savings bonds, travelers checks and cashiers checks, and offers collection teller services. The Bank has no subsidiaries.

The Bank does not engage in any line of business other than normal commercial banking activities. The Bank does not engage in any operations in foreign countries nor is a material portion of the Bank’s revenues derived from customers in foreign countries. The business of the Bank is not considered to be seasonal nor is the Bank’s business dependent on any industry.

The Bank’s Primary Service Area

The Bank’s primary service area consists of Fulton and DeKalb Counties, along with certain portions of Rockdale County; through its branch in Columbus, the Bank also serves Muscogee County, Georgia, and through its branches in Birmingham and Eutaw, it serves Jefferson and Greene Counties, Alabama. The primary focus of the Bank is the small business and commercial/service firms in the area plus individuals and households who reside in or commute to the area. The majority of the Bank’s customers are drawn from the described area.

Competition

The Bank must compete for both deposit and loan customers with other financial institutions. Currently, there are numerous branches of national, regional, and local banks, as well as other types of entities offering financial services, located in the Bank’s market area.

Deposits

The Bank offers a wide range of commercial and consumer deposit accounts, including non-interest bearing checking accounts, money market checking accounts (consumer and commercial), negotiable order of withdrawal (“NOW”) accounts, individual retirement accounts, time certificates of deposit, sweep accounts, and regular savings accounts. The sources of deposits typically are residents, local governments and businesses and their employees within the Bank’s market area, obtained through personal solicitation by the Bank’s officers and directors, direct mail solicitation and advertisements published in the local media. The Bank pays competitive interest rates on time and savings deposits and has a service charge fee schedule competitive with other financial institutions in the Bank’s market area, covering such matters as maintenance fees on checking accounts, per item processing fees on checking accounts, returned check charges and the like.

Loan Portfolio

The Bank engages in a full complement of lending activities, including consumer/installment loans, mortgage loans, home equity lines of credit, construction loans, and commercial loans, with particular emphasis on small business loans. The Bank believes that the origination of short-term fixed rate loans and loans tied to floating interest rates is the most desirable method of conducting its lending activities.

Consumer Loans

The Bank’s consumer loans consist primarily of installment loans to individuals for personal, family, and household purposes, including loans for automobiles, home improvements, and investments. This category of loans also includes loans secured by second mortgages on the residences of borrowers.

Commercial Lending

Commercial lending is directed principally toward businesses whose demands for funds fall within the Bank’s legal lending limits and which are existing deposit customers of the Bank. This category of loans includes loans made to individual, partnership, or corporate borrowers and obtained for a variety of business purposes.

Investments

As of December 31, 2013, investment securities comprised approximately 37% of the Bank’s assets, with loans (net of loan loss reserves) comprising 47% of assets. The Bank invests primarily in obligations of the United States, obligations guaranteed as to principal and interest by the United States, government-sponsored enterprises securities, general obligation municipals and other taxable securities.

Asset/Liability Management

It is the objective of the Bank to manage assets and liabilities to provide a satisfactory, consistent level of profitability within the framework of established cash, loan, investment, borrowing, and capital policies. Certain officers of the Bank are charged with the responsibility for developing and monitoring policies and procedures that are designed to ensure acceptable composition of the asset/liability mix. It is the overall philosophy of management to support asset growth primarily through the growth of core deposits, which include deposits of all categories made by individuals, partnerships, and corporations. Management of the Bank seeks to invest the largest portion of the Bank’s assets in consumer/installment, commercial and construction loans.

The Bank’s asset/liability mix is monitored on a daily basis and a quarterly report reflecting the interest-sensitive assets and interest-sensitive liabilities is prepared and presented to the Bank’s Board of Directors asset/liability committee during their meeting which takes place every two months. The objective of this policy is to control interest-sensitive assets and liabilities so as to minimize the impact of substantial movements in interest rates on the Bank’s earnings.

Correspondent Banking

Correspondent banking involves the provision of services by one bank to another bank that cannot provide that service for itself from an economic or practical standpoint. The Bank purchases correspondent services offered by larger banks, including check collections, security safekeeping, investment services, wire transfer services, coin and currency supplies, overline and liquidity loan participation, and sales of loans to or participation with correspondent banks.

Employees

As of December 31, 2013, the Bank had 102 full-time equivalent employees (the Company has no employees who are not also employees of the Bank). The Bank is not a party to any collective bargaining agreement and, in the opinion of management, the Bank enjoys excellent relations with its employees.

Website Address

Our corporate website address is www.ctbconnect.com. From this website, select the “Investor Information” tab followed by selecting “Annual Reports/Financial Statements”. Our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and any amendments to these reports are available and accessible soon after we file them with the SEC.

