This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of certain factors, including the risks faced by us described below and elsewhere in this report.
Risks Related to Our Operations
We are growing rapidly, and we may fail to manage our growth properly.
Since our initial public offering (“IPO”) in February 2012, we have pursued targeted and opportunistic growth which has included four whole-bank acquisitions
along with seven branch acquisitions. These acquisitions represent both significant operational growth and a substantial geographic expansion of our commercial and consumer banking operations. Simultaneously with this growth of our banking operations through acquisition, we have also grown our mortgage origination operations opportunistically but quickly, opening new primary and satellite offices in Northern and Southern California starting in 2013, and further expanding our mortgage origination operations into Arizona beginning in the fourth quarter of 2014 and Central California in the second quarter of 2015, while also continuing to grow those operations in the Pacific Northwest. Beginning in 2015, we also started expanding our commercial lending activities, opening new primary offices in Salt Lake City, Utah and adding production personnel in Southern California focused on residential construction and SBA loans. At the time of our IPO, we had 20 retail branches and nine stand-alone lending centers. As of
March 31, 2017
we have grown to a total of 55 retail branches, 55 primary stand-alone lending centers, including six primary commercial lending centers, and one stand-alone insurance office.
These activities reflect substantial growth in terms of total assets, total deposits, total loans and employees. We plan to continue both strategic and opportunistic growth, which can present substantial demands on management personnel, line employees, and other aspects of our operations, especially if growth occurs rapidly. We may face difficulties in managing that growth, and we may experience a variety of adverse consequences, including:
|
|
•
|
Loss of or damage to key customer relationships;
|
|
|
•
|
Distraction of management from ordinary course operations;
|
|
|
•
|
Costs incurred in the process of vetting potential acquisition candidates which we may not recoup;
|
|
|
•
|
Loss of key employees or significant numbers of employees;
|
|
|
•
|
The potential of litigation from prior employers relating to the portability of their employees;
|
|
|
•
|
Costs associated with opening new offices and systems expansion to accommodate our growth in employees;
|
|
|
•
|
Increased costs related to hiring, training and providing initial compensation to new employees, which may not be recouped if those employees do not remain with us long enough to be profitable;
|
|
|
•
|
Challenges in complying with legal and regulatory requirements in new jurisdictions;
|
|
|
•
|
Inadequacies in our computer systems, accounting policies and procedures, and management personnel (some of which may be difficult to detect until other problems become manifest);
|
|
|
•
|
Challenges integrating different systems, practices, and customer relationships;
|
|
|
•
|
An inability to attract and retain personnel whose experience and (in certain circumstances) business relationships promote the achievement of our strategic goals; and
|
|
|
•
|
Increasing volatility in our operating results as we progress through these initiatives.
|
Because our business strategy includes growth in total assets, total deposits, total loans and employees, including through opportunistic acquisitions, if we fail to manage our growth properly, our financial condition and results of operations could be negatively affected. Further, we anticipate that our regulatory burden will increase substantially in the event that we exceed $10 billion in total assets, which may happen in the next few years if we continue our recent growth trajectory. That increased regulatory burden could substantially increase our compliance costs and our risks of regulatory noncompliance, which may exacerbate the factors described above.
Volatility in mortgage markets, changes in interest rates, operational costs and other factors beyond our control may adversely impact our ability to remain profitable.
We have sustained significant losses in the past, and we cannot guarantee that we will remain profitable or be able to maintain the level of profit we are currently experiencing. For example, in the fourth quarter of 2016, unexpected sharp increases in interest rates related to the results of the U.S. presidential election as well as asymmetrical changes in the values of mortgage servicing rights and certain derivative hedging instruments created an unforeseen and material adverse impact on our earnings
for that quarter. Many factors affect our profitability, and our ability to remain profitable is threatened by a myriad of issues, including:
|
|
•
|
Volatility in interest rates that may limit our ability to make loans, decrease our net interest income and noninterest income, increase the number of rate locks that become closed loans which may in turn increase our costs relative to our income, reduce demand for loans, diminish the value of our mortgage servicing rights, affect the value of our hedging instruments, increase the cost of deposits and otherwise negatively impact our financial situation;
|
|
|
•
|
Volatility in mortgage markets, which is driven by factors outside of our control such as interest rate changes, housing inventory and general economic conditions, may negatively impact our ability to originate loans and change the fair value of our existing loans and servicing rights;
|
|
|
•
|
Our hedging strategies to offset risks related to interest rate changes may not prove to be successful and may result in unanticipated losses for the Company;
|
|
|
•
|
Changes in regulations or interpretation of regulation through enforcement actions may negatively impact the Company or the Bank and may limit our ability to offer certain products or services, increase our costs of compliance or restrict our growth initiatives, branch expansion and acquisition activities;
|
|
|
•
|
Increased costs from growth through acquisition could exceed the income growth anticipated from these opportunities, especially in the short term as these acquisitions are integrated into our business;
|
|
|
•
|
Increased costs for controls over data confidentiality, integrity, and availability due to growth or to strengthen the security profile of our computer systems and computer networks;
|
|
|
•
|
Changes in government-sponsored enterprises and their ability to insure or to buy our loans in the secondary market may result in significant changes in our ability to recognize income on sale of our loans to third parties;
|
|
|
•
|
Competition in the mortgage market industry may drive down the interest rates we are able to offer on our mortgages, which will negatively impact our net interest income; and
|
|
|
•
|
Changes in the cost structures and fees of government-sponsored enterprises to whom we sell many of these loans may compress our margins and reduce our net income and profitability.
|
These and other factors may limit our ability to generate revenue in excess of our costs, which in turn may result in a lower rate of profitability or even substantial losses for the Company.
The integration of recent and future acquisitions could consume significant resources and may not be successful.
We have completed four whole-bank acquisitions and acquired seven stand-alone branches in the past four years, all of which has required substantial resources and costs related to the acquisition process and subsequent integration. For example, we incurred $
4.6 million
and
$10.7 million
of acquisition related expenses, net of tax, in the fiscal years ended December 31, 2016 and 2015, respectively. We regularly evaluate merger and acquisition opportunities with other financial institutions and financial services companies. There are certain risks related to the integration of operations of acquired banks and branches, which we may continue to encounter if we acquire other banks or branches as part of our ongoing strategy to grow our business and our market share.
Any future acquisition we may undertake may involve numerous risks related to the investigation and consideration of the potential acquisition and the costs of undertaking such a transaction, as well as integrating acquired businesses into HomeStreet and HomeStreet Bank, including risks that arise after the transaction is completed. These risks include:
|
|
•
|
Diversion of management's attention from normal daily operations of the business;
|
|
|
•
|
Difficulties in integrating the operations, technologies, and personnel of the acquired companies;
|
|
|
•
|
Difficulties in implementing, upgrading and maintaining our internal controls over financial reporting and our disclosure controls and procedures;
|
|
|
•
|
Increased risk of compliance errors related to regulatory requirements, including customer notices and other related disclosures;
|
|
|
•
|
Inability to maintain the key business relationships and the reputations of acquired businesses;
|
|
|
•
|
Entry into markets in which we have limited or no prior experience and in which competitors have stronger market positions;
|
|
|
•
|
Potential responsibility for the liabilities of acquired businesses;
|
|
|
•
|
Inability to maintain our internal standards, procedures and policies at the acquired companies or businesses; and
|
|
|
•
|
Potential loss of key employees of the acquired companies.
|
In addition, in certain cases our acquisition of a whole bank or a branch includes the acquisition of all or a substantial portion of the target bank or branch’s assets and liabilities, including all or a substantial portion of its loan portfolio. There may be
instances where we, under our normal operating procedures, may find after the acquisition that there may be additional losses or undisclosed liabilities with respect to the assets and liabilities of the target bank or branch, and, with respect to its loan portfolio, that the ability of a borrower to repay a loan may have become impaired, the quality of the value of the collateral securing a loan may fall below our standards, or the allowance for loan losses may not be adequate. One or more of these factors might cause us to have additional losses or liabilities, additional loan charge-offs or increases in allowances for loan losses.
