Item 1. Business
Hudson City Bancorp, Inc.
Hudson City Bancorp is a Delaware corporation organized in 1999 and serves as the holding company of its only
subsidiary, Hudson City Savings Bank. The principal asset of Hudson City Bancorp is its investment in Hudson City Savings Bank. As a savings and loan holding company, Hudson City Bancorp is subject to supervision and regulation by the Board of
Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the FRB).
Hudson City Bancorps executive offices are located at West 80 Century Road, Paramus,
New Jersey 07652 and our telephone number is (201) 967-1900.
On August 27, 2012, the Company entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the
Merger Agreement) with M&T and WTC. The Merger Agreement provides that, upon the terms and subject to the conditions set forth therein, Hudson City Bancorp will merge with and into WTC, with WTC continuing as the surviving entity.
On April 12, 2013, M&T and the Company announced that additional time would be required to obtain a regulatory determination on the applications
necessary to complete the proposed Merger. On April 13, 2013, M&T and the Company entered into Amendment No. 1 to the Merger Agreement. Amendment No. 1, among other things, extended the date after which either party may elect to
terminate the Merger Agreement from August 27, 2013 to January 31, 2014. On December 17, 2013, M&T and the Company announced that they entered into Amendment No. 2 to the Merger Agreement. Amendment No. 2 extends the
date after which either party may terminate the Merger Agreement if the Merger has not yet been completed from January 31, 2014 to December 31, 2014, and provides that the Company may terminate the Merger Agreement at any time if it
reasonably determines that M&T is unlikely to be able to obtain the requisite regulatory approvals in time to permit the closing to occur on or prior to December 31, 2014. Amendment No. 2 also permits the Company to take certain
interim actions without the prior approval of M&T, including with respect to our conduct of business, implementation of our strategic plan, retention incentives and certain other matters with respect to our personnel, prior to the completion of
the Merger. While M&T and the Company extended the date after which either party may elect to terminate the Merger Agreement from January 31, 2014 to December 31, 2014, there can be no assurances that the Merger will be completed by
that date or that the Company will not exercise its right to terminate the Merger Agreement in accordance with its terms.
Prior to the announcement of
the Merger, the Company retained an outside consultant to assist management in developing a strategic plan (the Strategic Plan). The operational core of the Strategic Plan is the expansion of our loan and deposit product offerings over
time to create more balanced sources of revenue and funding. We believe that the markets in which we operate provide significant opportunities for the Hudson City brand to capture market share in products and services that we have not actively
pursued previously. The Strategic Plan includes initiatives such as:
|
|
|
origination of residential mortgages for sale to the secondary mortgage market,
|
|
|
|
establishment of a commercial real estate lending unit,
|
|
|
|
the analysis of a balance sheet restructuring transaction,
|
|
|
|
establishment of a small business banking unit,
|
|
|
|
tactical deposit pricing, and
|
|
|
|
developing a more robust suite of consumer banking products.
|
Prior to the execution of Amendment No. 1, the
implementation of the Strategic Plan was suspended pending completion of the Merger. When we announced in April 2013 that additional time would be required to obtain regulatory approval for the Merger, we charted a dual path for the Company. We
continued to plan for the
1
completion of the Merger, but we also refreshed the Strategic Plan prioritizing the matters that we could achieve during the pendency of the Merger such as secondary mortgage market operations
and commercial real estate lending, and proceeded with planning for the implementation of those prioritized matters. Given the further delay in completing the Merger, the Company and M&T have agreed that the Company is permitted to proceed with
the implementation of the Strategic Plan. Many of the initiatives require significant lead time for full implementation and roll out to our customers. We expect commencement of the roll out of the prioritized initiatives during the second half of
2014.
On March 30, 2012, the Bank entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the OCC (the Bank MOU), which is substantially similar
to and replaced the memorandum of understanding the Bank entered into with our former regulator, the Office of Thrift Supervision (the OTS), on June 24, 2011. In accordance with the Bank MOU, the Bank has adopted and has implemented
enhanced operating policies and procedures that are intended to enable us to continue to: (a) reduce our level of interest rate risk, (b) reduce our funding concentration, (c) diversify our funding sources, (d) enhance our
liquidity position, (e) monitor and manage loan modifications and (f) maintain our capital position in accordance with our existing capital plan. In addition, we developed the Strategic Plan for the Bank which establishes objectives for
the Banks overall risk profile, earnings performance, growth and balance sheet mix and to enhance our enterprise risk management program.
The
Company entered into a separate Memorandum of Understanding with the FRB (the Company MOU) on April 24, 2012, which is substantially similar to and replaced the memorandum of understanding the Company entered into with our former
regulator, the OTS, on June 24, 2011. In accordance with the Company MOU, the Company must, among other things support the Banks compliance with the Bank MOU. The Company MOU also requires the Company to: (a) obtain approval from the
FRB prior to receiving a capital distribution from the Bank or declaring a dividend to shareholders and(b) obtain approval from the FRB prior to repurchasing or redeeming any Company stock or incurring any debt with a maturity of greater than one
year. In accordance with the Company MOU, the Company submitted a comprehensive capital plan and a comprehensive earnings plan to the FRB. These agreements will remain in effect until modified or terminated by the OCC (with respect to the Bank MOU)
and the FRB (with respect to the Company MOU).
Hudson City Savings.
Hudson City Savings is a federally chartered stock savings bank subject
to supervision and examination by the OCC. The Banks deposits are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC).
Hudson
City Savings Bank has served its customers since 1868. We conduct our operations out of our corporate offices in Paramus in Bergen County, New Jersey and through 135 branches in the New York metropolitan area. We operate 97 branches located in 17
counties throughout the State of New Jersey. In New York State, we operate 10 branch offices in Westchester County, 12 branch offices in Suffolk County, 1 branch office each in Putnam and Rockland Counties and 5 branch offices in Richmond County
(Staten Island). We also operate 9 branch offices in Fairfield County, Connecticut. We also open deposit accounts through our internet banking service.
We are a community and consumer-oriented retail savings bank offering traditional deposit products, residential real estate mortgage loans and consumer loans.
In addition, we purchase mortgages and mortgage-backed securities and other securities issued by U.S. government-sponsored enterprises (GSEs) as well as other investments permitted by applicable laws and regulations. We currently retain
substantially all of the loans we originate in our portfolio. As part of our Strategic Plan, beginning in the second half of 2014, we intend to originate loans for sale in the secondary market and to commence diversifying our loan portfolio through
the purchase and origination of commercial real estate loans and interests in such loans.
Our business model and product offerings allow us to serve a
broad range of customers with varying demographic characteristics. Our traditional consumer products, such as conforming one- to four-family residential mortgages, time deposits, checking and savings accounts appeal to a broad customer base. Our
jumbo mortgage lending proficiency and our time deposit and money market products have allowed us to target higher income customers successfully.
2
Our revenues are derived principally from interest on our mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities and
interest and dividends on our investment securities. Our primary sources of funds are customer deposits, borrowings, scheduled amortization and prepayments of mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities, maturities and calls of investment
securities and funds provided by operations.
Available Information
Our periodic and current reports, proxy and information statements, and other information that we file with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
SEC), are available free of charge through our website, www.hcbk.com
,
as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. Unless specifically incorporated by reference, the information on
our website is not part of this annual report. Such reports are also available on the SECs website at www.sec.gov, or at the SECs Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC, 20549. Information may be obtained on the
operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.
Market Area
Through our branch offices, we have operations in 9 of the top 50 counties in the United States ranked by median household income. Operating in high median
household income counties fits well with our jumbo mortgage loan and consumer deposit business model. Prior to 2010, we purchased first mortgage loans in states that are east of the Mississippi River and as far south as South Carolina. Our loan
purchase activity has declined significantly since 2010 and has been limited to our primary market area, which consists of New Jersey, New York and Connecticut. We experienced a decrease in our loan purchase activity as sellers from whom we have
historically purchased loans are either retaining these loans in their portfolios or selling them to the GSEs. Historically, our wholesale loan purchase program complemented our retail loan origination by enabling us to diversify our assets outside
of our local market area.
The northern New Jersey market represents the greatest concentration of population, deposits and income in New Jersey. The
combination of these counties represents more than half of the entire New Jersey population and more than half of New Jersey households. The northern New Jersey market also represents the greatest concentration of Hudson City Savings retail
operations
both lending and deposit gathering
and based on its high level of economic activity, we believe that the northern New Jersey market provides significant opportunities for future growth. The New Jersey shore
market represents a strong concentration of population and income, and is a popular resort and retirement market area, which provides healthy opportunities for deposit growth and residential lending. The southwestern New Jersey market consists of
communities adjacent to the Philadelphia metropolitan area.
The New York counties of Richmond, Westchester, Suffolk, Rockland and Putnam as well as
Fairfield County, Connecticut have similar demographic and economic characteristics to the northern New Jersey market area. Our entry into these counties, which started in 2004, has allowed us to expand our retail operations and geographic
footprint.
We also open deposit accounts through our internet banking service which allows us to serve customers throughout the United States. As of
December 31, 2013, we had $146.1 million of deposits that were opened through our internet banking service.
Our future growth opportunities will be
influenced by the growth and stability of the regional economy, other demographic population trends and the competitive environment in the New York metropolitan area (which we define to include New York, New Jersey and Connecticut). During 2013, the
national economy expanded at a
3
moderate pace. The unemployment rate, which declined to 6.7% in December 2013 from 7.8% in December 2012, remains elevated. Housing market conditions in our primary lending area improved in 2013
after several years of reduced levels of sales, elevated levels of housing inventories, declining house prices, increasing home foreclosures and an increase in the length of time houses remain on the market. Housing prices increased during 2013 as
indicated by the S&P/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices. Approximately 84.5% of our mortgage loans are located in the New York metropolitan area. The Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA), an independent entity within the Department of
Housing and Urban Development, publishes housing market data on a quarterly basis. According to the most recent data published by the FHFA, house prices in New Jersey have increased 3.29% from the third quarter of 2012. For New York and Connecticut,
house prices increased 2.97% and 2.30%, respectively during this same period. Additionally, according to the FHFA data, the states of Pennsylvania, Virginia, Massachusetts, Illinois and Maryland experienced increases in house prices of 4.84%, 4.78%,
6.23%, 4.33%, and 7.15%, respectively for those same periods. These eight states account for 96.3% of our total mortgage portfolio. We can give no assurance as to whether economic and housing conditions will continue to improve in the near future.