Supervision and Regulation

Both the Company and the Bank are subject to extensive state and federal banking regulations that impose restrictions on and provide for general regulatory oversight of their operations. These laws are generally intended to protect depositors and not shareholders. Legislation and regulations authorized by legislation influence, among other things:

The following is a summary description of the relevant laws, rules, and regulations governing banks and holding companies. The descriptions of, and references to, the statutes and regulations below are brief summaries and do not purport to be complete. The descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the specific statutes and regulations discussed.

The regulatory and supervisory structure establishes a comprehensive framework of activities in which an institution can engage and is intended primarily for the protection of depositors, the deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, rather than for the protection of shareholders or creditors. The regulatory structure also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including policies concerning the establishment of deposit insurance assessment fees, classification of assets and establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes.

Various legislation is from time to time introduced in Congress and Georgia’s legislature, including proposals to overhaul the bank regulatory system, expand the powers of depository institutions, and limit the investments that depository institutions may make with insured funds. Such legislation may change applicable statutes and the operating environment in substantial and unpredictable ways. We cannot determine the ultimate effect that future legislation or implementing regulations would have upon our financial condition or upon our results of operations. As is further described below, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), has significantly changed the bank regulatory structure and may affect the lending, investment and general operating activities of depository institutions and their holding companies.

The Company

Since the Company owns all of the capital stock of the Bank, it is a bank holding company under the federal Bank Holding Company Act of 1956. As a result, the Company is primarily subject to the supervision, examination, and reporting requirements of the Bank Holding Company Act and the regulations of the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”). As a bank holding company located in Georgia, the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance (the “DBF”) also regulates and monitors all significant aspects of our operations.

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

Additionally, the Bank Holding Company Act provides that the Federal Reserve may not approve any of these transactions if it would result in or tend to create a monopoly or, substantially lessen competition or otherwise function as a restraint of trade, unless the anticompetitive effects of the proposed transaction are clearly outweighed by the public interest in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be served. The Federal Reserve is also required to consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding companies and banks concerned and the convenience and needs of the community to be served. The Federal Reserve’s consideration of financial resources generally focuses on capital adequacy, which is discussed below.

Under the Bank Holding Company Act, if adequately capitalized and adequately managed, the Company or any other bank holding company located in Georgia may purchase a bank located outside of Georgia. Conversely, an adequately capitalized and adequately managed bank holding company located outside of Georgia may purchase a bank located inside Georgia. In each case, however, restrictions may be placed on the acquisition of a bank that has only been in existence for a limited amount of time or will result in specified concentrations of deposits. For example, Georgia law prohibits a bank holding company from acquiring control of a financial institution until the target financial institution has been incorporated for three years. Because the Bank has been incorporated for more than three years, this limitation does not apply to the Bank or the Company.

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

Our common stock is registered under Section 12 of the Securities Act of 1934, as amended. The regulations provide a procedure for challenge of the rebuttable control presumption.

Permitted Activities . The Bank Holding Company Act has generally prohibited a bank holding company from engaging in activities other than banking or managing or controlling banks or other permissible subsidiaries and from acquiring or retaining direct or indirect control of any company engaged in any activities other than those determined by the Federal Reserve to be closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act have expanded the permissible activities of a bank holding company that qualifies as a financial holding company. Under the regulations implementing the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a financial holding company may engage in additional activities that are financial in nature or incidental or complementary to financial activity. Those activities include, among other activities, certain insurance and securities activities.

To qualify to become a financial holding company, the Bank and any other depository institution subsidiary of the Company must be well capitalized and well managed and must have a Community Reinvestment Act rating of at least “satisfactory.” Additionally, the Company must file an election with the Federal Reserve to become a financial holding company and must provide the Federal Reserve with 30 days’ written notice prior to engaging in a permitted financial activity. While the Company meets the qualification standards applicable to financial holding companies, we have not elected to become a financial holding company at this time.

Support of Subsidiary Institutions . Under Federal Reserve policy, the Company is expected to act as a source of financial strength for the Bank and to commit resources to support the Bank. In addition, pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), the federal banking regulators must require a bank holding company to serve as a source of financial strength for any depository institution subsidiary. This support may be required at times when, without this Federal Reserve policy, the Company might not be inclined to provide it. In addition, any capital loans made by the Company to the Bank will be repaid only after its deposits and various other obligations are repaid in full. In the unlikely event of the Company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by it to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of the Bank will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.

The Federal Reserve Board may require a holding company to terminate any activity or relinquish control of a non-bank subsidiary (other than a non-bank subsidiary of a bank) upon the Federal Reserve Board’s determination that such activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial soundness or stability of any subsidiary depository institution of the holding company. Further, federal bank regulatory authorities have additional discretion to require a holding company to divest itself of any bank or non-bank subsidiary if the agency determines that divestiture may aid the depository institution’s financial condition.