Difficulties in pursuing or integrating any new acquisitions, and potential discoveries of additional losses or undisclosed liabilities with respect to the assets and liabilities of acquired companies, may increase our costs and adversely impact our financial condition and results of operations. Further, even if we successfully address these factors and are successful in closing acquisitions and integrating our systems with the acquired systems, we may nonetheless experience customer losses, or we may fail to grow the acquired businesses as we intend or to operate the acquired businesses at a level that would avoid losses or justify our investments in those companies.
In addition, we may choose to issue additional common stock for future acquisitions, or we may instead choose to pay the consideration in cash or a combination of stock and cash. Any issuances of stock relating to an acquisition may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share, book value per share or the percentage ownership of current shareholders depending on the value of the assets or entity acquired. Alternatively, the use of cash as consideration in any such acquisitions could impact our capital position and may require us to raise additional capital.
The significant concentration of real estate secured loans in our portfolio has had a negative impact on our asset quality and profitability in the past and there can be no assurance that it will not have such impact in the future.
A substantial portion of our loans are secured by real property, a characteristic we expect to continue indefinitely. Our real estate secured lending is generally sensitive to national, regional and local economic conditions, making loss levels difficult to predict. Declines in real estate sales and prices, significant increases in interest rates, and a degeneration in prevailing economic conditions may result in higher than expected loan delinquencies, foreclosures, problem loans, OREO, net charge-offs and provisions for credit and OREO losses. Although real estate prices are stable in the markets in which we operate, if market values decline, the collateral for our loans may provide less security and our ability to recover the principal, interest and costs due on defaulted loans by selling the underlying real estate will be diminished, leaving us more likely to suffer additional losses on defaulted loans. Such declines may have a greater effect on our earnings and capital than on the earnings and capital of financial institutions whose loan portfolios are more diversified.
Worsening conditions in the real estate market and higher than normal delinquency and default rates on loans could cause other adverse consequences for us, including:
|
|
•
|
Reduced cash flows and capital resources, as we are required to make cash advances to meet contractual obligations to investors, process foreclosures, and maintain, repair and market foreclosed properties;
|
|
|
•
|
Declining mortgage servicing fee revenues because we recognize these revenues only upon collection;
|
|
|
•
|
Increasing loan servicing costs;
|
|
|
•
|
Declining fair value on our mortgage servicing rights; and
|
|
|
•
|
Declining fair values and liquidity of securities held in our investment portfolio that are collateralized by mortgage obligations.
|
We may incur significant losses as a result of ineffective hedging of interest rate risk related to our loans sold with retained servicing rights.
Both the value of our single family mortgage servicing rights, or MSRs, and the value of our single family loans held for sale change with fluctuations in interest rates, among other things, reflecting the changing expectations of mortgage prepayment activity. To mitigate potential losses of fair value of single family loans held for sale and MSRs related to changes in interest rates, we actively hedge this risk with financial derivative instruments. Hedging is a complex process, requiring sophisticated models, experienced and skilled personnel and continual monitoring. Changes in the value of our hedging instruments may not correlate with changes in the value of our single family loans held for sale and MSRs, as occurred in the fourth quarter of 2016, and we could incur a net valuation loss as a result of our hedging activities. As we continue to expand our single family mortgage operations and add more single family mortgage origination personnel, the volume of our single family loans held for sale and MSRs has continued to increase. The increase in volume in turn increases our exposure to the risks associated with the impact of interest rate fluctuations on single family loans held for sale and MSRs. Further, in times of significant financial disruption, as in 2008, hedging counterparties have been known to default on their obligations. Any such events or conditions may harm our results of operations.
Our business is geographically confined to certain metropolitan areas of the Western United States, and events and conditions that disproportionately affect those areas may pose a more pronounced risk for our business.
Although we presently have operations in eight states, a substantial majority of our revenues are derived from operations in the Puget Sound region of Washington State, the Portland, Oregon metropolitan area, the San Francisco Bay area and the Los Angeles and San Diego metropolitan areas in Southern California and all of our markets are located in the Western United States. Each of our primary markets is subject to various types of natural disasters, and each has experienced disproportionately significant economic declines in the past decade. Economic declines or natural disasters that affect these areas in particular, or economic events that particularly or more significantly affect the Western United States, the Puget Sound region, the San Francisco Bay area or Southern California, may have an unusually pronounced impact on our business and, because our operations are not more geographically diversified, we may lack the ability to mitigate those impacts from operations in other regions of the United States.
We have previously had deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting, and those deficiencies or others that we have not discovered may result in our inability to maintain control over our assets or to identify and accurately report our financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.
Our internal controls over financial reporting are intended to assure we maintain accurate records, promote the accurate and timely reporting of our financial information, maintain adequate control over our assets, and detect unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets. Effective internal and disclosure controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports and effectively prevent fraud and to operate successfully as a public company. If we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our reputation and operating results may be harmed.
As part of our ongoing monitoring of internal control from time to time we have discovered deficiencies in our internal controls that have required remediation. These deficiencies have included “material weaknesses,” defined as a deficiency or combination of deficiencies that results in more than a remote likelihood that a material misstatement of the annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected. For example, our management determined that we had experienced a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting as of September 30, 2014 related to errors in the analysis of hedge effectiveness related to fair value hedge accounting for certain commercial real estate loans and related swap or derivative instruments, and also concluded that our internal controls over financial reporting were not effective as of December 31, 2014 because of a material weakness in our internal controls related to certain new back office systems, primarily relating to accounts payable processing and payroll processing. We also have discovered “significant deficiencies,” defined as a deficiency or combination of deficiencies in internal control over financial reporting that is less severe than a material weakness, yet important enough to merit attention by those responsible for oversight of the Company's financial reporting.
Management has in place a process to document and analyze all identified internal control deficiencies and implement remedial measures sufficient to resolve those deficiencies. To support our growth initiatives and to create operating efficiencies we have implemented, and will continue to implement, new systems and processes. If our project management processes are not sound and adequate resources are not deployed to these implementations, we may experience additional internal control lapses that could expose the Company to operating losses. However, any failure to maintain effective controls or timely effect any necessary improvement of our internal and disclosure controls in the future could harm operating results or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations.
If our internal controls over financial reporting are subject to additional defects we have not identified, we may be unable to maintain adequate control over our assets, or we may experience material errors in recording our assets, liabilities and results of operations. Repeated or continuing deficiencies may cause investors to question the reliability of our internal controls or our financial statements, and may result in an erosion of confidence in our management or result in penalties or other potential enforcement action by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). On January 19, 2017, we finalized a settlement agreement with the SEC and paid a fine of $500,000 related to the previously disclosed SEC investigation into our fair value hedge accounting for certain commercial real estate loans and swaps. This fine was recorded in our financial statements for the fourth quarter of 2016. While the fair value hedge accounting error at issue in the settlement was disclosed by HomeStreet in November 2014 and neither the errors nor the amount of the settlement was ultimately material to our financial statements in any period, inquiries by the SEC took the time and attention of management for significant periods of time and may have had an adverse impact on investor confidence in us in the near term which may have had a negative impact on the value of our securities. Future failures of a similar nature may have a more significant impact than might generally be expected, both because of a potential for enhanced regulatory scrutiny and the potential for further reputational harm.