Competition
We face intense competition both in
making loans and attracting deposits in the market areas we serve. New Jersey and the New York metropolitan area have a high concentration of financial institutions, many of which are branches of large money center banks and regional banks. Some of
these competitors have greater resources than we do and may offer services that we do not provide such as trust services or investment services. Customers who seek one-stop shopping may be drawn to these institutions.
Our competition for loans comes principally from commercial banks, savings institutions, mortgage banking firms, credit unions, finance companies, insurance
companies and brokerage firms. We have also faced increased competition for mortgage loans due to the unprecedented involvement of the GSEs in the mortgage market in recent years.
Our most direct competition for deposits comes from commercial banks, savings banks, savings and loan associations and credit unions. We face additional
competition for deposits from short-term money market funds and other corporate and government securities funds and from brokerage firms and insurance companies.
Lending Activities
Loan Portfolio
Composition.
Our loan portfolio primarily consists of one- to four-family residential first mortgage loans, which represent 99.0% of total loans. The remaining loans in our portfolio include multi-family and commercial mortgage loans,
construction loans and consumer loans, which primarily consist of fixed-rate second mortgage loans and home equity credit lines. Beginning in the second half of 2014, we expect to commence diversifying our loan portfolio through the purchase and
origination of commercial real estate loans and interests in such loans.
At December 31, 2013, we had total loans of $24.11 billion, of which $23.90
billion, or 99.1%, were first mortgage loans. Of the first mortgage loans outstanding at that date, 55.4% were fixed-rate mortgage loans and 44.6% were adjustable-rate mortgage (ARM) loans. At December 31, 2013, multi-family and
commercial mortgage loans totaled $25.7 million, construction loans totaled $294,000, and consumer and other loans, primarily fixed-rate second mortgage loans and home equity credit lines, amounted to $214.7 million, or 0.89%, of total loans.
Our loans are subject to federal and state laws and regulations. The interest rates we charge on loans are affected principally by the demand for loans, the
supply of money available for lending purposes and the interest rates offered by our competitors. These factors are, in turn, affected by general and local economic conditions, monetary policies of the federal government, including the FRB,
legislative tax policies and governmental budgetary matters.
4
The following table presents the composition of our loan portfolio in dollar amounts and in percentages of the
total portfolio at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of Total
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of Total
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of Total
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of Total
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of Total
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
First mortgage loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family
|
|
$
|
23,167,644
|
|
|
|
96.08
|
%
|
|
$
|
26,119,764
|
|
|
|
96.41
|
%
|
|
$
|
28,260,772
|
|
|
|
96.35
|
%
|
|
$
|
30,049,398
|
|
|
|
97.17
|
%
|
|
$
|
31,076,829
|
|
|
|
97.79
|
%
|
FHA/VA
|
|
|
704,532
|
|
|
|
2.92
|
|
|
|
687,172
|
|
|
|
2.54
|
|
|
|
734,781
|
|
|
|
2.51
|
|
|
|
499,724
|
|
|
|
1.62
|
|
|
|
285,003
|
|
|
|
0.90
|
|
Multi-family and commercial
|
|
|
25,671
|
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
|
|
32,259
|
|
|
|
0.12
|
|
|
|
39,634
|
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
48,067
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
54,694
|
|
|
|
0.17
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
4,929
|
|
|
|
0.02
|
|
|
|
9,081
|
|
|
|
0.03
|
|
|
|
13,030
|
|
|
|
0.04
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total first mortgage loans
|
|
|
23,898,141
|
|
|
|
99.11
|
|
|
|
26,843,864
|
|
|
|
99.09
|
|
|
|
29,040,116
|
|
|
|
99.02
|
|
|
|
30,606,270
|
|
|
|
98.98
|
|
|
|
31,429,556
|
|
|
|
98.90
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
86,079
|
|
|
|
0.36
|
|
|
|
106,239
|
|
|
|
0.39
|
|
|
|
131,597
|
|
|
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
160,896
|
|
|
|
0.52
|
|
|
|
201,375
|
|
|
|
0.63
|
|
Home equity credit lines
|
|
|
108,550
|
|
|
|
0.45
|
|
|
|
119,872
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
134,502
|
|
|
|
0.46
|
|
|
|
137,467
|
|
|
|
0.44
|
|
|
|
127,987
|
|
|
|
0.40
|
|
Other
|
|
|
20,059
|
|
|
|
0.08
|
|
|
|
20,904
|
|
|
|
0.08
|
|
|
|
21,130
|
|
|
|
0.07
|
|
|
|
19,264
|
|
|
|
0.06
|
|
|
|
21,003
|
|
|
|
0.07
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consumer and other loans
|
|
|
214,688
|
|
|
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
247,015
|
|
|
|
0.91
|
|
|
|
287,229
|
|
|
|
0.98
|
|
|
|
317,627
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
350,365
|
|
|
|
1.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
29,327,345
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
31,779,921
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
105,480
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
97,534
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
83,805
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
86,633
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81,307
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
(276,097
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(302,348
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(273,791
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(236,574
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(140,074
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loans
|
|
$
|
23,942,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
26,886,065
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
29,137,359
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
30,773,956
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
31,721,154
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5
The following tables present the composition of our loan portfolio by credit quality indicator at the dates
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Risk Profile based on Payment Activity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four- family
first mortgage loans
|
|
|
Other first
Mortgages
|
|
|
Consumer and Other
|
|
|
Total
Loans
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
Multi-family
and
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
second
mortgages
|
|
|
Home Equity
credit lines
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
$
|
19,319,959
|
|
|
$
|
3,513,504
|
|
|
$
|
22,482
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
84,667
|
|
|
$
|
104,655
|
|
|
$
|
18,318
|
|
|
$
|
23,063,585
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
903,485
|
|
|
|
135,228
|
|
|
|
3,189
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
1,412
|
|
|
|
3,895
|
|
|
|
1,741
|
|
|
|
1,049,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20,223,444
|
|
|
$
|
3,648,732
|
|
|
$
|
25,671
|
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
|
$
|
86,079
|
|
|
$
|
108,550
|
|
|
$
|
20,059
|
|
|
$
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Performing
|
|
$
|
21,355,105
|
|
|
$
|
4,303,636
|
|
|
$
|
30,571
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
104,574
|
|
|
$
|
115,876
|
|
|
$
|
18,590
|
|
|
$
|
25,928,352
|
|
Non-performing
|
|
|
965,956
|
|
|
|
182,239
|
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
1,665
|
|
|
|
3,996
|
|
|
|
2,314
|
|
|
|
1,162,527
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
22,321,061
|
|
|
$
|
4,485,875
|
|
|
$
|
32,259
|
|
|
$
|
4,669
|
|
|
$
|
106,239
|
|
|
$
|
119,872
|
|
|
$
|
20,904
|
|
|
$
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Risk Profile by Internally Assigned Grade
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four- family
first mortgage loans
|
|
|
Other first
Mortgages
|
|
|
Consumer and Other
|
|
|
Total
Loans
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
Multi-family
and
Commercial
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
Fixed-rate
second
mortgages
|
|
|
Home Equity
credit lines
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
$
|
19,218,917
|
|
|
$
|
3,480,909
|
|
|
$
|
15,281
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
84,233
|
|
|
$
|
102,364
|
|
|
$
|
17,157
|
|
|
$
|
22,918,861
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
108,957
|
|
|
|
19,866
|
|
|
|
980
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
875
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
130,852
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
895,570
|
|
|
|
147,957
|
|
|
|
9,410
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
1,717
|
|
|
|
5,311
|
|
|
|
2,857
|
|
|
|
1,063,116
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
20,223,444
|
|
|
$
|
3,648,732
|
|
|
$
|
25,671
|
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
|
$
|
86,079
|
|
|
$
|
108,550
|
|
|
$
|
20,059
|
|
|
$
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass
|
|
$
|
21,209,628
|
|
|
$
|
4,268,034
|
|
|
$
|
20,215
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
104,216
|
|
|
$
|
114,741
|
|
|
$
|
17,794
|
|
|
$
|
25,734,628
|
|
Special mention
|
|
|
175,361
|
|
|
|
29,609
|
|
|
|
2,445
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
89
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
207,572
|
|
Substandard
|
|
|
936,072
|
|
|
|
188,232
|
|
|
|
9,599
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
1,955
|
|
|
|
5,042
|
|
|
|
3,110
|
|
|
|
1,148,679
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
22,321,061
|
|
|
$
|
4,485,875
|
|
|
$
|
32,259
|
|
|
$
|
4,669
|
|
|
$
|
106,239
|
|
|
$
|
119,872
|
|
|
$
|
20,904
|
|
|
$
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan classifications are defined as follows:
|
|
|
Pass These loans are protected by the current net worth and paying capacity of the obligor (or guarantors, if any) or by the fair value, less cost to acquire and sell, of any underlying collateral in a timely
manner.
|
|
|
|
Special Mention These loans have potential weaknesses that deserve managements close attention. If left uncorrected, these potential weaknesses may result in deterioration of repayment prospects.
|
6
|
|
|
Substandard These loans are inadequately protected by the current net worth and paying capacity of the obligor or by the collateral pledged, if any. Assets so classified must have a well-defined weakness, or
weaknesses that jeopardize the liquidation of the debt. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some loss if the deficiencies are not corrected.
|
|
|
|
Doubtful These loans have all the weaknesses inherent in a loan classified substandard with the added characteristic that the weaknesses make the full recovery of our principal balance highly questionable and
improbable on the basis of currently known facts, conditions, and values. The likelihood of a loss on an asset or portion of an asset classified Doubtful is high. Its classification as Loss is not appropriate, however, because pending events are
expected to materially affect the amount of loss.
|
|
|
|
Loss These loans are considered uncollectible and of such little value that a charge-off is warranted. This classification does not necessarily mean that an asset has no recovery or salvage value; but rather,
there is much doubt about whether, how much, or when the recovery will occur.
|
We evaluate the classification of our one-to four-family
mortgage loans, consumer loans and other loans primarily on a pooled basis by delinquency. Loans that are past due 60 to 89 days are classified as special mention and loans that are past due 90 days or more are classified as substandard. We obtain
updated valuations for one- to four- family mortgage loans by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due. If necessary, we charge-off an amount to reduce the carrying value of the loan to the value of the underlying property, less estimated selling
costs. Since we record the charge-off when we receive the updated valuation, we typically do not have any residential first mortgages classified as doubtful or loss. We evaluate troubled debt restructurings, multi-family, commercial and construction
loans individually and base our classification on the debt service capability of the underlying property as well as secondary sources of repayment such as the borrowers and any guarantors ability and willingness to provide debt service.