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, a holding company’s bank subsidiary can be required to indemnify, or cross-guarantee, the FDIC against losses it incurs with respect to any other bank controlled by the holding company, which in effect will make the holding company’s equity investments in healthy bank subsidiaries available to the FDIC to assist any failing or failed bank subsidiary that the holding company may have.

Non-Bank Subsidiary Examination and Enforcement . As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, all non-bank subsidiaries not currently regulated by a state or federal agency will now be subject to examination by the Federal Reserve Board in the same manner and with the same frequency as if its activities were conducted by the lead bank subsidiary. These examinations will consider the activities engaged in by the non-bank subsidiary pose a material threat to the safety and soundness of its insured depository institution affiliates, are subject to appropriate monitoring and control, and comply with applicable laws. Pursuant to this authority, the Federal Reserve Board may also take enforcement action against non-bank subsidiaries.

The Bank

Since the Bank is a commercial bank chartered under the laws of the State of Georgia and is a Federal Reserve member bank, it is primarily subject to the supervision, examination and reporting requirements of the DBF and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta. The DBF and the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta regularly examine the Bank’s operations and have the authority to approve or disapprove mergers, the establishment of branches and similar corporate actions. Both regulatory agencies have the power to prevent the continuance or development of unsafe or unsound banking practices or other violations of law. Additionally, the Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC to the maximum extent provided by law. The Bank is also subject to numerous state and federal statutes and regulations that affect its business, activities, and operations.

Branching . Under current Georgia law, the Bank may open branch offices throughout Georgia with the prior approval of the DBF. In addition, with prior regulatory approval, the Bank may acquire branches of existing banks located in Georgia. Prior to enactment of the Dodd-Frank Act, the Bank and any other national or state-chartered bank were generally permitted to branch across state lines by merging with banks in other states if allowed by the applicable states’ laws. Georgia law, with limited exceptions, permitted branching across state lines through interstate mergers. However, interstate branching is now permitted for all national- and state-chartered banks as a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, provided that a state bank chartered by the state in which the branch is to be located would also be permitted to establish a branch.

Prompt Corrective Action . The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 establishes a system of prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized financial institutions. Under this system, the federal banking regulators have established five capital categories in which all institutions are placed: Well Capitalized, Adequately Capitalized, Undercapitalized, Significantly Undercapitalized and Critically Undercapitalized.

As a bank’s capital condition deteriorates, federal banking regulators are required to take various mandatory supervisory actions and are authorized to take other discretionary actions with respect to institutions in the three undercapitalized categories. The severity of the action depends upon the capital category in which the institution is placed.

As of December 31, 2013, the Bank was considered well-capitalized.

A “well-capitalized” bank is one that exceeds all of its required capital requirements, which include maintaining a total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 6% and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 5%. Generally, a classification as well capitalized will place a bank outside of the regulatory zone for purposes of prompt corrective action. However, a well-capitalized bank may be reclassified as “adequately capitalized” based on criteria other than capital, if the federal regulator determines that a bank is in an unsafe or unsound condition, or is engaged in unsafe or unsound practices or has not adequately corrected a prior deficiency.

FDIC Insurance Assessments. The Bank’s deposits are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) of the FDIC up to the maximum amount permitted by law, which was permanently increased to $250,000 by the Dodd-Frank Act. The FDIC uses the DIF to protect against the loss of insured deposits if an FDIC-insured bank or savings association fails. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC must take steps, as necessary, for the DIF reserve ratio to reach 1.35% of estimated insured deposits by September 30, 2020. The Bank is thus subject to FDIC deposit premium assessments.

The FDIC used a risk-based assessment system that assigns insured depository institutions to one of four risk categories based on three primary sources of information: supervisory risk ratings for all institutions, financial ratios for most institutions, including the Bank, and long-term debt issuer ratings for large institutions that have such ratings. For institutions assigned to the lowest risk category, the annual assessment rate ranges between 7 and 16 cents per $100 of domestic deposits. For institutions assigned to higher risk categories, assessment rates range from 17 to 77.5 cents per $100 of domestic deposits. These ranges reflect a possible downward adjustment for unsecured debt outstanding and possible upward adjustments for secured liabilities and, in the case of institutions outside the lowest risk category, brokered deposits.