Our allowance for loan losses may prove inadequate or we may be negatively affected by credit risk exposures. Future additions to our allowance for loan losses, as well as charge-offs in excess of reserves, will reduce our earnings.
Our business depends on the creditworthiness of our customers. As with most financial institutions, we maintain an allowance for loan losses to reflect potential defaults and nonperformance, which represents management's best estimate of probable incurred losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Management's estimate is based on our continuing evaluation of specific credit risks and loan loss experience, current loan portfolio quality, present economic, political and regulatory conditions, industry concentrations and other factors that may indicate future loan losses. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and judgment and requires us to make estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes. Generally, our nonperforming loans and OREO reflect operating difficulties of individual borrowers and weaknesses in the economies of the markets we serve. This allowance may not be adequate to cover actual losses, and future provisions for losses could materially and adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
In addition, as we have acquired new operations, we have added the loans previously held by the acquired companies or related to the acquired branches to our books. We expect that future acquisitions we may make may bring additional loans originated by other institutions onto our books. Although we review loan quality as part of our due diligence in considering any acquisition involving loans, the addition of such loans may increase our credit risk exposure, require an increase in our allowance for loan losses, and adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows stemming from losses on those additional loans.
Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we report our financial condition and results of operations, and we use estimates in determining the fair value of certain of our assets, which estimates may prove to be imprecise and result in significant changes in valuation.
A portion of our assets are carried on the balance sheet at fair value, including investment securities available for sale, mortgage servicing rights related to single family loans and single family loans held for sale. Generally, for assets that are reported at fair value, we use quoted market prices or internal valuation models that use observable market data inputs to estimate their fair value. In certain cases, observable market prices and data may not be readily available or their availability may be diminished due to market conditions. We use financial models to value certain of these assets. These models are complex and use asset-specific collateral data and market inputs for interest rates. Although we have processes and procedures in place governing internal valuation models and their testing and calibration, such assumptions are complex as we must make judgments about the effect of matters that are inherently uncertain. Different assumptions could result in significant changes in valuation, which in turn could affect earnings or result in significant changes in the dollar amount of assets reported on the balance sheet. As we grow the expectation for the sophistication of our models will increase and we may need to hire additional personnel with sufficient expertise.
Our funding sources may prove insufficient to replace deposits and support our future growth.
We must maintain sufficient funds to respond to the needs of depositors and borrowers. As a part of our liquidity management, we use a number of funding sources in addition to core deposit growth and repayments and maturities of loans and investments. As we continue to grow, we are likely to become more dependent on these sources, which may include Federal Home Loan Bank advances, proceeds from the sale of loans, federal funds purchased and brokered certificates of deposit. Adverse operating results or changes in industry conditions could lead to difficulty or an inability to access these additional funding sources and could make our existing funds more volatile. Our financial flexibility may be materially constrained if we are unable to maintain our access to funding or if adequate financing is not available to accommodate future growth at acceptable interest rates. If we are required to rely more heavily on more expensive funding sources to support future growth, our revenues may not increase proportionately to cover our costs. In that case, our operating margins and profitability would be adversely affected. Further, the volatility inherent in some of these funding sources, particularly including brokered deposits, may increase our exposure to liquidity risk.
Our management of capital could adversely affect profitability measures and the market price of our common stock and could dilute the holders of our outstanding common stock.
Our capital ratios are higher than regulatory minimums. We may choose to have a lower capital ratio in the future in order to take advantage of growth opportunities, including acquisition and organic loan growth, or in order to take advantage of a favorable investment opportunity. On the other hand, we may again in the future elect to raise capital through a sale of our debt or equity securities in order to have additional resources to pursue our growth, including by acquisition, fund our business needs and meet our commitments, or as a response to changes in economic conditions that make capital raising a prudent choice. In
the event the quality of our assets or our economic position were to deteriorate significantly, as a result of market forces or otherwise, we may also need to raise additional capital in order to remain compliant with capital standards.
We may not be able to raise such additional capital at the time when we need it, or on terms that are acceptable to us. Our ability to raise additional capital will depend in part on conditions in the capital markets at the time, which are outside our control, and in part on our financial performance. Further, if we need to raise capital in the future, especially if it is in response to changing market conditions, we may need to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital, which would create competition for investors. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, any capital raising alternatives could dilute the holders of our outstanding common stock and may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
If we breach any of the representations or warranties we make to a purchaser or securitizer of our mortgage loans or MSRs, we may be liable to the purchaser or securitizer for certain costs and damages.
When we sell or securitize mortgage loans in the ordinary course of business, we are required to make certain representations and warranties to the purchaser about the mortgage loans and the manner in which they were originated. Our agreements require us to repurchase mortgage loans if we have breached any of these representations or warranties, in which case we may be required to repurchase such loan and record a loss upon repurchase and/or bear any subsequent loss on the loan. We may not have any remedies available to us against a third party for such losses, or the remedies available to us may not be as broad as the remedies available to the purchaser of the mortgage loan against us. In addition, if there are remedies against a third party available to us, we face further risk that such third party may not have the financial capacity to perform remedies that otherwise may be available to us. Therefore, if a purchaser enforces remedies against us, we may not be able to recover our losses from a third party and may be required to bear the full amount of the related loss.
If repurchase and indemnity demands increase on loans or MSRs that we sell from our portfolios, our liquidity, results of operations and financial condition will be adversely affected.
If we breach any representations or warranties or fail to follow guidelines when originating an FHA/HUD-insured loan or a VA-guaranteed loan, we may lose the insurance or guarantee on the loan and suffer losses, pay penalties, and/or be subjected to litigation from the federal government.
We originate and purchase, sell and thereafter service single family loans, some of which are insured by FHA/HUD or guaranteed by the VA. We certify to the FHA/HUD and the VA that the loans meet their requirements and guidelines. The FHA/HUD and VA audit loans that are insured or guaranteed under their programs, including audits of our processes and procedures as well as individual loan documentation. Violations of guidelines can result in monetary penalties or require us to provide indemnifications against loss or loans declared ineligible for their programs. In the past, monetary penalties and losses from indemnifications have not created material losses to the Bank. As a result of the housing crisis, the FHA/HUD has stepped up enforcement initiatives. In addition to regular FHA/HUD audits, HUD's Inspector General has become active in enforcing FHA regulations with respect to individual loans and has partnered with the Department of Justice ("DOJ") in filing lawsuits against lenders for systemic violations. The penalties resulting from such lawsuits can be much more severe, since systemic violations can be applied to groups of loans and penalties may be subject to treble damages. The DOJ has used the Federal False Claims Act and other federal laws and regulations in prosecuting these lawsuits. Because of our significant origination of FHA/HUD insured and VA guaranteed loans, if the DOJ were to find potential violations by the Bank, we could be subject to material monetary penalties and/or losses, and may even be subject to lawsuits alleging systemic violations which could result in treble damages.
We may face risk of loss if we purchase loans from a seller that fails to satisfy its indemnification obligations.
We generally receive representations and warranties from the originators and sellers from whom we purchase loans and servicing rights such that if a loan defaults and there has been a breach of such representations and warranties, we may be able to pursue a remedy against the seller of the loan for the unpaid principal and interest on the defaulted loan. However, if the originator and/or seller breaches such representations and warranties and does not have the financial capacity to pay the related damages, we may be subject to the risk of loss for such loan as the originator or seller may not be able to pay such damages or repurchase loans when called upon by us to do so. Currently, we only purchase loans from WMS Series LLC, an affiliated business arrangement with certain Windermere real estate brokerage franchise owners.