Residential mortgage loans that are classified as troubled debt restructurings are individually evaluated for impairment based on the present value of each loans expected future cash flows.
The following table presents the geographic distribution of loans in our portfolio at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
At December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
Percentage of Loans by
State to Total loans
|
|
|
Percentage of Loans by
State to Total loans
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
42.5
|
%
|
|
|
43.0
|
%
|
New York
|
|
|
27.1
|
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
Connecticut
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
84.5
|
|
|
|
82.4
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
Massachusetts
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
Illinois
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
All others
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total outside the New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7
Loan Maturity
.
The following table presents the contractual maturity of our loans at
December 31, 2013. The table does not include the effect of prepayments or scheduled principal amortization. Prepayments and scheduled principal amortization on first mortgage loans totaled $6.27 billion for 2013, $7.03 billion for 2012 and
$6.59 billion for 2011.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
One- to four-
Family First
Mortgages
|
|
|
Multi-family
and Commercial
Mortgages
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
Consumer and
Other Loans
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Amounts Due:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One year or less
|
|
$
|
1,104
|
|
|
|
10,246
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
7,051
|
|
|
$
|
18,695
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After one year:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One to three years
|
|
|
12,791
|
|
|
|
4,889
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
14,846
|
|
|
|
32,526
|
|
Three to five years
|
|
|
149,926
|
|
|
|
4,244
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,892
|
|
|
|
162,062
|
|
Five to ten years
|
|
|
461,871
|
|
|
|
4,465
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32,602
|
|
|
|
498,938
|
|
Ten to twenty years
|
|
|
4,252,107
|
|
|
|
1,350
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
148,288
|
|
|
|
4,401,745
|
|
Over twenty years
|
|
|
18,994,377
|
|
|
|
477
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,009
|
|
|
|
18,998,863
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total due after one year
|
|
|
23,871,072
|
|
|
|
15,425
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
207,637
|
|
|
|
24,094,134
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
$
|
23,872,176
|
|
|
$
|
25,671
|
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
|
$
|
214,688
|
|
|
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deferred loan costs
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105,480
|
|
Allowance for loan losses
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(276,097
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
23,942,212
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents, as of December 31, 2013, the dollar amounts of all fixed-rate and adjustable-rate loans
that are contractually due after December 31, 2014:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due After December 31, 2014
|
|
|
|
Fixed
|
|
|
Adjustable
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
One-to-four family first mortgage loans
|
|
$
|
13,230,064
|
|
|
$
|
10,641,008
|
|
|
$
|
23,871,072
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
8,569
|
|
|
|
6,856
|
|
|
|
15,425
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
92,986
|
|
|
|
114,651
|
|
|
|
207,637
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans due after one year
|
|
$
|
13,331,619
|
|
|
$
|
10,762,515
|
|
|
$
|
24,094,134
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8
The following table presents our loan originations, purchases, sales and principal payments for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Total loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance outstanding at beginning of period
|
|
$
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
$
|
29,327,345
|
|
|
$
|
30,923,897
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Originations:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans (1)
|
|
|
3,443,460
|
|
|
|
4,976,263
|
|
|
|
4,848,647
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
52,719
|
|
|
|
58,907
|
|
|
|
77,678
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total originations
|
|
|
3,496,179
|
|
|
|
5,035,170
|
|
|
|
4,926,325
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgage loans
|
|
|
96,892
|
|
|
|
28,742
|
|
|
|
344,766
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total purchases
|
|
|
96,892
|
|
|
|
28,742
|
|
|
|
344,766
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal payments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans (1)
|
|
|
(6,273,486
|
)
|
|
|
(7,029,457
|
)
|
|
|
(6,594,600
|
)
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
(84,493
|
)
|
|
|
(98,660
|
)
|
|
|
(107,694
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total principal payments
|
|
|
(6,357,979
|
)
|
|
|
(7,128,117
|
)
|
|
|
(6,702,294
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premium amortization and discount accretion, net
|
|
|
1,483
|
|
|
|
2,626
|
|
|
|
7,169
|
|
Transfers to foreclosed real estate
|
|
|
(126,771
|
)
|
|
|
(87,787
|
)
|
|
|
(75,422
|
)
|
Charge-offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans
|
|
|
(87,288
|
)
|
|
|
(86,636
|
)
|
|
|
(96,714
|
)
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
(566
|
)
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
(382
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance outstanding at end of period
|
|
$
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
$
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
$
|
29,327,345
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Includes Multi-family, Commercial and Construction loans
|
Residential Mortgage Lending.
Historically, our primary lending emphasis has been the origination and purchase of first mortgage loans secured by one- to four-family properties that serve as the primary or secondary residence of the owner. We do not offer loans secured by
cooperative apartment units or interests therein. We currently originate and purchase substantially all of our one- to four-family first mortgage loans for retention in our portfolio. We specialize in residential mortgage loans with principal
balances in excess of the Fannie Mae, single-family limit which, prior to 2008, was $417,000 (non-conforming or jumbo loans). Beginning in 2008, Fannie Mae instituted two sets of loan limits a conforming loan limit at
$417,000 and a high-cost loan limit at $729,750. On October 1, 2011, the high-cost loan limit was reduced to $625,500.
Most
of our retail loan originations are from licensed mortgage bankers or brokers, existing or past customers, members of our local communities or referrals from local real estate agents, attorneys and builders. Our extensive branch network is also a
source of new loan generation. We also employ a staff of representatives who call on real estate professionals to disseminate information regarding our loan programs and take applications directly from their clients. These representatives are paid
for each origination. Originated loans represent 79.5% of our one- to four- family first mortgage loans.
We currently offer loans that generally conform
to underwriting standards specified by Fannie Mae (conforming loans) and non-conforming loans. These loans may be fixed-rate one- to four-family mortgage loans or adjustable-rate one- to four-family mortgage loans with maturities of up
to 30 years. The average size of our one- to four-family mortgage loans originated in 2013 was approximately $610,000. The overall average
9
size of our one- to four-family first mortgage loans held in portfolio was approximately $413,000 and $418,000 at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We sold no loans in 2013, 2012 or
2011 and had no loans classified as held for sale at December 31, 2013.
Our originations of residential first mortgage loans amounted to $3.44
billion in 2013, $4.98 billion in 2012 and $4.85 billion in 2011. Included in these totals are refinancings of our existing first mortgage loans as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent of
First Mortgage
Loan Originations
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
$
|
850,997
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
%
|
2012
|
|
$
|
1,334,841
|
|
|
|
26.7
|
|
2011
|
|
|
754,684
|
|
|
|
15.1
|
|
Prior to January 1, 2012, we allowed certain existing customers to reduce the interest rates on their mortgage loans, for
a fee, with the intent of maintaining our customer relationship in periods of extensive refinancing due to a low interest rate environment. This program changed the existing interest rate to the market rate for a product currently offered by us with
a similar or reduced term. The program did not extend the maturity date of the loan. To qualify for an interest rate reduction, the loan had to be current with no payments past due in any of the 12 preceding months. In general, all other terms and
conditions of the existing mortgage loan remained the same. During 2011, mortgage loans with principal balances of $2.77 billion had interest rates reduced pursuant to this program. Effective December 31, 2011, we discontinued this program but
continue to allow borrowers to refinance their loans with us subject to meeting our normal underwriting requirements, including obtaining a new appraisal.
We offer a variety of adjustable-rate and fixed-rate one- to four-family mortgage loans with maximum loan to value (LTV) ratios that depend on the
type of property and the size of loan involved. The LTV ratio is the loan amount divided by the appraised value of the property. The LTV ratio is a measure commonly used by financial institutions to determine exposure to risk. Loans on
owner-occupied one- to four-family homes of up to $1.0 million are generally subject to a maximum LTV ratio of 80%. LTV ratios of 75% or less are generally required for one- to four-family loans in excess of $1.0 million and less than $1.5 million.
Loans in excess of $1.5 million and less than $2.0 million are generally subject to a maximum LTV ratio of 70%. Loans in excess of $2.0 million and up to $2.5 million are generally subject to a maximum LTV ratio of 65%. Loans in excess of $2.5
million and up to $3.0 million are generally subject to a maximum LTV ratio of 60%. We typically do not originate mortgage loans in excess of $3.0 million.
We also offer a variety of ARM loans secured by one- to four-family residential properties with a fixed rate for initial terms of three years, five years,
seven years or ten years. After the initial adjustment period, ARM loans adjust on an annual basis. These loans are originated in amounts generally up to $3.0 million. The ARM loans that we currently originate have a maximum 30-year amortization
period and are generally subject to the LTV ratios described above. The interest rates on ARM loans fluctuate based upon a fixed spread above the monthly average yield on United States Treasury securities adjusted to a constant maturity of one year
and generally are subject to a maximum increase or decrease of 2% per adjustment period and a limitation on the aggregate adjustment of 5% over the life of the loan. As a result of generally low market interest rates for ARM loans, the initial
offered rate on these loans was 12.5 to 175 basis points above the current fully indexed rate at December 31, 2013. We originated $2.74 billion of one- to four-family ARM loans in 2013. At December 31, 2013, 44.6% of our one- to
four-family mortgage loans consisted of ARM loans.
The origination and retention of ARM loans helps reduce exposure to increases in interest rates.
However, ARM loans can pose credit risks different from the risks inherent in fixed-rate loans, primarily because as interest
10
rates rise, the underlying payments of the borrower may rise, which increases the potential for default. The marketability of the underlying property also may be adversely affected by higher
interest rates. In order to minimize risks, we evaluate borrowers of ARM loans based on their ability to repay the loans at the higher of the initial interest rate or the fully indexed rate. On January 10, 2014, the Bank began to utilize the
guidelines included in Appendix Q of the qualified mortgage regulation when qualifying ARM borrowers. In an effort to further reduce risk, we have not in the past, nor do we currently, originate ARM loans that provide for negative amortization of
principal.
Historically, our wholesale loan purchase program complemented our retail loan origination production by enabling us to diversify assets
outside our local market area. At December 31, 2013, $4.89 billion, or 20.5%, of our one- to four-family first mortgage loans were purchased loans. Our loan purchase activity has significantly declined as the GSEs have been actively purchasing
loans as part of their efforts to keep mortgage rates low to support the housing market during the recent economic recession and subsequent recovery. As a result, the sellers from whom we have historically purchased loans are originating loans at
lower rates than we would accept, selling many of their loans to the GSEs or keeping them in their portfolio. We expect that the amount of loan purchases will continue to be at reduced levels for the near future.