On September 29, 2009, the FDIC announced a uniform 3 basis points increase effective January 1, 2011, and on November 12, 2009, adopted a rule requiring nearly all FDIC-insured depository institutions, including the Bank, to prepay their DIF assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for the following three years on December 30, 2009. At that time, the FDIC indicated that the prepayment of DIF assessments was in lieu of additional special assessments; however, there can be no guarantee that continued pressures on the DIF will not result in additional special assessments being collected by the FDIC in the future.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC issued regulations that redefined the “assessment base” used for calculating deposit insurance assessments. Rather than the prior system, whereby the assessment base was calculated by using an insured depository institution’s domestic deposits less a few allowable exclusions, the new assessment base is calculated using the average consolidated total assets of an insured depository institution less the average tangible equity of such institution. Tangible equity is defined as Tier 1 capital. The FDIC continues to utilize a risk-based assessment system in which institutions will be subject to assessment rates ranging from 2.5 to 45 basis points, subject to adjustments for unsecured debt and, in the case of institutions outside the lowest risk category, brokered deposits.

The FDIC Board retains the flexibility to, without further notice-and-comment rulemaking, adopt rates that are higher or lower than the stated base assessment rates, provided that the FDIC cannot (i) increase or decrease the total rates from one quarter to the next by more than three basis points, or (ii) deviate by more than three basis points from the stated assessment rates. Although the Dodd-Frank Act requires that the FDIC eliminate its requirement to pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds a certain threshold, the FDIC has proposed a decreasing schedule of assessment rates that would take effect when the DIF reserve ratio first meets or exceeds 1.15%. As proposed, if the DIF reserve ratio meets or exceeds 1.15%, base assessment rates would range from 1.5 to 40 basis points; if the DIF reserve ratio meets or exceeds 2%, base assessment rates would range from 1 to 38 basis points; and if the DIF reserve ratio meets or exceeds 2.5%, base assessment rates would range from 0.5 to 35 basis points. All base assessment rates would continue to be subject to adjustments for unsecured debt and brokered deposits.

The FDIC also collects a deposit-based assessment from insured financial institutions on behalf of The Financing Corporation (“FICO”). The funds from these assessments are used to service debt issued by FICO in its capacity as a financial vehicle for the Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation. The FICO assessment rate is set quarterly and in 2013 was 0.64 cents per $100 of assessable deposits for all four quarters. The assessment rate has been dropped to 0.62 cents for the first quarter of 2014. These assessments will continue until the debt matures between 2017 and 2019.

The FDIC may terminate its insurance of deposits if it finds that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order, or condition imposed by the FDIC.

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses. The Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses (the “ALLL”) represents one of the most significant estimates in the Bank’s financial statements and regulatory reports. Because of its significance, the Bank has developed a system by which it develops, maintains, and documents a comprehensive, systematic, and consistently applied process for determining the amounts of the ALLL and the provision for loan and lease losses. The Interagency Policy Statement on the Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses, issued on December 13, 2006, encourages all banks to ensure controls are in place to consistently determine the ALLL in accordance with GAAP, the bank’s stated policies and procedures, management’s best judgment and relevant supervisory guidance. Consistent with supervisory guidance, the Bank maintains a prudent and conservative, but not excessive, ALLL, that is at a level that is appropriate to cover estimated credit losses on individually evaluated loans determined to be impaired as well as estimated credit losses inherent in the remainder of the loan and lease portfolio. The Bank’s estimate of credit losses reflects consideration of all significant factors that affect the collectibility of the portfolio as of the evaluation date. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis – Critical Accounting Policies.”

Commercial Real Estate Lending . The Bank’s lending operations may be subject to enhanced scrutiny by federal banking regulators based on its concentration of commercial real estate loans. On December 6, 2006, the federal banking regulators issued final guidance to remind financial institutions of the risk posed by commercial real estate (“CRE”) lending concentrations. CRE loans generally include land development, construction loans, and loans secured by multifamily property, and nonfarm, nonresidential real property where the primary source of repayment is derived from rental income associated with the property.

The guidance prescribes the following guidelines for its examiners to help identify institutions that are potentially exposed to significant CRE risk and may warrant greater supervisory scrutiny:

Enforcement Powers . The Financial Institution Reform Recovery and Enforcement Act (“FIRREA”) expanded and increased civil and criminal penalties available for use by the federal regulatory agencies against depository institutions and certain “institution-affiliated parties.” Institution-affiliated parties primarily include management, employees, and agents of a financial institution, as well as independent contractors and consultants such as attorneys and accountants and others who participate in the conduct of the financial institution’s affairs. These practices can include the failure of an institution to timely file required reports or the filing of false or misleading information or the submission of inaccurate reports. Civil penalties may be as high as $1,100,000 per day for such violations. Criminal penalties for some financial institution crimes have been increased to 20 years. In addition, regulators are provided with greater flexibility to commence enforcement actions against institutions and institution-affiliated parties.