Changes in fee structures by third party loan purchasers and mortgage insurers may decrease our loan production volume and the margin we can recognize on conforming home loans, and may adversely impact our results of operations.
Changes in the fee structures by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac or other third party loan purchasers, such as an increase in guarantee fees and other required fees and payments, may increase the costs of doing business with them and, in turn, increase the cost of mortgages to consumers and the cost of selling conforming loans to third party loan purchasers. Increases in those costs could in turn decrease our margin and negatively impact our profitability. Additionally, increased costs for premiums from mortgage insurers, extensions of the period for which private mortgage insurance is required on a loan purchased by third party purchasers and other changes to mortgage insurance requirements could also increase our costs of completing a mortgage and our margins for home loan origination. Were any of our third party loan purchasers to make such changes in the future, it may have a negative impact on our ability to originate loans to be sold because of the increased costs of such loans and may decrease our profitability with respect to loans held for sale. In addition, any significant adverse change in the level of activity in the secondary market or the underwriting criteria of these third party loan purchasers could negatively impact our results of business, operations and cash flows.
We may incur additional costs in placing loans if our third party purchasers discontinue doing business with us for any reason.
We rely on third party purchasers with whom we place loans as a source of funding for the loans we make to consumers. Occasionally, third party loan purchasers may go out of business, elect to exit the market or choose to cease doing business with us for a myriad of reasons, including but not limited to the increased burdens on purchasers related to compliance, adverse market conditions or other pressures on the industry. In the event that one or more third party purchasers goes out of business, exits the market or otherwise ceases to do business with us at a time when we have loans that have been placed with such purchaser but not yet sold, we may incur additional costs to sell those loans to other purchasers or may have to retain such loans, which could negatively impact our results of operations and our capital position.
Our real estate lending also may expose us to environmental liabilities.
In the course of our business, it is necessary to foreclose and take title to real estate, which could subject us to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. Hazardous substances or waste, contaminants, pollutants or sources thereof may be discovered on properties during our ownership or after a sale to a third party. We could be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clean up hazardous or toxic substances or chemical releases at such properties. The costs associated with investigation or remediation activities could be substantial and could substantially exceed the value of the real property. In addition, as the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. We may be unable to recover costs from any third party. These occurrences may materially reduce the value of the affected property, and we may find it difficult or impossible to use or sell the property prior to or following any environmental remediation. If we ever become subject to significant environmental liabilities, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected.
Market-Related Risks
Fluctuations in interest rates could adversely affect the value of our assets and reduce our net interest income and noninterest income, thereby adversely affecting our earnings and profitability.
Interest rates may be affected by many factors beyond our control, including general and economic conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of various governmental and regulatory authorities. For example, unexpected increases in interest rates such as those in the fourth quarter of 2016 relating to the reaction to the U.S. presidential election resulted in an increased percentage of rate lock customer closing loans, which in turn increased our costs relative to income. Related and concomitant asymmetrical changes in the values of MSRs and certain derivative instruments used in related hedging transactions also adversely impacted our MSR-related risk management results in that period. Even expected increases in interest rates, such as those implemented in early 2014, may reduce our mortgage revenues by reducing the market for refinancings, which may negatively impact our noninterest income and, to a lesser extent, our net interest income, as well as demand for our residential loan products and the revenue realized on the sale of loans. Market volatility in interest rates can be difficult to predict, as unexpected interest rate changes may result in a sudden impact while anticipated changes in interest rates generally impact the mortgage rate market prior to the actual rate change.
Our earnings are also dependent on the difference between the interest earned on loans and investments and the interest paid on deposits and borrowings. Changes in market interest rates impact the rates earned on loans and investment securities and the rates paid on deposits and borrowings and may negatively impact our ability to attract deposits, make loans and achieve satisfactory interest rate spreads, which could adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations. In addition, changes to market interest rates may impact the level of loans, deposits and investments and the credit quality of existing loans.
In addition, our securities portfolio includes securities that are insured or guaranteed by U.S. government agencies or government-sponsored enterprises and other securities that are sensitive to interest rate fluctuations. The unrealized gains or losses in our available-for-sale portfolio are reported as a separate component of shareholders' equity until realized upon sale. Interest rate fluctuations may impact the value of these securities and as a result, shareholders' equity, and may cause material fluctuations from quarter to quarter. Failure to hold our securities until maturity or until market conditions are favorable for a sale could adversely affect our financial condition.
A significant portion of our noninterest income is derived from originating residential mortgage loans and selling them into the secondary market. That business has benefited from a long period of historically low interest rates. To the extent interest rates rise, particularly if they rise substantially, we may experience a reduction in mortgage financing of new home purchases and refinancing. These factors have negatively affected our mortgage loan origination volume and our noninterest income in the past and may do so again in the future.
Our mortgage operations are impacted by changes in the housing market, including factors that impact housing affordability and availability.
Housing affordability is directly affected by both the level of mortgage interest rates and the inventory of houses available for sale. The housing market recovery has been aided by a protracted period of historically low mortgage interest rates that has made it easier for consumers to qualify for a mortgage and purchase a home, however, mortgage rates have now begun to rise again. Should mortgage rates substantially increase over current levels, it would become more difficult for many consumers to qualify for mortgage credit. This could have a dampening effect on home sales and on home values.
In addition, constraints on the number of houses available for sale in some of our largest markets are driving up home prices, which may also make it harder for our customer to qualify for a mortgage, adversely impact our ability to originate mortgages and, as a consequence, our results of operations. Any return to a recessionary economy could also result in financial stress on our borrowers that may result in volatility in home prices, increased foreclosures and significant write-downs of asset values, all of which would adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
The stock price of our common stock is subject to volatility.
The price of our common stock has fluctuated in the past and may face additional and potentially substantial fluctuations in the future. Among the factors that may impact our stock price are the following:
|
|
•
|
Variances in our operating results;
|
|
|
•
|
Disparity between our operating results and the operating results of our competitors;
|
|
|
•
|
Changes in analyst’s estimates of our earnings results and future performance, or variances between our actual performance and that forecast by analysts;
|
|
|
•
|
News releases or other announcements of material events relating to the Company, including but not limited to mergers, acquisitions, expansion plans or other strategic developments;
|
|
|
•
|
Future securities offerings by us of debt or equity securities
|
|
|
•
|
Addition or departure of key personnel;
|
|
|
•
|
Market-wide events that may be seen by the market as impacting the Company;
|
|
|
•
|
The presence or absence of short-selling of our common stock;
|
|
|
•
|
General financial conditions of the country or the regions in which we operate;
|
|
|
•
|
Trends in real estate in our primary markets; or
|
|
|
•
|
Trends relating to the economic markets generally.
|
The stock markets in general experience substantial price and trading fluctuations, and such changes may create volatility in the market as a whole or in the stock prices of securities related to particular industries or companies that is unrelated or disproportionate to changes in operating performance of the Company. Such volatility may have an adverse effect on the trading price of our common stock.
Current economic conditions continue to pose significant challenges for us and could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We generate revenue from the interest and fees we charge on the loans and other products and services we sell, and a substantial amount of our revenue and earnings comes from the net interest and noninterest income that we earn from our mortgage banking and commercial lending businesses. Our operations have been, and will continue to be, materially affected by the state of the U.S. economy, particularly unemployment levels and home prices. A prolonged period of slow growth or a pronounced decline in the U.S. economy, or any deterioration in general economic conditions and/or the financial markets resulting from these factors, or any other events or factors that may disrupt or dampen the economic recovery
,
could dampen consumer confidence, adversely impact the models we use to assess creditworthiness, and materially adversely affect our financial results and condition. If the economy worsens and unemployment rises, which also would likely result in a decrease in consumer and business confidence and spending, the demand for our credit products, including our mortgages, may fall, reducing our net interest and noninterest income and our earnings. Significant and unexpected market developments may also make it more challenging for us to properly forecast our expected financial results.