We have developed written standard operating guidelines relating to the purchase of these assets. These guidelines include an evaluation and approval process
for the various sellers from whom we choose to buy whole loans, the acceptable types of whole loans and acceptable property locations. The purchase agreements, as established with each seller/servicer, contain parameters of the loan characteristics
that can be included in each package. These parameters, such as maximum loan size and maximum weighted average LTV, generally conform to parameters utilized by us to originate mortgage loans. All loans are reviewed for compliance with the agreed
upon parameters. All purchased loan packages are subject to internal due diligence procedures including review of a sampling of individual loan files. We generally perform full credit reviews of 10% to 20% of the mortgage loans in each package
purchased. Our due diligence procedures include a review of the legal documents, including the note, the mortgage and the title policy, review of the credit file, evaluating debt service ratios, review of the appraisal and verifying LTV ratios and
evaluating the completeness of the loan package. This review subjects the loan files in the sample to substantially the same underwriting standards used in our own loan origination process. We maintain custody of the legal documents including the
original note.
We purchased first mortgage loans of $96.9 million in 2013, $28.7 million in 2012 and $344.8 million in 2011. The average size of our
one-to four-family mortgage loans purchased during 2013 was approximately $240,000. Substantially all of the loans purchased in 2013, 2012 and 2011 were loans guaranteed by the Federal Housing Administration (the FHA).
We also purchase and originate interest-only mortgage loans. These loans are designed for customers who desire flexible amortization schedules. These loans
are originated as ARM loans with initial terms of five, seven or ten years with the interest-only portion of the payment based upon the initial loan term, or offered on a 30-year fixed-rate loan, with interest-only payments for the first 10 years of
the obligation. At the end of the initial 5-, 7- or 10-year interest-only period the loan payment will adjust to include both principal and interest and will amortize over the remaining term so the loan will be repaid at the end of its original
life. These loans are underwritten using fully amortizing payment amounts, more restrictive standards and generally are made with lower LTV limitations imposed to help minimize any potential credit risk. These loans may involve higher risks compared
to standard loan products since there is the potential for higher payments once the interest rate resets and the principal begins to amortize and they rely on a stable or rising housing market to maintain an acceptable LTV ratio. However, we do not
believe these programs will have a material adverse impact on our asset quality based on our underwriting criteria and the average LTV ratios on the loans originated in this program. During 2013, we originated $451.6 million of interest-only loans
with an average LTV ratio of 58.4% based on the appraised value at the time of origination. The outstanding principal balance of interest-only loans in our portfolio was approximately $3.65 billion as of December 31, 2013. Non-performing
interest-only loans amounted to $135.2 million, or 12.9%, of non-
11
performing loans at December 31, 2013 as compared to non-performing interest-only loans of $182.2 million, or 15.7%, of non-performing loans at December 31, 2012. We have not in the
past, nor do we currently, originate or purchase option ARM loans, where the borrower is given various payment options that could change payment flows to the Bank. For a description of guidance on nontraditional mortgage products, see
Regulation of Hudson City Savings Bank and Hudson City Bancorp.
In addition to our full documentation loan program, prior to January 2014, we
originated and purchased loans to certain eligible borrowers as reduced documentation loans. Generally the maximum loan amount for reduced documentation loans was $750,000 and these loans were subject to higher interest rates than our full
documentation loan products. We required applicants for reduced documentation loans to complete a Freddie Mac/Fannie Mae loan application and requested income, asset and credit history information from the borrower. Additionally, we verified asset
holdings and obtained credit reports from outside vendors on all borrowers to ascertain the credit history of the borrower. Applicants with delinquent credit histories generally did not qualify
for the reduced documentation processing, although delinquencies that were adequately explained did not prohibit processing as a reduced documentation loan. We
reserved the right to verify income and did require asset verification but we may not have elected to verify or corroborate certain income information where we believed circumstances warrant. We originated $780.2 million of reduced documentation
loans in 2013 as compared to $895.7 million in 2012. Reduced documentation loans represent 21.3% of our one- to four-family first mortgage loans at December 31, 2013. Included in our loan portfolio at December 31, 2013 are $4.27 billion of
amortizing reduced documentation loans and $826.5 million of reduced documentation interest-only loans as compared to $4.24 billion and $1.00 billion, respectively, at December 31, 2012. Non-performing loans at December 31, 2013 include
$182.9 million of amortizing reduced documentation loans and $48.8 million of interest-only reduced documentation loans as compared to $189.5 million and $74.5 million, respectively, at December 31, 2012.
In January 2013, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (the CFPB) issued a series of final rules related to mortgage loan origination and
mortgage loan servicing. Among other things, these final rules, which went into effect on January 10, 2014, prohibit creditors, such as Hudson City Savings, from extending mortgage loans without regard to the consumers ability to repay
and establishes certain protections from liability for loans that meet the requirements of a qualified mortgage. As of January 10, 2014, we only originate loans that meet the requirements of a qualified mortgage, except
we may continue to originate interest only loans subject to our compliance with the ability to repay provisions of the CFPBs final rule. As a result, in January 2014 we discontinued our reduced documentation loan program in order to comply
with the newly effective CFPB requirements to validate a borrowers ability to repay and the corresponding safe harbor for qualified mortgages. Accordingly, we expect our future loan production volume to decrease. See Regulation of Hudson
City Savings Bank and Hudson City Bancorp.
We offer mortgage programs designed to address the credit needs of low and moderate-income home mortgage
applicants and low and moderate-income home improvement loan applicants. We define low and moderate-income applicants as borrowers residing in low- and moderate-income census tracts or households with income not greater than 80% of the median income
of the Metropolitan Statistical Area in the county where the subject property is located. Among the features of the low- and moderate-income home mortgage programs are reduced rates, reduced fees and closing costs, and generally less restrictive
requirements for qualification compared with our traditional one- to four-family mortgage loans. For example, these programs have generally provided for loans with up to 80% LTV ratios and rates which are 25 basis points lower than our traditional
mortgage loans. In 2013, we originated $29.7 million in mortgage loans under these programs.
Origination and Sale in the Secondary Market of
Residential Mortgage Loans.
In accordance with our Strategic Plan, we intend to begin to originate residential mortgage loans that conform to GSE guidelines for sale to the GSEs in the second half of 2014. Initially, all loans sold to the
GSEs will be serviced by a third party subservicing vendor, however, we intend to enhance our servicing function to allow us to service our sold portfolio in the future. As we originate, sell and service our sold loan portfolio, we would expect to
have a mortgage servicing rights asset build up over time. We are currently in the process of hiring secondary mortgage market professionals, enhancing our existing servicing program, building out necessary systems and establishing processes and
procedures for originating and selling residential mortgage loans to the GSEs.
12
Multi-family and Commercial Mortgage Loans.
At December 31, 2013, $25.7 million, or 0.11%, of
the total loan portfolio consisted of multi-family and commercial mortgage loans. Commercial mortgage loans are secured by office buildings and other commercial properties. Multi-family mortgage loans generally are secured by multi-family rental
properties (including mixed-use buildings and walk-up apartments). Substantially all of these loans were acquired in the acquisition of Sound Federal Bancorp, Inc. in 2006. Since our primary lending product has historically been one-to four-family
mortgage loans, we have not actively pursued the origination of commercial and multi-family mortgage loans. We did not originate any such loans in 2013. However, commercial real estate lending is a prioritized initiative included in our Strategic
Plan. We expect to begin originating and purchasing commercial real estate loans and interests in such loans in the second half of 2014. We anticipate that these loans will consist primarily of mortgage loans on office buildings, mixed-use buildings
and multi-family properties. We are currently in the process of hiring commercial real estate professionals, building out necessary systems and establishing processes and procedures for originating, purchasing and monitoring commercial real estate
loans.
At December 31, 2013, the largest commercial mortgage loan had a principal balance of $6.0 million and was secured by a storage unit
facility. This borrower also had $1.9 million of commercial mortgage loans outstanding with us at December 31, 2013. These loans were restructured during 2010 to allow for a deferment of principal payments. During 2012, the borrower did not
perform in accordance with the restructured agreements which resulted in a charge-off of $873,000 against these loans. These loans are included in troubled debt restructurings and classified as substandard at December 31, 2013.
Loans secured by multi-family and commercial real estate generally are larger than one-to four-family residential loans and involve a greater degree of risk.
Commercial mortgage loans can involve large loan balances to single borrowers or groups of related borrowers. Such loans depend to a large degree, on the results of operations and management of the properties or underlying businesses, and may be
affected to a greater extent by adverse conditions in the real estate market or in the economy in general.
Consumer Loans
.
At
December 31, 2013, consumer and other loans amounted to $214.7 million, or 0.89%, of our total loans and consisted primarily of fixed-rate second mortgage loans and home equity credit lines. Consumer loans generally have shorter terms to
maturity, relative to our mortgage portfolio, which reduces our exposure to changes in interest rates. Consumer loans generally carry higher rates of interest than do one- to four-family residential mortgage loans. In addition, we believe that
offering consumer loan products helps to expand and create stronger ties to our existing customer base by increasing the number of customer relationships and providing cross-marketing opportunities.
We offer fixed-rate second mortgage loans generally in amounts up to $250,000 secured by owner-occupied one- to four-family residences located in the State of
New Jersey, and the portions of New York and Connecticut served by our first mortgage loan products, for terms of up to 20 years. At December 31, 2013 these loans totaled $86.1 million, or 0.36% of total loans. The underwriting standards
applicable to these loans generally are the same as one- to four-family first mortgage loans, except that the combined LTV ratio, including the balance of the first mortgage, generally cannot exceed 80% of the appraised value of the property at time
of origination.
Our home equity credit line loans totaled $108.6 million or 0.45% of total loans at December 31, 2013. These loans are either
fixed-rate or adjustable-rate loans secured by a first or second mortgage on owner-occupied one- to four-family residences located in our market area. The interest rates on adjustable-rate home equity credit lines are based on the prime
rate as published in The Wall Street Journal (the Index) subject to certain interest rate limitations. Interest rates on home equity credit lines are adjusted monthly based upon changes in the Index. Minimum monthly principal
payments on currently offered home equity lines of credit are based on
13
1/240th of the outstanding principal balance or $100, whichever is greater. The maximum credit line generally available is $250,000. The underwriting terms and procedures applicable to these
loans are substantially the same as for our fixed-rate second mortgage loans.
Other loans totaled $20.1 million at December 31, 2013 and consisted
of collateralized passbook loans, overdraft protection loans, unsecured personal loans, and secured and unsecured commercial lines of credit. We have not originated unsecured personal loans since 2005.