Possible enforcement actions include the termination of deposit insurance. Furthermore, banking agencies’ power to issue regulatory orders were expanded. Such orders may, among other things, require affirmative action to correct any harm resulting from a violation or practice, including restitution, reimbursement, indemnifications or guarantees against loss. A financial institution may also be ordered to restrict its growth, dispose of certain assets, rescind agreements or contracts, or take other actions as determined by the ordering agency to be appropriate. The Dodd-Frank Act increases regulatory oversight, supervision and examination of banks, bank holding companies and their respective subsidiaries by the appropriate regulatory agency.

Community Reinvestment Act . The Community Reinvestment Act requires that, in connection with examinations of financial institutions within their respective jurisdictions, the Federal Reserve or the FDIC shall evaluate the record of each financial institution in meeting the credit needs of its local community, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. These facts are also considered in evaluating mergers, acquisitions, and applications to open a branch or facility. Failure to adequately meet these criteria could impose additional requirements and limitations on the Bank. Additionally, we must publicly disclose the terms of various Community Reinvestment Act-related agreements.

Consumer Protection

The Bank is also subject to consumer laws and regulations intended to protect consumers in transactions with depository institutions, as well as other laws or regulations affecting customers of financial institutions generally. These laws and regulations include but are not limited to:

Capital Adequacy

The Company and the Bank are required to comply with the capital adequacy standards established by the Federal Reserve for member banks and bank holding companies. The Federal Reserve has established a risk-based and a leverage measure of capital adequacy for bank holding companies. Since the Company’s consolidated assets are less than $500 million, under the Federal Reserve’s capital guidelines, our capital adequacy is measured on a bank-only basis as opposed to a consolidated basis. The Bank is also subject to risk-based and leverage capital requirements adopted by the FDIC, which are substantially similar to those adopted by the Federal Reserve for bank holding companies.

The risk-based capital standards are designed to make regulatory capital requirements more sensitive to differences in risk profiles among banks and bank holding companies, to account for off-balance-sheet exposure, and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid assets. Assets and off-balance-sheet items, such as letters of credit and unfunded loan commitments, are assigned to broad risk categories, each with appropriate risk weights. The resulting capital ratios represent capital as a percentage of total risk-weighted assets and off-balance-sheet items.

The minimum guideline for the ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets, and classification as adequately capitalized, is 8%. A bank that fails to meet the required minimum guidelines is classified as undercapitalized and is subject to operating and managerial restrictions. A bank that maintains a ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of 10% or more is classified as well capitalized.

Total capital consists of two components, Tier 1 Capital and Tier 2 Capital. Tier 1 Capital generally consists of common shareholders’ equity, noncontrolling interests in the equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, qualifying noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, and a limited amount of qualifying trust preferred securities and qualifying cumulative perpetual preferred stock, less goodwill and other specified intangible assets. Tier 1 Capital must equal at least 4% of risk-weighted assets. Tier 2 Capital generally includes, among other things, perpetual preferred stock, qualifying mandatory convertible debt securities, qualifying subordinated debt, trust preferred securities not meeting the Tier 1 definition, and a limited amount of loan loss reserves. The total amount of Tier 2 Capital is limited to 100% of Tier 1 Capital. At December 31, 2013, the Company’s ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets was 19% and our ratio of Tier 1 Capital to risk-weighted assets was 18%.

In addition, the Federal Reserve has established minimum leverage ratio guidelines for bank holding companies. These guidelines provide for a minimum ratio of Tier 1 Capital to average assets, less goodwill and other specified intangible assets, of 3% for bank holding companies that meet specified criteria, including having the highest regulatory rating and implementing the Federal Reserve’s risk-based capital measure for market risk. All other bank holding companies generally are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 4%. At December 31, 2013, the Company’s leverage ratio was 11%. The guidelines also provide that bank holding companies experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels without reliance on intangible assets. The Federal Reserve considers the leverage ratio and other indicators of capital strength in evaluating proposals for expansion or new activities.

Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act commonly referred to as the “Collins Amendment” established new minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements on bank holding companies and eliminated the inclusion of “hybrid capital” instruments in Tier 1 capital by certain institutions.

The Dodd-Frank Act establishes certain regulatory capital deductions with respect to hybrid capital instruments, such as trust preferred securities, that will effectively disallow the inclusion of such instruments in Tier 1 capital if such capital instrument is issued on or after May 19, 2010. However, preferred shares issued to the U.S. Department of the Treasury (the “Treasury”) pursuant to the TARP Capital Purchase Program (“TARP CPP”) or TARP Community Development Capital Initiative (“TARP CDCI”) are exempt from the Collins Amendment and are permanently includable in Tier 1 capital.