A change in federal monetary policy could adversely impact our mortgage banking revenues.
The Federal Reserve is responsible for regulating the supply of money in the United States, and as a result its monetary policies strongly influence our costs of funds for lending and investing as well as the rate of return we are able to earn on those loans and investments, both of which impact our net interest income and net interest margin. The Federal Reserve Board's interest rate policies can also materially affect the value of financial instruments we hold, including debt securities, mortgage servicing rights, or MSRs and derivative instruments used to hedge against changes in the value of our MSRs. These monetary policies can also negatively impact our borrowers, which in turn may increase the risk that they will be unable to pay their loans according to the terms or be unable to pay their loans at all. We have no control over the Federal Reserve Board’s policies and cannot predict when changes are expected or what the magnitude of such changes may be.
The Federal Reserve Board's monetary policies during the recession and subsequent economic recovery may have had the effect of supporting higher revenues than might otherwise be available. For instance, during a period beginning in November 2008 through October 2014, the Federal Reserve Board purchased certain mortgage-backed securities and United States Treasury securities under its quantitative easing programs in an effort to meet specific economic targets and bolster the U.S. economy. If the rebound in employment and real wages is not adequate to offset the termination of that program, or if the Federal Reserve begins selling off the securities it has accumulated, we may see a reduction in mortgage originations throughout the United States, and may see a corresponding rise in interest rates, which could reduce our mortgage origination revenues and in turn have a material adverse impact upon our business.
A substantial portion of our revenue is derived from residential mortgage lending which is a market sector that experiences significant volatility.
A substantial portion of our consolidated net revenues (net interest income plus noninterest income) are derived from originating and selling residential mortgages. Residential mortgage lending in general has experienced substantial volatility in recent periods. An increase in interest rates in the second quarter of 2013 resulted in a significant adverse impact on our business and financial results due primarily to a related decrease in volume of loan originations, especially refinancings. The Federal Reserve increased interest rates in December 2015 and again in December 2016. Interest rate changes in the fourth quarter of 2016 resulted in lower rate locks and higher closed loan volume. We book revenue at the time we enter into rate lock agreements after adjusting for the estimated percentage of loans that are not expected to actually close, which we refer to as “fallout”. When interest rates rise, the level of fallout as a percentage of rate locks declines, which results in higher costs relative to income for that period, which may adversely impact our earnings and results of operations. In addition, an increase in interest rates may materially and adversely affect our future loan origination volume, margins, and the value of the collateral securing our outstanding loans, may increase rates of borrower default, and may otherwise adversely affect our business.
We may incur losses due to changes in prepayment rates.
Our mortgage servicing rights carry interest rate risk because the total amount of servicing fees earned, as well as changes in fair-market value, fluctuate based on expected loan prepayments (affecting the expected average life of a portfolio of residential mortgage servicing rights). The rate of prepayment of residential mortgage loans may be influenced by changing national and regional economic trends, such as recessions or depressed real estate markets, as well as the difference between interest rates on existing residential mortgage loans relative to prevailing residential mortgage rates. Changes in prepayment rates are therefore difficult for us to predict. An increase in the general level of interest rates may adversely affect the ability of some borrowers to pay the interest and principal of their obligations. During periods of declining interest rates, many residential borrowers
refinance their mortgage loans. The loan administration fee income (related to the residential mortgage loan servicing rights corresponding to a mortgage loan) decreases as mortgage loans are prepaid. Consequently, the fair value of portfolios of residential mortgage loan servicing rights tend to decrease during periods of declining interest rates, because greater prepayments can be expected and, as a result, the amount of loan administration income received also decreases.
Regulatory-Related Risks
We are subject to extensive regulation that may restrict our activities, including declaring cash dividends or capital distributions or pursuing growth initiatives and acquisition activities, and imposes financial requirements or limitations on the conduct of our business.
Our operations are subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities, including the FDIC, the Washington Department of Financial Institutions and the Federal Reserve Board, and are subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions on part or all of our operations. The laws, rules and regulations to which we are subject have been evolving and changing frequently following the economic recession that began in 2008. We are subject to various examinations by our regulators during the course of the year. Regulatory authorities who conduct these examinations have extensive discretion in their supervisory and enforcement activities, including the authority to restrict our operations and acquisition activity, adversely reclassify our assets, determine the level of deposit premiums assessed, require us to increase our allowance for loan losses, require customer restitution and impose fines or other penalties. The level of discretion, and the extent of potential penalties and other remedies, have increased substantially during recent years. We have, in the past, been subject to specific regulatory orders that constrained our business and required us to take measures that investors may have deemed undesirable, and we may again in the future be subject to such orders if banking regulators were to determine that our operations require such restrictions or if they determine that remediation of operational deficiencies is required.
In addition, recent political shifts in the United States may result in additional significant changes in legislation and regulations that impact us. Dodd-Frank’s level of oversight and compliance obligations increase significantly for banks with total assets in excess of $10 billion, which may limit our ability to grow beyond that level or may significantly increase the cost and regulatory burden of doing so. While the Trump administration and Republicans controlling Congress have announced that they intend to repeal or revise significant portions of Dodd-Frank and other regulation impacting financial institutions, the nature and extent of such repeals or revisions are not presently known. These circumstances lead to additional uncertainty regarding our regulatory environment and the cost and requirements for compliance. We are unable to predict whether U.S. federal, state or local authorities, or other pertinent bodies, will enact legislation, laws, rules, regulations, handbooks, guidelines or similar provisions that will affect our business or require changes in our practices in the future, and any such changes could adversely affect our cost of doing business and profitability.
Changes in regulation of our industry has the potential to create higher costs of compliance, including short-term costs to meet new compliance standards, limit our ability to pursue business opportunities and increase our exposure to the judicial system and the plaintiff’s bar.
Policies and regulations enacted by CFPB may negatively impact our residential mortgage loan business and compliance risk.
Our consumer business, including our mortgage, credit card, and other consumer lending and non-lending businesses, may be adversely affected by the policies enacted or regulations adopted by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) which under the Dodd-Frank Act has broad rulemaking authority over consumer financial products and services. For example, in January 2014 new federal regulations promulgated by the CFPB took effect which impact how we originate and service residential mortgage loans. Those regulations, among other things, require mortgage lenders to assess and document a borrower’s ability to repay their mortgage loan while providing borrowers the ability to challenge foreclosures and sue for damages based on allegations that the lender failed to meet the standard for determining the borrower’s ability to repay their loan. While the regulations include presumptions in favor of the lender based on certain loan underwriting criteria, they have not yet been challenged widely in courts and it is uncertain how these presumptions will be construed and applied by courts in the event of litigation. The ultimate impact of these regulations on the lender’s enforcement of its loan documents in the event of a loan default, and the cost and expense of doing so, is uncertain, but may be significant. In addition, the secondary market demand for loans that do not fall within the presumptively safest category of a “qualified mortgage” as defined by the CFPB is uncertain. The 2014 regulations also require changes to certain loan servicing procedures and practices, which has resulted in increased foreclosure costs and longer foreclosure timelines in the event of loan default, and failure to comply with the new servicing rules may result in additional litigation and compliance risk.