Loan Approval Procedures and Authority
.
All residential mortgage loans up to $600,000 must be approved by two underwriting officers in
the Mortgage Origination Department. Residential mortgage loans in excess of $600,000 up to $1.0 million in size require that one of the two officers signing off on the loan be a senior underwriting staff member assigned and approved by senior
management in the Mortgage Origination area or any officer bearing the title of First Vice President-Mortgage Officer, Senior Vice President-Mortgage Officer, Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer prior
to issuance of a commitment letter. Residential mortgage loans in excess of $1.0 million up to $3.0 million require that in addition to the standard underwriter approval, one of the officers signing off on the loan must be a senior underwriting
staff member assigned and approved by senior management in the Mortgage Origination area and one additional officer signing off on the loan must bear the title of the First Vice President-Mortgage Officer, Senior Vice President-Mortgage Officer,
Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer prior to issuance of a commitment letter. Residential mortgage loans in excess of $3.0 million require that in addition to the standard underwriter approval, two
additional signatures are required with the officers bearing the title of Senior Vice President-Mortgage Officer, Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer prior to issuance of a commitment letter. Loan
requests in excess of $5.0 million must be approved by at least two of the following senior officers, Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer and will be reported to the Board of Directors at the next
regularly scheduled Board meeting. The maximum number of first mortgage loans outstanding at any one time per borrower (obligor on the note) shall not exceed three loans with only one loan being permitted for investment purposes. The aggregate of
all residential loans, existing and/or committed to any one borrower, generally shall not exceed $5.0 million. Aggregate loan balances exceeding this limit must be approved by at least two of the following senior officers: Executive Vice
President-Lending, Chief Operating Officer or Chief Executive Officer and will be reported to the Board of Directors at the next regularly scheduled Board meeting.
Historically, our primary lending emphasis has been the origination and purchase of residential first mortgage loans, however, commercial real estate lending
is a prioritized initiative included in our Strategic Plan. Beginning in the second half of 2014, we intend to commence diversifying our loan portfolio through the purchase and origination of commercial real estate loans and interest in such loans.
We are currently in the process of hiring commercial real estate professionals, building out necessary systems and establishing processes and procedures for originating, purchasing and monitoring commercial real estate loans.
Home equity credit lines and fixed-rate second mortgage loans in principal amounts of $50,000 or less require approval by one of our designated Consumer Loan
Department underwriters. Home equity credit lines and fixed-rate home equity loans in excess of $50,000, up to the $250,000 maximum, require approval by an underwriter and either our Consumer Loan Officer, Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief
Executive Officer or Chief Operating Officer. Home equity credit lines and loans involving mortgage liens where the combined first and second mortgage principal balances exceed $750,000 require approval by an underwriter, our Consumer Loan Officer
and either our Executive Vice President-Lending, Chief Executive Officer or Chief Operating Officer.
Upon receipt of a completed loan application from a
prospective borrower, we order a credit report and we verify certain other information. If necessary, we obtain additional financial or credit-related information. We require an appraisal for all first mortgage loans. Appraisals may be performed by
our in-house Appraisal Department or by licensed or certified third-party appraisal firms. Currently most appraisals are performed by third-party appraisers and are reviewed by our in-house Appraisal Department.
14
We require title insurance on all mortgage loans, except for home equity credit lines and fixed-rate second
mortgage loans. For these loans, we require a property search detailing the current chain of title. We require borrowers to obtain hazard insurance and we require borrowers to obtain flood insurance prior to closing, if appropriate. We require most
borrowers to advance funds on a monthly basis together with each payment of principal and interest to a mortgage escrow account from which we make disbursements for items such as real estate taxes, flood insurance and private mortgage insurance
premiums, if required. Presently, we do not escrow for real estate taxes on properties located in the states of New York, Connecticut, Massachusetts and Pennsylvania.
Asset Quality
One of our key operating objectives has
been, and continues to be, to maintain a high level of asset quality. Through a variety of strategies we have been proactive in addressing problem loans and non-performing assets. Charge-offs, net of recoveries, amounted to $62.8 million in 2013 and
$66.4 million in 2012. Economic conditions have improved at a moderate pace. The unemployment rate, which declined to 6.7% in December 2013 from 7.8% in 2012, remains elevated. During 2013, house prices increased both nationally and in our primary
lending markets. We continue to closely monitor the local and national real estate markets and other factors related to risks inherent in our loan portfolio. We determined the provision for loan losses for 2013 based on our allowance for loan loss
(ALL) methodology that considers a number of quantitative and qualitative factors, including the amount of non-performing loans, the loss experience of our non-performing loans, recent collateral valuations, conditions in the real estate
and housing markets, current economic conditions, continued elevated levels of unemployment, and growth or shrinkage in the loan portfolio.
Historically,
our primary lending emphasis has been the origination and purchase of one- to four-family first mortgage loans on residential properties and, to a lesser extent, second mortgage loans on one- to four-family residential properties. Our loan growth is
primarily concentrated in one- to four-family mortgage loans with original LTV ratios of less than 80%. The average LTV ratio of our 2013 first mortgage loan originations and our total first mortgage loan portfolio were 58.4% and 58.9%,
respectively, using the appraised value at the time of origination. The value of the property used as collateral for our loans is dependent upon local market conditions. As part of our estimation of the ALL, we monitor changes in the values of homes
in each market using indices published by various organizations. Based on our analysis of the data for 2013, we concluded that home values in our primary lending markets increased during 2013 but remain lower than their peak levels reached in 2006
prior to the economic recession. Due to the decline of real estate values starting in 2006 and continuing through 2011, the LTV ratios based on appraisals obtained at time of origination do not necessarily indicate the extent to which we may incur a
loss on any given loan that may go into foreclosure.
15
The following table presents the geographic distribution of our loan portfolio as a percentage of total loans and
of our non-performing loans as a percentage of total non-performing loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
At December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Non-performing
Loans
|
|
|
Total loans
|
|
|
Non-performing
Loans
|
|
New Jersey
|
|
|
42.5
|
%
|
|
|
44.2
|
%
|
|
|
43.0
|
%
|
|
|
47.9
|
%
|
New York
|
|
|
27.1
|
|
|
|
24.1
|
|
|
|
24.7
|
|
|
|
22.0
|
|
Connecticut
|
|
|
14.9
|
|
|
|
8.0
|
|
|
|
14.7
|
|
|
|
7.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
84.5
|
|
|
|
76.3
|
|
|
|
82.4
|
|
|
|
77.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pennsylvania
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
1.9
|
|
Virginia
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
2.3
|
|
|
|
2.4
|
|
|
|
2.6
|
|
Massachusetts
|
|
|
1.8
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
1.5
|
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
Maryland
|
|
|
1.7
|
|
|
|
4.7
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
4.2
|
|
Illinois
|
|
|
1.6
|
|
|
|
4.8
|
|
|
|
2.0
|
|
|
|
4.6
|
|
All others
|
|
|
3.7
|
|
|
|
7.9
|
|
|
|
4.9
|
|
|
|
8.1
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total outside New York metropolitan area
|
|
|
15.5
|
|
|
|
23.7
|
|
|
|
17.6
|
|
|
|
23.0
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
100.0
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delinquent Loans and Foreclosed Assets
.
When a borrower fails to make required payments on a loan, we
take a number of steps to induce the borrower to cure the delinquency and restore the loan to a current status. In the case of originated mortgage loans, our Mortgage Servicing Department is responsible for collection procedures from the 15th day up
to the 119th day of delinquency. Specific procedures include a late charge notice being sent at the time a payment is over 15 days past due. Telephone contact is attempted on approximately the 20th day of the month to avoid a 30-day delinquency. A
second written notice is sent at the time the payment becomes 30 days past due.
We send additional letters if no contact is established by approximately
the 45th day of delinquency. On the 60th day of delinquency, we send another letter followed by continued telephone contact. Between the 30th and the 60th day of delinquency, if telephone contact has not been established, an independent contractor
may be sent to make a physical inspection of the property. When contact is made with the borrower at any time prior to foreclosure, we attempt to obtain full payment, work out a repayment schedule, or discuss other loss mitigation options with the
borrower in order to avoid foreclosure.
We send a foreclosure notice when a loan is over 90 days delinquent. The accrual of income on loans that are not
guaranteed by a federal agency is generally discontinued when interest or principal payments are 90 days in arrears and any accrued but unpaid interest is reversed. We commence foreclosure proceedings if the loan is not brought current between the
120th and 150th day of delinquency unless specific limited circumstances warrant an exception. The collection procedures for mortgage loans guaranteed by federal agencies follow the collection guidelines outlined by those agencies.
We monitor delinquencies on our serviced loan portfolio from reports sent to us by the servicers. Once all past due reports are received, we examine the
delinquencies and contact appropriate servicer personnel to determine the status of the loans. We also use these reports to prepare our own monthly reports for management review. These summaries break down, by servicer, total principal and interest
due, length of delinquency, as well as accounts in foreclosure and bankruptcy. We monitor all accounts in foreclosure to confirm that the servicer has taken all proper steps to foreclose promptly if there is no other recourse. We also monitor
whether mortgagors who filed bankruptcy are meeting their obligation to pay the mortgage debt in accordance with the terms of the bankruptcy petition.
16
The collection procedures for consumer and other loans include sending periodic late notices to a borrower once a
loan is past due. We attempt to make direct contact with a borrower once a loan becomes 30 days past due. Supervisory personnel in our Consumer Loan Department review the delinquent loans and collection efforts on a regular basis. If collection
activity is unsuccessful after 90 days, we may refer the matter to our legal counsel for further collection effort or charge-off the loan. Loans we deem to be uncollectible are proposed for charge-off. Charge-offs of consumer loans require the
approval of our Consumer Loan Officer and either the Executive Vice President-Lending, our Chief Executive Officer or Chief Operating Officer.
Foreclosed
real estate is property acquired through foreclosure or deed in lieu of foreclosure. Write-downs to fair value (net of estimated costs to sell) at the time of acquisition are charged to the ALL. After acquisition, foreclosed properties are held for
sale and carried at the lower of fair value minus estimated cost to sell, or at cost. If a foreclosure action is commenced and the loan is not brought current, paid in full or refinanced before the foreclosure sale, the real property securing the
loan is either sold at the foreclosure sale, or we or our servicer sells the property as soon thereafter as practicable.
Management continuously monitors
the status of the loan portfolio and reports to the Board of Directors at each regular meeting. Our Asset Quality Committee (AQC) is responsible for monitoring our loan portfolio, delinquencies and foreclosed real estate. This committee
includes members of senior management from the Loan Originations, Loan Servicing, Appraisal, Risk Management and Finance Departments.