Failure to meet capital guidelines could subject a bank or bank holding company to a variety of enforcement remedies, including issuance of a capital directive, the termination of deposit insurance by the FDIC, a prohibition on accepting brokered deposits, and certain other restrictions on its business. As described above, significant additional restrictions can be imposed on FDIC-insured depository institutions that fail to meet applicable capital requirements. See “—Prompt Corrective Action” above for a summary of the restriction to which we would become subject if our capital condition were to significantly deteriorate.

The Federal Reserve Board, and the FDIC have authority to compel or restrict certain actions if the Bank’s capital should fall below adequate capital standards as a result of operating losses, or if its regulators otherwise determine that it has insufficient capital. Among other matters, the corrective actions may include, removing officers and directors; and assessing civil monetary penalties; and taking possession of and closing and liquidating the Bank.

Generally, the regulatory capital framework under which the Company and the Bank operate is in a period of change with likely legislation or regulation that will continue to revise the current standards and very likely increase capital requirements for the entire banking industry. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, bank regulators are required to establish new minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements for certain bank holding companies and systematically important non-bank financial companies. The new minimum thresholds will not be lower than existing regulatory capital and leverage standards applicable to insured depository institutions and may, in fact, be higher once established.

Basel III

On July 2, 2013, the Federal Reserve approved a final rule to establish a new comprehensive regulatory capital framework for all US banking organizations. On July 9, 2013, the final rule was approved (as an interim final rule) by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The Regulatory Capital Framework (Basel III) implements several changes to the US regulatory capital framework required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The new US capital framework imposes higher minimum capital requirements, additional capital buffers above those minimum requirements, a more restrictive definition of capital, and higher risk weights for various enumerated classifications of assets, the combined impact of which effectively results in substantially more demanding capital standards for US banking organizations.

The Basel III final rule establishes a new common equity Tier 1 capital (“CET1”) requirement, an increase in the Tier 1 capital requirement from 4.0% to 6.0% and maintains the current 8.0% total capital requirement. The new CET1 and minimum Tier 1 capital requirements are effective January 1, 2015. In addition to these minimum risk-based capital ratios, the Basel final rule requires that all banking organizations maintain a “capital conservation buffer” consisting of common equity Tier 1 capital (“CET1”) in an amount equal to 2.5% of risk-weighted assets in order to avoid restrictions on their ability to make capital distributions and to pay certain discretionary bonus payments to executive officers. In order to avoid those restrictions, the capital conservation buffer effectively increases the minimum CET1 capital, Tier 1 capital, and total capital ratios for US banking organizations to 7.0%, 8.5%, and 10.5%, respectively. Banking organizations with capital levels that fall within the buffer will be required to limit dividends, share repurchases or redemptions (unless replaced within the same calendar quarter by capital instruments of equal or higher quality), and discretionary bonus payments. The capital conservation buffer is phased in over a 5-year period beginning January 1, 2016.

As required by Dodd-Frank, the Basel III final rule requires that capital instruments such as trust preferred securities and cumulative preferred shares be phased-out of Tier 1 capital by January 1, 2016, for banking organizations that had $15 billion or more in total consolidated assets as of December 31, 2009 and permanently grandfathers as Tier 1 capital such instruments issued by these smaller entities prior to May 19, 2010 (provided they do not exceed 25 percent of Tier 1 capital).

The Basel III final rule provides banking organizations under $250 billion in total consolidated assets or under $10 billion in foreign exposures with a one-time “opt-out” right to continue excluding Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income from CET1 capital. The election to opt out must be made on the banking organization’s first Call Report filed after January 1, 2015.

The Basel III final rule requires that goodwill and other intangible assets (other than mortgage servicing assets), net of associated deferred tax liabilities (“DTLs”), be deducted from CET1 capital. Additionally, deferred tax assets (“DTAs”) that arise from net operating loss and tax credit carryforwards, net of associated DTLs and valuation allowances, are fully deducted from CET1 capital. However, DTAs arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks, along with mortgage servicing assets and “significant” (defined as greater than 10% of the issued and outstanding common stock of the unconsolidated financial institution) investments in the common stock of unconsolidated “financial institutions” are partially includible in CET1 capital, subject to deductions defined in the final rule.

Based on a preliminary assessment of the impact of Basel III, management of the Company anticipates that the Company and Bank will be in compliance with the Basel III guidelines within the implementation periods.

Payment of Dividends

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. The principal source of the Company’s cash flow, including cash flow to pay dividends to its shareholders, is dividends that the Bank pays to the Company, its sole shareholder. Statutory and regulatory limitations apply to the Bank’s payment of dividends to the Company as well as to the Company’s payment of dividends to its shareholders.