The CFPB was also given authority over the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, or RESPA, under the Dodd-Frank Act and has, in some cases, interpreted RESPA requirements differently than other agencies, regulators and judicial opinions. As a result, certain practices that have been considered standard in the industry, including relationships that have been established between mortgage lenders and others in the mortgage industry such as developers, realtors and insurance providers, are now being subjected to additional scrutiny under RESPA. Our regulators, including the FDIC, review our practices for compliance with RESPA as interpreted by the CFPB. Changes in RESPA requirements and the interpretation of RESPA requirements by our regulators may result in adverse examination findings by our regulators, which could negatively impact our ability to pursue our growth plans, branch expansion and limit our acquisition activity.
In addition to RESPA compliance, the Bank is also subject to the CFPB's Final Integrated Disclosure Rule, commonly known as TRID, which became effective in October 2015. Among other things, TRID requires lenders to combine the initial Good Faith Estimate and Initial Truth in Lending (“TIL”) disclosures into a single new Loan Estimate disclosure and the HUD-1 and Final TIL disclosures into a single new Closing Disclosure. The definition of an application and timing requirements has changed, and a new Closing Disclosure waiting period has been added. These changes, along with other changes required by TRID, require significant systems modifications, process and procedures changes and training and we have incurred and will continue to incur additional personnel costs in the near future related to compliance with TRID. Failure to comply with these new requirements may result in regulatory penalties for disclosure and other violations under the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (“RESPA”) and the Truth In Lending Act (“TILA”), and private right of action under TILA, and may impact our ability to sell or the price we receive for certain loans.
In addition, the CFPB recently adopted additional rules under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act (“HMDA”) that are intended to improve information reported about the residential mortgage market and increase disclosure about consumer access to mortgage credit. The updates to the HMDA increase the types of dwelling-secured loans that will be subject to the disclosure requirements of the rule and expand the categories of information that financial institutions such as the Bank will be required to report with respect to such loans and such borrowers, including potentially sensitive customer information. Most of the rule's provisions are expected to become effective January 1, 2018. These changes may increase our compliance costs due to the anticipated need for additional resources to meet the enhanced disclosure requirements, including additional personnel and training costs as well as informational systems to allow the Bank to properly capture and report the additional mandated information. The volume of new data that will be required to be reported under the updated rules will also cause the Bank to face an increased risk of errors in the information. More importantly, because of the sensitive nature of some of the additional customer information to be included in such reports, the Bank may face a higher potential for a security breach resulting in the disclosure of sensitive customer information in the event the HMDA reporting files were obtained by an unauthorized party.
While the full impact of CFPB's activities on our business is still unknown, and there is a potential for repeal or significant revision of new and proposed CFPB regulations under the Trump administration, any additional rule changes under the HMDA and other CFPB actions that may follow and any changes in interpretation of the regulations applicable to the Bank could increase our compliance costs, require changes in our business practices and limit the products and services we are able to provide to customers.
Interpretation of federal and state legislation, case law or regulatory action may negatively impact our business.
Regulatory and judicial interpretation of existing and future federal and state legislation, case law, judicial orders and regulations could also require us to revise our operations and change certain business practices, impose additional costs, reduce our revenue and earnings and otherwise adversely impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. For instance, judges interpreting legislation and judicial decisions made during the recent financial crisis could allow modification of the terms of residential mortgages in bankruptcy proceedings which could hinder our ability to foreclose promptly on defaulted mortgage loans or expand assignee liability for certain violations in the mortgage loan origination process, any or all of which could adversely affect our business or result in our being held responsible for violations in the mortgage loan origination process. In addition, the exercise by regulators of revised and at times expanded powers under existing or future regulations could materially and negatively impact the profitability of our business, the value of assets we hold or the collateral available for our loans, require changes to business practices or force us to discontinue businesses and expose us to additional costs, taxes, liabilities, penalties, enforcement actions and reputational risk.
Such judicial decisions or regulatory interpretations may affect the manner in which we do business and the products and services that we provide, restrict our ability to grow through acquisition, restrict our ability to compete in our current business or expand into any new business, and impose additional fees, assessments or taxes on us or increase our regulatory oversight.
Federal, state and local consumer protection laws may restrict our ability to offer and/or increase our risk of liability with respect to certain products and services and could increase our cost of doing business.
Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain practices considered “predatory” or “unfair and deceptive”. These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, failing to disclose key features, limitations, or costs related to products and services, failing to provide advertised benefits, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans, imposing excessive fees for overdrafts, and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. It is our policy not to make predatory loans or engage in deceptive practices, but these laws and regulations create the potential for liability with respect to our lending, servicing, loan investment, deposit taking and other financial activities. As a company with a significant mortgage banking operation, we also, inherently, have a significant amount of risk of noncompliance with fair lending laws and regulations. These laws and regulations are complex and require vigilance to ensure that policies and practices do not create disparate impact on our customers or that our employees do not engage in overt discriminatory practices. Noncompliance can result in significant regulatory actions including, but not limited to, sanctions, fines or referrals to the Department of Justice and restrictions on our ability to execute our growth and expansion plans. These risks are enhanced because of our growth activities as we integrate operations from our acquisitions and expand our geographic markets. As we offer products and services to customers in additional states, we may become subject to additional state and local laws designed to protect consumers. The additional laws and regulations may increase our cost of doing business, and ultimately may prevent us from making certain loans, offering certain products, and may cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans and other products and services that we do provide.
Changes to regulatory requirements relating to customer information may increase our cost of doing business and create additional compliance risk.
In May 2016, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network of the Department of Justice announced that beginning in May 2018, financial institutions would be required to identify the ultimate beneficial owners of all entity clients as part of their customer due diligence compliance. Meeting this new requirement will increase our overall compliance burden and require us to expend additional resources in the review of customers who are entities. In addition, there may be unforeseen challenges in obtaining beneficial ownership information about all of our entity customers, which increases the risk that we will not be in compliance with this new requirement.
We are subject to more stringent capital requirements under Basel III.
As of January 1, 2015, we became subject to new rules relating to capital standards requirements, including requirements contemplated by Section 171 of the Dodd-Frank Act as well as certain standards initially adopted by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision, which standards are commonly referred to as Basel III. Many of these rules apply to both the Company and the Bank, including increased common equity Tier 1 capital ratios, Tier 1 leverage ratios, Tier 1 risk-based ratios and total risk-based ratios. In addition, beginning in 2016, all institutions subject to Basel III, including the Company and the Bank are required to establish a “conservation buffer” that is being phased in and will take full effect on January 1, 2019. This conservation buffer consists of common equity Tier 1 capital and will ultimately be required to be 2.5% above existing minimum capital ratio requirements. This means that once the conservation buffer is fully phased in, in order to prevent certain regulatory restrictions, the common equity Tier 1 capital ratio requirement will be 7.0%, the Tier 1 risk-based ratio requirement will be 8.5% and the total risk-based capital ratio requirement will be 10.5%. Any institution that does not meet the conservation buffer will be subject to restrictions on certain activities including payment of dividends, stock repurchases and discretionary bonuses to executive officers.
Additional prompt corrective action rules implemented in 2015 also apply to the Bank, including higher and new ratio requirements for the Bank to be considered well-capitalized. The new rules also modify the manner for determining when certain capital elements are included in the ratio calculations, including but not limited to, requiring certain deductions related to mortgage servicing rights and deferred tax assets. For more on these regulatory requirements and how they apply to the Company and the Bank, see “Regulation and Supervision of HomeStreet Bank
- Capital and Prompt Corrective Action Requirements - Capital Requirements
” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2017. The application of more stringent capital requirements could, among other things, result in lower returns on invested capital and result in regulatory actions if we were to be unable to comply with such requirements. In addition, if we need to raise additional equity capital in order to meet these more stringent requirements, our shareholders may be diluted.