Loans delinquent 60
days to 89 days and 90 days or more were as follows as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
90 Days or More
|
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
No. of
Loans
|
|
|
Principal
Balance
of Loans
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgages
|
|
|
356
|
|
|
$
|
140,230
|
|
|
|
2,601
|
|
|
$
|
905,869
|
|
|
|
537
|
|
|
$
|
218,814
|
|
|
|
2,828
|
|
|
$
|
1,018,642
|
|
|
|
457
|
|
|
$
|
177,605
|
|
|
|
2,553
|
|
|
$
|
914,291
|
|
FHA/VA first mortgages
|
|
|
73
|
|
|
|
13,963
|
|
|
|
559
|
|
|
|
132,844
|
|
|
|
74
|
|
|
|
16,828
|
|
|
|
525
|
|
|
|
129,553
|
|
|
|
40
|
|
|
|
8,774
|
|
|
|
377
|
|
|
|
97,476
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
5,983
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
3,189
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
3,190
|
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
393
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
2,223
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4
|
|
|
|
4,344
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
|
1,337
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
7,048
|
|
|
|
9
|
|
|
|
447
|
|
|
|
71
|
|
|
|
7,975
|
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
632
|
|
|
|
49
|
|
|
|
4,353
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
448
|
|
|
$
|
161,513
|
|
|
|
3,233
|
|
|
$
|
1,049,244
|
|
|
|
625
|
|
|
$
|
239,279
|
|
|
|
3,432
|
|
|
$
|
1,162,527
|
|
|
|
509
|
|
|
$
|
187,404
|
|
|
|
2,987
|
|
|
$
|
1,022,687
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Delinquent loans to total loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.67
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.35
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.88
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4.29
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.64
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3.48
|
%
|
17
The following table is a comparison of our delinquent loans by class as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-59 Days
|
|
|
60-89 Days
|
|
|
90 Days
or more
|
|
|
Total
Past Due
|
|
|
Current
Loans
|
|
|
Total
Loans
|
|
|
90 Days
or more
accruing
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
274,303
|
|
|
$
|
132,910
|
|
|
$
|
903,485
|
|
|
$
|
1,310,698
|
|
|
$
|
18,912,746
|
|
|
$
|
20,223,444
|
|
|
$
|
132,844
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
34,277
|
|
|
|
21,283
|
|
|
|
135,228
|
|
|
|
190,788
|
|
|
|
3,457,944
|
|
|
|
3,648,732
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
1,384
|
|
|
|
5,983
|
|
|
|
3,189
|
|
|
|
10,556
|
|
|
|
15,115
|
|
|
|
25,671
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
484
|
|
|
|
129
|
|
|
|
1,412
|
|
|
|
2,025
|
|
|
|
84,054
|
|
|
|
86,079
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
1,389
|
|
|
|
1,163
|
|
|
|
3,895
|
|
|
|
6,447
|
|
|
|
102,103
|
|
|
|
108,550
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
58
|
|
|
|
45
|
|
|
|
1,741
|
|
|
|
1,844
|
|
|
|
18,215
|
|
|
|
20,059
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
311,895
|
|
|
$
|
161,513
|
|
|
$
|
1,049,244
|
|
|
$
|
1,522,652
|
|
|
$
|
22,590,177
|
|
|
$
|
24,112,829
|
|
|
$
|
132,844
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family first mortgages:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amortizing
|
|
$
|
327,122
|
|
|
$
|
206,033
|
|
|
$
|
965,956
|
|
|
$
|
1,499,111
|
|
|
$
|
20,821,950
|
|
|
$
|
22,321,061
|
|
|
$
|
129,553
|
|
Interest-only
|
|
|
58,004
|
|
|
|
29,609
|
|
|
|
182,239
|
|
|
|
269,852
|
|
|
|
4,216,023
|
|
|
|
4,485,875
|
|
|
|
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
6,474
|
|
|
|
3,190
|
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
11,352
|
|
|
|
20,907
|
|
|
|
32,259
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fixed-rate second mortgages
|
|
|
587
|
|
|
|
68
|
|
|
|
1,665
|
|
|
|
2,320
|
|
|
|
103,919
|
|
|
|
106,239
|
|
|
|
|
|
Home equity lines of credit
|
|
|
1,592
|
|
|
|
379
|
|
|
|
3,996
|
|
|
|
5,967
|
|
|
|
113,905
|
|
|
|
119,872
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other
|
|
|
62
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,314
|
|
|
|
2,376
|
|
|
|
18,528
|
|
|
|
20,904
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
393,841
|
|
|
$
|
239,279
|
|
|
$
|
1,162,527
|
|
|
$
|
1,795,647
|
|
|
$
|
25,295,232
|
|
|
$
|
27,090,879
|
|
|
$
|
129,553
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
We continue to closely monitor the local and national real estate markets and other factors related to risks inherent in our
loan portfolio. Economic conditions improved modestly during 2013, but were adversely affected since 2006 by the decline in the housing and real estate markets. Beginning in 2012, house prices stabilized and increased during 2013. However, the
recent increases in market interest rates and the continued elevated level of unemployment may have adverse implications for the housing markets.
With
the exception of first mortgage loans guaranteed by a federal agency, we stop accruing income on loans when interest or principal payments are 90 days in arrears or earlier when the timely collectability of such interest or principal is doubtful. We
reverse any accrued, but unpaid interest on non-accrual loans that we previously credited to income. We recognize income in the period that we collect it or when the ultimate collectability of principal is no longer in doubt. We return a non-accrual
loan to accrual status when factors indicating doubtful collection no longer exist.
18
The following table presents information regarding non-performing assets as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Non-accrual loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One-to four family amortizing loans
|
|
$
|
770,641
|
|
|
$
|
836,403
|
|
|
$
|
700,429
|
|
|
$
|
614,758
|
|
|
$
|
499,550
|
|
One-to four family interest-only loans
|
|
|
135,228
|
|
|
|
182,239
|
|
|
|
213,862
|
|
|
|
179,348
|
|
|
|
82,236
|
|
Multi-family and commercial mortgages
|
|
|
3,189
|
|
|
|
1,688
|
|
|
|
2,223
|
|
|
|
1,117
|
|
|
|
1,414
|
|
Construction loans
|
|
|
294
|
|
|
|
4,669
|
|
|
|
4,344
|
|
|
|
7,560
|
|
|
|
6,624
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
7,048
|
|
|
|
7,975
|
|
|
|
4,353
|
|
|
|
4,320
|
|
|
|
1,916
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-accrual loans
|
|
|
916,400
|
|
|
|
1,032,974
|
|
|
|
925,211
|
|
|
|
807,103
|
|
|
|
591,740
|
|
Accruing loans delinquent 90 days or more
|
|
|
132,844
|
|
|
|
129,553
|
|
|
|
97,476
|
|
|
|
64,156
|
|
|
|
35,955
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans
|
|
|
1,049,244
|
|
|
|
1,162,527
|
|
|
|
1,022,687
|
|
|
|
871,259
|
|
|
|
627,695
|
|
Foreclosed real estate, net
|
|
|
70,436
|
|
|
|
47,322
|
|
|
|
40,619
|
|
|
|
45,693
|
|
|
|
16,736
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets
|
|
$
|
1,119,680
|
|
|
$
|
1,209,849
|
|
|
$
|
1,063,306
|
|
|
$
|
916,952
|
|
|
$
|
644,431
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans to total loans
|
|
|
4.35
|
%
|
|
|
4.29
|
%
|
|
|
3.48
|
%
|
|
|
2.82
|
%
|
|
|
1.98
|
%
|
Non-performing assets to total assets
|
|
|
2.90
|
|
|
|
2.98
|
|
|
|
2.34
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
|
|
|
1.07
|
|
Loans that are past due 90 days or more and still accruing interest are loans that are insured by the FHA.
Non-performing loans exclude troubled debt restructurings that are accruing and have been performing in accordance with the terms of their restructure
agreement for at least six months. The following table presents information regarding loans modified in a troubled debt restructuring:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Troubled debt restructurings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Current
|
|
$
|
108,413
|
|
|
$
|
64,438
|
|
|
$
|
43,042
|
|
|
$
|
9,429
|
|
|
|
|
|
30-59 days
|
|
|
19,931
|
|
|
|
28,988
|
|
|
|
7,359
|
|
|
|
1,616
|
|
|
|
|
|
60-89 days
|
|
|
17,407
|
|
|
|
14,346
|
|
|
|
4,786
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 days or more
|
|
|
176,797
|
|
|
|
107,320
|
|
|
|
11,354
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total troubled debt restructurings
|
|
|
322,548
|
|
|
|
215,092
|
|
|
|
66,541
|
|
|
|
11,045
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The increase in troubled debt restructurings was primarily due to an expansion of loan modification programs offered by the
Bank pursuant to a Residential Mortgage Loss Mitigation Policy that became effective during the first quarter of 2012. In addition, based on regulatory guidance, at December 31, 2013 we included in troubled debt restructurings $187.7 million of
loans to borrowers whose loans have been discharged in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy as compared to $115.4 million at December 31, 2012.
Loans that were
modified in a troubled debt restructuring primarily represent loans that have been in a deferred principal payment plan for an extended period of time, generally in excess of six months, loans that have had past due amounts capitalized as part of
the loan balance, loans that have a confirmed Chapter 13 bankruptcy status, borrowers loans that have been discharged in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy and other repayment plans. These loans are individually evaluated for impairment to determine if
the carrying value of the loan is in excess of the fair value of the collateral or the present value of each loans expected future cash flows.
We
discontinue accruing interest and reverse previously accrued but unpaid interest on troubled debt restructurings that are past due 90 days or more or if we believe we will not collect all amounts contractually due. Approximately $22.7 million of
troubled debt restructurings that were previously accruing interest became 90 days or more past due during 2013 for which we discontinued accruing interest and reversed previously accrued, but unpaid interest.
19
Included in accruing loans delinquent 90 days or more are $132.8 million of FHA loans. We continue to accrue
interest on these loans since they are insured by the FHA and we believe that we will collect substantially all amounts contractually due under the terms of the loan. At December 31, 2013, approximately 76.3% of our non-performing loans were in
the New York metropolitan area and 23.7% were outside of the New York metropolitan area. At December 31, 2012, approximately 77.0% of our non-performing loans were in the New York metropolitan area and 23.0% were outside of the New York
metropolitan area. Non-accrual first mortgage loans at December 31, 2013 included $135.2 million of interest-only loans and $231.7 million of reduced documentation loans with average LTV ratios of approximately 63.4% and 66.2%, respectively,
based on appraised values at time of origination. Non-accrual first mortgage loans at December 31, 2012 included $182.2 million of interest-only loans and $264.0 million of reduced documentation loans with average LTV ratios of approximately
68.7% and 53.6%, respectively, based on appraised values at time of origination.