If, in the opinion of the federal banking regulator, the Bank were engaged in or about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice, the federal banking regulator could require, after notice and a hearing, that it cease and desist from its practice. The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete a depository institution’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice. Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991, a depository institution may not pay any dividend if payment would cause it to become undercapitalized or if it is already undercapitalized. Moreover, the federal agencies have issued policy statements that provide that bank holding companies and insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings.

The Georgia Department of Banking and Finance also regulates the Bank’s dividend payments and must approve dividend payments that would exceed 50% of the Bank’s net income for the prior year. Our payment of dividends may also be affected or limited by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines.

When the Company received a capital investment from the United States Department of the Treasury in exchange for Preferred Stock under the Troubled Assets Relief Program (“TARP”) Capital Purchase Program on March 6, 2009, which investment has since been converted to an investment under the TARP CDCI, the Company became subject to additional limitations on the payment of dividends. These limitations require, among other things, that for as long as the Preferred Stock is outstanding, no dividends may be declared or paid on the Company’s common stock until all accrued and unpaid dividends on the Preferred Stock are fully paid. In addition, the U.S. Treasury’s consent is required for any increase in dividends on common stock while the Preferred Stock is still outstanding.

Furthermore, the Federal Reserve Board clarified its guidance on dividend policies for bank holding companies through the publication of a Supervisory Letter, dated February 24, 2009. As part of the letter, the Federal Reserve Board encouraged bank holding companies, particularly those that had participated in the CPP, to consult with the Federal Reserve Board prior to dividend declarations and redemption and repurchase decisions even when not explicitly required to do so by federal regulations. The Federal Reserve Board has indicated that TARP recipients, such as the Company, should consider and communicate in advance to regulatory staff how proposed dividends, capital repurchases, and capital redemptions are consistent with its obligation to eventually redeem the securities held by the Treasury. This guidance is largely consistent with prior regulatory statements encouraging bank holding companies to pay dividends out of net income and to avoid dividends that could adversely affect the capital needs or minimum regulatory capital ratios of the bank holding company and its subsidiary bank.

Restrictions on Transactions with Affiliates

The Company and the Bank are subject to the provisions of Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act. Section 23A places limits on the amount of:

The total amount of the above transactions is limited in amount, as to any one affiliate, to 10% of a bank’s capital and surplus and, as to all affiliates combined, to 20% of a bank’s capital and surplus. In addition to the limitation on the amount of these transactions, each of the above transactions must also meet specified collateral requirements. The Bank must also comply with other provisions designed to avoid the taking of low-quality assets.

The Company and the Bank are also subject to the provisions of Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act which, among other things, prohibit an institution from engaging in the above transactions with affiliates unless the transactions are on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the institution or its subsidiaries, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with nonaffiliated companies.

The Dodd-Frank Act enhances the requirements for certain transactions with affiliates under Section 23A and 23B, including an expansion of the definition of “covered transactions” and increasing the amount of time for which collateral requirements regarding covered transactions must be maintained.

The Bank is also subject to restrictions on extensions of credit to its executive officers, directors, principal shareholders and their related interests. These extensions of credit (1) must be made on substantially the same terms, including interest rates and collateral, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with third parties, and (2) must not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features.

The Dodd-Frank Act also prohibits an insured depository institution from engaging in asset purchases or sales transactions with its officers, directors or principal shareholders unless on market terms and, if the transaction represents greater than 10% of the capital and surplus of the bank, has been approved by a majority of the disinterested directors.

Limitations on Senior Executive Compensation

In June of 2010, federal banking regulators issued guidance designed to help ensure that incentive compensation policies at banking organizations do not encourage excessive risk-taking or undermined the safety and soundness of the organization. In connection with this guidance, the regulatory agencies announced that they will review incentive compensation arrangements as part of the regular, risk-focused supervisory process. Regulatory authorities may also take enforcement action against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangement or related risk management, control, or governance processes pose a risk to the safety and soundness of the organization and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies. To ensure that incentive compensation arrangements do not undermine safety and soundness at insured depository institutions, the incentive compensation guidance sets forth the following key principles:

Because the Company received a capital investment from the United States Department of the Treasury under the TARP Capital Purchase Program and now has a capital investment in the TARP Community Development Capital Initiative, the Company is subject to executive compensation limitations. For example, the Company must meet the following standards:

Financial Regulatory Reform

On July 21, 2010, the President signed into law the Dodd-Frank Act, which contains a comprehensive set of provisions designed to govern the practices and oversight of financial institutions and other participants in the financial markets. The Dodd-Frank Act made extensive changes in the regulation of financial institutions and their holding companies. It requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations, and to prepare numerous studies and reports for Congress. These studies could potentially result in additional legislative or regulatory action.