Any restructuring or replacement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and changes in existing government-sponsored and federal mortgage programs could adversely affect our business.
We originate and purchase, sell and thereafter service single family and multifamily mortgages under the Fannie Mae, and to a lesser extent, the Freddie Mac single family purchase programs and the Fannie Mae multifamily
DUS
®
program. In 2008, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac were placed into conservatorship, and since then Congress, various executive branch agencies and certain large private investors in Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have offered a wide range of proposals aimed at restructuring these agencies.
We cannot be certain whether or how Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ultimately will be restructured or replaced, if or when additional reform of the housing finance market will be implemented or what the future role of the U.S. government will be in the mortgage market, and, accordingly, we will not be able to determine the impact that any such reform may have on us until a definitive reform plan is adopted. However, any restructuring or replacement of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac that restricts the current loan purchase programs of those entities may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations. Moreover, we have recorded on our balance sheet an intangible asset (mortgage servicing rights, or MSRs) relating to our right to service single and multifamily loans sold to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. We valued our MSRs at
$236.0 million
at
March 31, 2017
. Changes in the policies and operations of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac or any replacement for or successor to those entities that adversely affect our single family residential loan and DUS
®
mortgage servicing assets may require us to record impairment charges to the value of these assets, and significant impairment charges could be material and adversely affect our business.
In addition, our ability to generate income through mortgage sales to institutional investors depends in part on programs sponsored by Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac and Ginnie Mae, which facilitate the issuance of mortgage-backed securities in the secondary market. Any significant revision or reduction in the operation of those programs could have a material adverse effect on our loan origination and mortgage sales as well as our results of operations. Also, any significant adverse change in the level of activity in the secondary market or the underwriting criteria of these entities could negatively impact our results of business, operations and cash flows.
Changes in accounting standards may require us to increase our Allowance for Loan Losses and could materially impact our financial statements.
From time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board (the “FASB”) and the SEC change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. These changes can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. For example, in June 2016, the FASB issued
ASU 2016-13
,
Financial Instruments - Credit Losses
(Topic 326)
which changes, among other things, the way companies must record expected credit losses on financial instruments that are not accounted for at fair value through net income, including loans held for investment, available for sale and held-to-maturity debt securities, trade and other receivables, net investment in leases and other commitments to extend credit held by a reporting entity at each reporting date, and require that financial assets measured at amortized cost be presented at the net amount expected to be collected, through an allowance for credit losses that is deducted from the amortized cost basis and eliminate the probable initial recognition in current GAAP and reflect the current estimate of all expected credit losses based upon historical experience, current conditions, and reasonable and supportable forecasts that affect the collectability of the financial assets.
For purchased financial assets with a more-than-insignificant amount of credit deterioration since origination (“PCD assets”) that are measured at amortized cost, an allowance for expected credit losses will be recorded as an adjustment to the cost basis of the asset. Subsequent changes in estimated cash flows would be recorded as an adjustment to the allowance and through the statement of income. Credit losses relating to available-for-sale debt securities will be recorded through an allowance for credit losses rather than as a direct write-down to the security's cost basis. The amendments in this ASU will be effective for us beginning on January 1, 2020. For most debt securities, the transition approach requires a cumulative-effect adjustment to the statement of financial position as of the beginning of the first reporting period the guidance is effective. For other-than-temporarily impaired debt securities and PCD assets, the guidance will be applied prospectively. We are currently evaluating the provisions of this ASU to determine the impact and developing appropriate systems to prepare for compliance with this new standard, however, we expect the new standard could have a material impact on the Company's consolidated financial statements.
HomeStreet, Inc. primarily relies on dividends from the Bank, which may be limited by applicable laws and regulations.
HomeStreet, Inc. is a separate legal entity from the Bank, and although we may receive some dividends from HomeStreet Capital Corporation, the primary source of our funds from which we service our debt, pay any dividends that we may declare to
our shareholders and otherwise satisfy our obligations is dividends from the Bank. The availability of dividends from the Bank is limited by various statutes and regulations, as well as by our policy of retaining a significant portion of our earnings to support the Bank's operations. New capital rules impose more stringent capital requirements to maintain “well capitalized” status which may additionally impact the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to the Company. See “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations -
Capital Management
” as well as “Regulation and Supervision of HomeStreet Bank -
Capital and Prompt Corrective Action Requirements
” in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2016, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 9, 2017. If the Bank cannot pay dividends to us, we may be limited in our ability to service our debts, fund the Company's operations and acquisition plans and pay dividends to the Company's shareholders. While the Company has paid special dividends in some prior quarters, we have not adopted a dividend policy and our board of directors has elected to retain capital for growth rather than to declare a dividend in recent years. As such, we have not declared dividends in any recent quarters, and the potential of future dividends is subject to cash flow limitations, capital requirements, capital and strategic needs and other factors.
The financial services industry is highly competitive.
We face pricing competition for loans and deposits. We also face competition with respect to customer convenience, product lines, accessibility of service and service capabilities. Our most direct competition comes from other banks, credit unions, mortgage companies and savings institutions, but more recently has also come from financial technology (or "fintech") companies that rely on technology to provide financial services. The significant competition in attracting and retaining deposits and making loans as well as in providing other financial services throughout our market area may impact future earnings and growth. Our success depends, in part, on the ability to adapt products and services to evolving industry standards and provide consistent customer service while keeping costs in line. There is increasing pressure to provide products and services at lower prices, which can reduce net interest income and non-interest income from fee-based products and services. New technology-driven products and services are often introduced and adopted, including innovative ways that customers can make payments, access products and manage accounts. We could be required to make substantial capital expenditures to modify or adapt existing products and services or develop new products and services. We may not be successful in introducing new products and services or those new products may not achieve market acceptance. We could lose business, be forced to price products and services on less advantageous terms to retain or attract clients, or be subject to cost increases if we do not effectively develop and implement new technology. In addition, advances in technology such as telephone, text, and on-line banking; e-commerce; and self-service automatic teller machines and other equipment, as well as changing customer preferences to access our products and services through digital channels, could decrease the value of our branch network and other assets. As a result of these competitive pressures, our business, financial condition or results of operations may be adversely affected.
We will be subject to heightened regulatory requirements if we exceed $10 billion in assets
.
We anticipate that our total assets could exceed $10 billion in the next several years, based on our historic organic and acquisition growth rates. The Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations impose various additional requirements on bank holding companies with $10 billion or more in total assets, including compliance with portions of the Federal Reserve’s enhanced prudential oversight requirements and annual stress testing requirements. In addition, banks with $10 billion or more in total assets are primarily examined by the CFPB with respect to various federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations. Currently, our bank is subject to regulations adopted by the CFPB, but the FDIC is primarily responsible for examining our bank’s compliance with consumer protection laws and those CFPB regulations. As a relatively new agency with evolving regulations and practices, there is uncertainty as to how the CFPB’s examination and regulatory authority might impact our business.
Compliance with these requirements may necessitate that we hire additional compliance or other personnel, design and implement additional internal controls, or incur other significant expenses, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. Compliance with the annual stress testing requirements, part of which must be publicly disclosed, may also be misinterpreted by the market generally or our customers and, as a result, may adversely affect our stock price or our ability to retain our customers or effectively compete for new business opportunities. To ensure compliance with these heightened requirements when effective, our regulators may require us to fully comply with these requirements or take actions to prepare for compliance even before our or the Bank’s total assets equal or exceed $10 billion. As a result, we may incur compliance-related costs before we might otherwise be required, including if we do not continue to grow at the rate we expect or at all. Our regulators may also consider our preparation for compliance with these regulatory requirements when examining our operations generally or considering any request for regulatory approval we may make, even requests for approvals on unrelated matters.