The total amount of interest income on non-accrual loans that would have
been recognized if interest on all such loans had been recorded based upon original contract terms amounted to approximately $58.4 million. The total amount of interest income received on non-accrual loans amounted to approximately $1.2 million
during 2013
.
We are not committed to lend additional funds to borrowers whose loans are in non-accrual status.
Allowance for Loan Losses.
The following table presents the activity in our ALL at or for the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At or for the Year December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Balance at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
302,348
|
|
|
$
|
273,791
|
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
$
|
140,074
|
|
|
$
|
49,797
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
36,500
|
|
|
|
95,000
|
|
|
|
120,000
|
|
|
|
195,000
|
|
|
|
137,500
|
|
Charge-offs:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
First mortgage loans
|
|
|
(87,288
|
)
|
|
|
(86,636
|
)
|
|
|
(96,714
|
)
|
|
|
(110,669
|
)
|
|
|
(48,097
|
)
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
(566
|
)
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
(382
|
)
|
|
|
(102
|
)
|
|
|
(36
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total charge-offs
|
|
|
(87,854
|
)
|
|
|
(87,100
|
)
|
|
|
(97,096
|
)
|
|
|
(110,771
|
)
|
|
|
(48,133
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
25,103
|
|
|
|
20,657
|
|
|
|
14,313
|
|
|
|
12,271
|
|
|
|
910
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs
|
|
|
(62,751
|
)
|
|
|
(66,443
|
)
|
|
|
(82,783
|
)
|
|
|
(98,500
|
)
|
|
|
(47,223
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
$
|
276,097
|
|
|
$
|
302,348
|
|
|
$
|
273,791
|
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
$
|
140,074
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses to total loans
|
|
|
1.15
|
%
|
|
|
1.12
|
%
|
|
|
0.93
|
%
|
|
|
0.77
|
%
|
|
|
0.44
|
%
|
Allowance for loan losses to non-performing loans
|
|
|
26.31
|
|
|
|
26.01
|
|
|
|
26.77
|
|
|
|
27.15
|
|
|
|
22.32
|
|
Net charge-offs as a percentage of average loans
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
0.28
|
|
|
|
0.31
|
|
|
|
0.15
|
|
20
The following table presents the activity in our ALL by portfolio segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
One-to four-
Family
Mortgages
|
|
|
Multi-family
and Commercial
Mortgages
|
|
|
Construction
|
|
|
Consumer and
Other Loans
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2011
|
|
$
|
264,922
|
|
|
$
|
4,382
|
|
|
$
|
734
|
|
|
$
|
3,753
|
|
|
$
|
273,791
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
95,282
|
|
|
|
(1,572
|
)
|
|
|
382
|
|
|
|
908
|
|
|
|
95,000
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(85,763
|
)
|
|
|
(873
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(464
|
)
|
|
|
(87,100
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
20,655
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2
|
|
|
|
20,657
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (charge-offs) recoveries
|
|
|
(65,108
|
)
|
|
|
(873
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(462
|
)
|
|
|
(66,443
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2012
|
|
$
|
295,096
|
|
|
$
|
1,937
|
|
|
$
|
1,116
|
|
|
$
|
4,199
|
|
|
$
|
302,348
|
|
Provision for loan losses
|
|
|
38,380
|
|
|
|
(1,132
|
)
|
|
|
(1,003
|
)
|
|
|
255
|
|
|
|
36,500
|
|
Charge-offs
|
|
|
(87,288
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(566
|
)
|
|
|
(87,854
|
)
|
Recoveries
|
|
|
25,073
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
|
|
|
|
25,103
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (charge-offs) recoveries
|
|
|
(62,215
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(536
|
)
|
|
|
(62,751
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at December 31, 2013
|
|
$
|
271,261
|
|
|
$
|
805
|
|
|
$
|
113
|
|
|
$
|
3,918
|
|
|
$
|
276,097
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loan portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of year
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
313,045
|
|
|
$
|
8,416
|
|
|
$
|
294
|
|
|
$
|
2,474
|
|
|
$
|
324,229
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
|
23,559,133
|
|
|
|
17,255
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
212,212
|
|
|
|
23,788,600
|
|
Allowance
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Individually evaluated for impairment
|
|
$
|
24,984
|
|
|
$
|
414
|
|
|
$
|
113
|
|
|
$
|
63
|
|
|
$
|
25,574
|
|
Collectively evaluated for impairment
|
|
|
246,277
|
|
|
|
391
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,855
|
|
|
|
250,523
|
|
The ALL has been determined in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (U.S. GAAP) and
applicable regulatory requirements, which require us to maintain an adequate ALL. We are responsible for the timely and periodic determination of the amount of the allowance required. We believe that our ALL is adequate to cover specifically
identifiable loan losses, as well as estimated losses inherent in our portfolio for which certain losses are probable but not specifically identifiable.
The ALL amounted to $276.1 million and $302.3 million at December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively. We recorded our provision for loan losses during 2013
based on our ALL methodology that considers a number of quantitative and qualitative factors, including the amount of non-performing loans, our loss experience on non-performing loans, conditions in the real estate and housing markets, current
economic conditions, particularly increasing levels of unemployment, and changes in the size of the loan portfolio. During 2013 we lowered our provision for loan losses due to improving economic conditions and unemployment rates, increasing home
prices, a decrease in the size of the loan portfolio and a decrease in net charge-offs and a decrease in the amount of total delinquent loans. However, we cannot assure you that the economy or home prices will continue to improve, that delinquent
loans will continue to decrease or that our loss experience will not worsen. . See Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis Critical Accounting Policies Allowance for Loan Losses.
At December 31, 2013, first mortgage loans secured by one-to four-family properties accounted for 99.0% of total loans. Fixed-rate mortgage loans
represent 55.4% of our first mortgage loans. Compared to adjustable-rate loans, fixed-rate loans possess less inherent credit risk since loan payments do not change in response to changes in interest rates. We do not originate or purchase option ARM
loans or negative amortization loans.
Non-performing loans amounted to $1.05 billion at December 31, 2013 as compared to $1.16 billion at
December 31, 2012. Non-performing loans at December 31, 2013 included $1.04 billion of one- to four-family first mortgage loans as compared to $1.15 billion at December 31, 2012. The ratio of non-performing loans to total loans was
4.35% at December 31, 2013 compared with 4.29% at December 31, 2012. Loans delinquent 60
21
to 89 days amounted to $161.5 million at December 31, 2013 as compared to $239.3 million at December 31, 2012. Foreclosed real estate amounted to $70.4 million at December 31, 2013
as compared to $47.3 million at December 31, 2012. As a result of our underwriting policies, our borrowers typically have a significant amount of equity, at the time of origination, in the underlying real estate that we use as collateral for
our loans. Due to the steady deterioration of real estate values that began in 2006 and continued into the first half of 2012, the LTV ratios based on appraisals obtained at time of origination do not necessarily indicate the extent to which we may
incur a loss on any given loan that may go into foreclosure. However, our lower average LTV ratios have helped to moderate our charge-offs as there has generally been adequate equity behind our first lien as of the foreclosure date to satisfy our
loan.
At December 31, 2013, the ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans was 26.31% as compared to 26.01% at December 31, 2012. The ratio of
the ALL to total loans was 1.15% at December 31, 2013 as compared to 1.12% at December 31, 2012. Changes in the ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans is not, absent other factors, an indication of the adequacy of the ALL since there is
not necessarily a direct relationship between changes in various asset quality ratios and changes in the ALL and non-performing loans. In the current economic environment, a loan generally becomes non-performing when the borrower experiences
financial difficulty. In many cases, the borrower also has a second mortgage or home equity loan on the property. In substantially all of these cases, we do not hold the second mortgage or home equity loan as this is not a business we have actively
pursued.
We obtain new collateral values by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due. If the estimated fair value of the collateral (less estimated
selling costs) is less than the recorded investment in the loan, we charge-off an amount to reduce the loan to the fair value of the collateral less estimated selling costs. As a result, certain losses inherent in our non-performing loans are being
recognized as charge-offs which may result in a lower ratio of the ALL to non-performing loans. Charge-offs, net of recoveries, amounted to $62.8 million for 2013 as compared to $66.4 million for 2012. Write-downs and net gains or losses on the sale
of foreclosed real estate amounted to a net gain of $1.7 million for 2013 as compared to a net loss of $1.9 million for 2012. The results of our reappraisal process, our recent charge-off history and our loss experience related to the sale of
foreclosed real estate are considered in the determination of the ALL. Our loss experience on the sale of foreclosed real estate was 18% for 2013 as compared to 26% for 2012.
As part of our estimation of the ALL, we monitor changes in the values of homes in each market using indices published by various organizations including the
FHFA and Case Shiller. Our AQC uses these indices and a stratification of our loan portfolio by state as part of its quarterly determination of the ALL. We do not apply different loss factors based on geographic locations since, at December 31,
2013, 84.5% of our loan portfolio and 76.3% of our non-performing loans are located in the New York metropolitan area. We believe that our process of obtaining updated collateral values by the time a loan becomes 180 days past due, and annually
thereafter, identifies potential charge-offs more accurately than a house price index that is based on a wide geographic area and includes many different types of houses. However, we use house price indices to identify geographic trends in housing
markets to determine if an overall adjustment to the ALL is required based on loans we have in those geographic areas and to determine if changes in the loss factors used in the ALL quantitative analysis are necessary. Our quantitative analysis of
the ALL accounts for increases in non-performing loans by applying progressively higher risk factors to loans as they become more delinquent.
Due to the
nature of our loan portfolio, our evaluation of the adequacy of our ALL is performed primarily on a pooled basis. Each quarter we prepare an analysis which categorizes the entire loan portfolio by certain risk characteristics such as
loan type (fixed and variable one- to four-family, interest-only, reduced documentation, multi-family, commercial, construction, etc.), loan source (originated or purchased) and payment status (i.e., current or number of days delinquent). Loans with
known potential losses are categorized separately. We assign estimated loss factors to the payment status categories on the basis of our assessment of the potential risk inherent in each loan type. These factors are periodically reviewed for
appropriateness giving consideration to our loss experience, delinquency trends, portfolio growth and environmental factors such as the status of the
22
regional economy and housing market, in order to ascertain that the loss factors cover probable and estimable losses inherent in the portfolio. We define our loss experience on non-performing
loans as the ratio of the excess of the loan balance (including selling costs) over the updated collateral value to the principal balance of loans for which we have updated valuations. We obtain updated collateral values by the time a loan becomes
180 days past due and on an annual basis thereafter for as long as the loan remains non-performing. Based on our analysis, our loss experience on our non-performing one- to four-family first mortgage loans was approximately 13.6% during 2013 as
compared to 14.3% in 2012 and 13.5% in 2011.