Uncertainty remains as to the ultimate impact of the Dodd-Frank Act, which could have a material adverse impact on the financial services industry as a whole or on ours and the Bank’s business, results of operations, and financial condition. Many aspects of the Dodd-Frank Act are subject to rulemaking and will take effect over several years, making it difficult to anticipate the overall financial impact on the Company, its customers or the financial industry more generally. However, it is likely that the Dodd-Frank Act will increase the regulatory burden, compliance costs and interest expense for the Company and Bank. Some of the rules that have been adopted to comply with the Dodd-Frank Act’s mandates are discussed below.

Consumer Financial Protection Bureau: The Dodd-Frank Act centralized responsibility for consumer financial protection including implementing, examining and enforcing compliance with federal consumer financial laws with Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the “CFPB”). Depository institutions with less than $10 billion in assets, such as our Bank, will be subject to rules promulgated by the CFPB but will continue to be examined and supervised by federal banking regulators for consumer compliance purposes.

UDAP and UDAAP: Recently, banking regulatory agencies have increasingly used a general consumer protection statute to address “unethical” or otherwise “bad” business practices that may not necessarily fall directly under the purview of a specific banking or consumer finance law. The law of choice for enforcement against such business practices has been Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act—the primary federal law that prohibits unfair or deceptive acts or practices and unfair methods of competition in or affecting commerce (“UDAP” or “FTC Act”). “Unjustified consumer injury” is the principal focus of the FTC Act. Prior to the Dodd-Frank Act, there was little formal guidance to provide insight to the parameters for compliance with the UDAP law. However, the UDAP provisions have been expanded under the Dodd-Frank Act to apply to “unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices” (“UDAAP”), which has been delegated to the CFPB for supervision. The CFPB has published its first Supervision and Examination Manual that addresses compliance with and the examination of UDAAP.

Mortgage Reform: The CFPB has adopted final rules implementing minimum standards for the origination of residential mortgages, including standards regarding a customer’s ability to repay, restricting variable-rate lending by requiring that the ability to repay variable-rate loans be determined by using the maximum rate that will apply during the first five years of a variable-rate loan term, and making more loans subject to provisions for higher cost loans, new disclosures, and certain other revisions. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act allows borrowers to raise certain defenses to foreclosure if they receive any loan other than a “qualified mortgage” as defined by the CFPB.

Deposit Insurance and Assessments: The $250,000 limit for federal deposit insurance for noninterest-bearing demand transaction accounts at all insured depository institutions was made permanent by the Dodd-Frank Act. The Dodd-Frank Act also changed the assessment base for federal deposit insurance from the amount of insured deposits to consolidated assets less tangible capital, eliminated the ceiling on the size of the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”), and increased the floor on the size of the DIF, which generally will require an increase in the level of assessments for institutions with assets in excess of $10 billion.

Demand Deposits: The Dodd-Frank Act repealed the federal prohibitions on the payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depository institutions to pay interest on business transactions and other accounts.

Interchange Fees: The Federal Reserve has issued final rules limiting the amount of any debit card interchange fee that an issuer may receive or charge with respect to electronic debit card transactions to be reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer with respect to the transaction.

Volcker Rule: On December 10, 2013, the federal regulators adopted final regulations to implement the proprietary trading and private fund prohibitions of the Volcker Rule under the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the final regulations, which will become effective on April 1, 2014, banking entities are generally prohibited, subject to significant exceptions from: (i) short-term proprietary trading as principal in securities and other financial instruments, and (ii) sponsoring or acquiring or retaining an ownership interest in private equity and hedge funds. The Federal Reserve has granted an extension for compliance with the Volcker Rule until July 21, 2015.

Proposed Legislation and Regulatory Action

New regulations and statutes are regularly proposed that contain wide-ranging proposals for altering the structures, regulations and competitive relationships of financial institutions operating or doing business in the United States. We cannot predict whether or in what form any proposed regulation or statute will be adopted or the extent to which our business may be affected by any new regulation or statute.

Effect of Governmental Monetary Polices

Our earnings are affected by domestic economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States government and its agencies. The Federal Reserve Bank’s monetary policies have had, and are likely to continue to have, an important impact on the operating results of commercial banks through its power to implement national monetary policy in order, among other things, to curb inflation or combat a recession. The monetary policies of the Federal Reserve affect the levels of bank loans, investments and deposits through its control over the issuance of United States government securities, its regulation of the discount rate applicable to member banks and its influence over reserve requirements to which member banks are subject. We cannot predict the nature or impact of future changes in monetary and fiscal policies.