Risks Related to Information Systems and Security
A failure in or breach of our security systems or infrastructure, including breaches resulting from cyber-attacks, could disrupt our businesses, result in the disclosure or misuse of confidential or proprietary information, damage our reputation, increase our costs and cause losses.
Information security risks for financial institutions have increased in recent years in part because of the proliferation of new technologies, the use of the Internet and telecommunications technologies to conduct financial transactions, and the increased sophistication and activities of organized crime, hackers, terrorists, activists, and other external parties. Those parties also may attempt to fraudulently induce employees, customers, or other users of our systems to disclose confidential information in order to gain access to our data or that of our customers. Our operations rely on the secure processing, transmission and storage of confidential information in our computer systems and networks, either managed directly by us or through our data processing vendors. In addition, to access our products and services, our customers may use personal computers, smartphones, tablet PCs, and other mobile devices that are beyond our control systems. Although we believe we have robust information security procedures and controls, we are heavily reliant on our third party vendors, technologies, systems, networks and our customers' devices all of which may become the target of cyber-attacks, computer viruses, malicious code, unauthorized access, hackers or information security breaches that could result in the unauthorized release, gathering, monitoring, misuse, loss, theft or destruction of our confidential, proprietary and other information or that of our customers, or disrupt our operations or those of our customers or third parties.
To date we are not aware of any material losses relating to cyber-attacks or other information security breaches, but there can be no assurance that we will not suffer such attacks, breaches and losses in the future. Our risk and exposure to these matters remains heightened because of, among other things, the evolving nature of these threats, our plans to continue to implement our Internet banking and mobile banking channel, our expanding operations and the outsourcing of a significant portion of our business operations. As a result, the continued development and enhancement of our information security controls, processes and practices designed to protect customer information, our systems, computers, software, data and networks from attack, damage or unauthorized access remain a priority for our management. As cyber threats continue to evolve, we may be required to expend significant additional resources to insure, modify or enhance our protective measures or to investigate and remediate important information security vulnerabilities or exposures; however, our measures may be insufficient to prevent physical and electronic break-ins, denial of service and other cyber-attacks or security breaches.
We maintain insurance coverage related to business interruptions and breaches of our security systems. However, disruptions or failures in the physical infrastructure or operating systems that support our businesses and customers, or cyber-attacks or security breaches of the networks, systems or devices that our customers use to access our products and services could result in customer attrition, uninsured financial losses, the inability of our customers to transact business with us, violations of applicable privacy and other laws, regulatory fines, penalties or intervention, additional regulatory scrutiny, reputational damage, litigation, reimbursement or other compensation costs, and/or additional compliance costs, any of which could materially and adversely affect our results of operations or financial condition.
We rely on third party vendors and other service providers for certain critical business activities, which creates additional operational and information security risks for us.
Third parties with which we do business or that facilitate our business activities, including exchanges, clearing houses, financial intermediaries or vendors that provide services or security solutions for our operations, could also be sources of operational and information security risk to us, including from breakdowns or failures of their own systems or capacity constraints. Specifically, we receive core systems processing, essential web hosting and other Internet systems and deposit and other processing services from third-party service providers. Such third parties may also be target of cyber-attacks, computer viruses, malicious code, unauthorized access, hackers or information security breaches that could compromise the confidential or proprietary information of HomeStreet and our customers. To date none of our third party vendors or service providers has notified us of any security breach in their systems.
In addition, if any third-party service providers experience difficulties or terminate their services and we are unable to replace them with other service providers, our operations could be interrupted and our operating expenses may be materially increased. If an interruption were to continue for a significant period of time, our business financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected.
Some of our primary third party service providers are subject to examination by banking regulators and may be subject to enhanced regulatory scrutiny due to regulatory findings during examinations of such service providers conducted by federal regulators. While we subject such vendors to higher scrutiny and monitor any corrective measures that the vendors are taking or
would undertake, we cannot fully anticipate and mitigate all risks that could result from a breach or other operational failure of a vendor’s system.
Others provide technology that we use in our own regulatory compliance, including our mortgage loan origination technology. If those providers fail to update their systems or services in a timely manner to reflect new or changing regulations, or if our personnel operate these systems in a non-compliant manner, our ability to meet regulatory requirements may be impacted and may expose us to heightened regulatory scrutiny and the potential for payment of monetary penalties.
In addition, in order to safeguard our online financial transactions, we must provide secure transmission of confidential information over public networks. Our Internet banking system relies on third party encryption and authentication technologies necessary to provide secure transmission of confidential information. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries in the field of cryptology or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the algorithms our third-party service providers use to protect customer data. If any such compromise of security were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The failure to protect our customers’ confidential information and privacy could adversely affect our business.
We are subject to federal and state privacy regulations and confidentiality obligations that, among other things restrict the use and dissemination of, and access to, certain information that we produce, store or maintain in the course of our business. We also have contractual obligations to protect certain confidential information we obtain from our existing vendors and customers. These obligations generally include protecting such confidential information in the same manner and to the same extent as we protect our own confidential information, and in some instances may impose indemnity obligations on us relating to unlawful or unauthorized disclosure of any such information.
If we do not properly comply with privacy regulations and contractual obligations that require us to protect confidential information, or if we experience a security breach or network compromise, we could experience adverse consequences, including regulatory sanctions, penalties or fines, increased compliance costs, remedial costs such as providing credit monitoring or other services to affected customers, litigation and damage to our reputation, which in turn could result in decreased revenues and loss of customers, all of which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The network and computer systems on which we depend could fail for reasons not related to security breaches.
Our computer systems could be vulnerable to unforeseen problems other than a cyber-attack or other security breach. Because we conduct a part of our business over the Internet and outsource several critical functions to third parties, operations will depend on our ability, as well as the ability of third-party service providers, to protect computer systems and network infrastructure against damage from fire, power loss, telecommunications failure, physical break-ins or similar catastrophic events. Any damage or failure that causes interruptions in operations may compromise our ability to perform critical functions in a timely manner (or may give rise to perceptions of such compromise) and could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations as well as our reputation and customer or vendor relationships.
We continually encounter technological change, and we may have fewer resources than many of our competitors to invest in technological improvements.
The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our clients by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy client demands for convenience, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many national vendors provide turn-key services to community banks, such as Internet banking and remote deposit capture that allow smaller banks to compete with institutions that have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able, however, to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers.
Anti-Takeover Risk
Some provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws and certain provisions of Washington law may deter takeover attempts, which may limit the opportunity of our shareholders to sell their shares at a favorable price.
Some provisions of our articles of incorporation and bylaws may have the effect of deterring or delaying attempts by our shareholders to remove or replace management, to commence proxy contests, or to effect changes in control. These provisions include:
|
|
•
|
A classified board of directors so that only approximately one third of our board of directors is elected each year;
|
|
|
•
|
Elimination of cumulative voting in the election of directors;
|
|
|
•
|
Procedures for advance notification of shareholder nominations and proposals;
|
|
|
•
|
The ability of our board of directors to amend our bylaws without shareholder approval; and
|
|
|
•
|
The ability of our board of directors to issue shares of preferred stock without shareholder approval upon the terms and conditions and with the rights, privileges and preferences as the board of directors may determine.
|
In addition, as a Washington corporation, we are subject to Washington law which imposes restrictions on business combinations and similar transactions between a corporation and certain significant shareholders. These provisions, alone or together, could have the effect of deterring or delaying changes in incumbent management, proxy contests or changes in control. These restrictions may limit a shareholder’s ability to benefit from a change-in-control transaction that might otherwise result in a premium unless such a transaction is favored by our board of directors.