In addition to our loss experience, we also use environmental factors and qualitative analyses to determine
the adequacy of our ALL. This analysis includes further evaluation of economic factors, such as trends in the unemployment rate, as well as a ratio analysis to evaluate the overall measurement of the ALL, a review of delinquency ratios, net
charge-off ratios and the ratio of the ALL to both non-performing loans and total loans. The qualitative review is used to reassess the overall determination of the ALL and to ensure that directional changes in the ALL and the provision for loan
losses are supported by relevant internal and external data. Based on our recent loss experience on non-performing loans and the sale of foreclosed real estate as well as our consideration of environmental factors, we changed certain loss factors
used in our quantitative analysis of the ALL for our one- to four- family first mortgage loans during 2013. The recent adjustment to our loss factors did not have a material effect on the ultimate level of our ALL or on our provision for loan
losses. If our future loss experience requires additional increases in our loss factors, this may result in increased levels of loan loss provisions.
We
consider the average LTV ratio of our non-performing loans and our total portfolio in relation to the overall changes in house prices in our lending markets when determining the ALL. This provides us with a macro indication of the
severity of potential losses that might be expected. Since substantially all our portfolio consists of first mortgage loans on residential properties, the LTV ratio is particularly important to us when a loan becomes non-performing. The weighted
average LTV ratio in our one- to four-family mortgage loan portfolio at December 31, 2013 was approximately 58.9%, using appraised values at the time of origination. The average LTV ratio of our non-performing loans using appraised values at
the time of origination was approximately 75.2% at December 31, 2013. Based on the valuation indices, house prices have declined in the New York metropolitan area, where 76.3% of our non-performing loans were located at December 31, 2013,
by approximately 21% from the peak of the market in 2006 through October 2012 and by 21% nationwide during that period. For the year ended December 31, 2013, home prices increased 5% in the New York metropolitan area and increased 14%
nationwide. Changes in house values may affect our loss experience which may require that we change the loss factors used in our quantitative analysis of the ALL. There can be no assurance whether significant declines in house values may occur and
result in higher loss experience and increased levels of charge-offs and loan loss provisions.
Net charge-offs amounted to $62.8 million for 2013 as
compared to net charge-offs of $66.4 million for 2012. Our charge-offs on non-performing loans have historically been low due to the amount of underlying equity in the properties collateralizing our first mortgage loans. Until the recent
recessionary cycle, it was our experience that as a non-performing loan approached foreclosure, the borrower sold the underlying property or, if there was a second mortgage or other subordinated lien, the subordinated lien holder would purchase the
property to protect their interest thereby resulting in the full payment of principal and interest to Hudson City Savings.
Due to the unprecedented level
of foreclosures and the desire by many states to slow the foreclosure process, we continue to experience a time frame to repayment or foreclosure of up to 48 months from the initial non-performing period. These delays have impacted our level of
non-performing loans as these loans take longer to migrate to real estate owned and ultimate disposition. In addition, the highly publicized foreclosure issues that have affected the nations largest mortgage loan servicers has resulted in
greater court and state attorney general scrutiny. Our foreclosure process and the time to complete a foreclosure continue to be prolonged, especially in New York and New Jersey where 68.3% of our non-performing loans are located. However, for loans
that have been in the foreclosure process for over 48 months, we are beginning to see an increased volume of completed
23
foreclosures. If real estate prices do not improve or decline, this extended time may result in further charge-offs. In addition, current conditions in the housing market have made it more
difficult for borrowers to sell homes to satisfy the mortgage and second lien holders and are less likely to repay our loan if the value of the property is not enough to satisfy their loan. We continue to closely monitor the property values
underlying our non-performing loans during this timeframe and take appropriate charge-offs when the loan balances exceed the underlying estimated property values.
Foreclosed real estate amounted to $70.4 million at December 31, 2013 as compared to $47.3 million at December 31, 2012. During 2013, we transferred
$126.8 million of loans to foreclosed real estate as compared to $87.8 million during 2012. Write-downs on foreclosed real estate and net gains or losses on the sale of foreclosed real estate amounted to a net gain of $1.7 million for the year ended
December 31, 2013 as compared to a net loss of $1.9 million for 2012. We sold 207 properties during 2013 as compared to 191 properties during 2012. Holding costs associated with foreclosed real estate amounted to $14.5 million and $8.3 million
for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012, respectively.
At December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, commercial and construction
loans evaluated for impairment in accordance with Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) guidance amounted to $8.7 million and $13.4 million, respectively. Based on this evaluation, we established an ALL of $527,000 for commercial
and construction loans classified as impaired at December 31, 2013 compared to $1.6 million at December 31, 2012. There were no charge-offs related to these loans in 2013 as compared to $873,000 in 2012.
The markets in which we lend experienced significant declines in real estate values beginning in 2006 and continuing into 2012. House prices began to increase
in the second half of 2012 and during 2013. We have taken these conditions into consideration in evaluating our ALL. Although we believe that we have established and maintained the ALL at adequate levels, additions may be necessary if future
economic and other conditions differ substantially from the current operating environment. Increases in our loss experience on non-performing loans, the loss factors used in our quantitative analysis of the ALL and continued increases in overall
loan delinquencies can have a significant impact on our need for increased levels of loan loss provisions in the future. No assurance can be given in any particular case that our LTV ratios will provide full protection in the event of borrower
default. Although we use the best information available, the level of the ALL remains an estimate that is subject to significant judgment and short-term change. See Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis Critical
Accounting Policies Allowance for Loan Losses.
24
The following table presents our allocation of the ALL by loan category and the percentage of loans in each
category to total loans at the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
2010
|
|
|
2009
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
of Loans in
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
of Loans in
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
of Loans in
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
of Loans in
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percentage
of Loans in
Category to
Total Loans
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
First mortgage loans:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One- to four-family
|
|
$
|
271,261
|
|
|
|
99.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
295,096
|
|
|
|
98.95
|
%
|
|
$
|
264,922
|
|
|
|
98.86
|
%
|
|
$
|
227,224
|
|
|
|
98.79
|
%
|
|
$
|
133,927
|
|
|
|
98.69
|
%
|
Other first mortgages
|
|
|
918
|
|
|
|
0.11
|
|
|
|
3,053
|
|
|
|
0.14
|
|
|
|
5,116
|
|
|
|
0.16
|
|
|
|
6,147
|
|
|
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
3,169
|
|
|
|
0.21
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total first mortgage loans
|
|
|
272,179
|
|
|
|
99.11
|
|
|
|
298,149
|
|
|
|
99.09
|
|
|
|
270,038
|
|
|
|
99.02
|
|
|
|
233,371
|
|
|
|
98.98
|
|
|
|
137,096
|
|
|
|
98.90
|
|
Consumer and other loans
|
|
|
3,918
|
|
|
|
0.89
|
|
|
|
4,199
|
|
|
|
0.91
|
|
|
|
3,753
|
|
|
|
0.98
|
|
|
|
3,203
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
2,978
|
|
|
|
1.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total allowance for loan losses
|
|
$
|
276,097
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
302,348
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
273,791
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
236,574
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
140,074
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment Activities
The Board of Directors reviews and approves our investment policy on an annual basis. The Chief Executive Officer, Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial
Officer, and other officers are authorized to purchase, sell, or loan securities. The Board of Directors reviews our investment activity on a quarterly basis.
Our investment policy is designed primarily to manage the interest rate sensitivity of our assets and liabilities, to generate a favorable return without
incurring undue interest rate and credit risk, to complement our lending activities and to provide and maintain liquidity within established guidelines. In establishing our investment strategies, we consider our asset/liability position, asset
concentrations, interest rate risk, credit risk, liquidity, market volatility and desired rate of return. We may invest in securities in accordance with the regulations of the OCC including U.S. Treasury obligations, federal agency securities,
mortgage-backed securities, certain time deposits of insured banks and savings institutions, certain bankers acceptances, repurchase agreements, federal funds sold, and, subject to certain limits, corporate debt and equity securities,
commercial paper and mutual funds. Our investment policy also provides that we will not engage in any practice that the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council considers to be an unsuitable investment practice.
On December 10, 2013, the OCC, the FDIC, the FRB, the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) released final rules to
implement Section 619 of the Reform Act, commonly known as the Volcker Rule. The Volcker Rule, among other things, prohibits banking entities from engaging in proprietary trading and from sponsoring, having an ownership interest in
or having certain relationships with a hedge fund or private equity fund, subject to certain exemptions. Any such prohibited investments are required to be disposed of by July 21, 2015. At December 31, 2013, we were not engaged in any
activities, nor did we have any ownership interests in any funds, that are prohibited under the Volcker Rule. See Regulation of Hudson City Savings Bank and Hudson City Bancorp.
We invest primarily in mortgage-backed securities issued by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as other securities issued by GSEs. These
securities account for substantially all of our securities. We do not purchase unrated or private label mortgage-backed securities. During 2012, we purchased $407.8 million of investment-grade corporate bonds.
25
At December 31, 2013, there were no debt securities past due or securities for which the Company currently
believes it is not probable that it will collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the security.
We invest primarily in
mortgage-backed securities issued by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, as well as other securities issued by GSEs. These securities account for substantially all of our securities. We do not purchase unrated or private label mortgage-backed
securities. During 2012 we purchased $407.8 million of investment-grade corporate bonds.
At December 31, 2013, there were no debt securities past
due or securities for which the Company currently believes it is not probable that it will collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the security.
We also have an investment in Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (FHLB) stock for $347.1 million at December 31, 2013. We have evaluated our
investment in FHLB stock for impairment which includes a review of the financial statements and capital balances of FHLB. FHLB is in compliance with its regulatory capital to assets ratio and liquidity requirements. We have also considered the
structure of the federal home loan bank system, which enables the regulator of the federal home loan banks to reallocate debt among the members, so each federal home loan bank member has a potential obligation to repay the consolidated obligations
issued by other federal home loan bank members. The FHLB structure has received support from the U.S. Treasury, which established a lending facility designed to provide secured funding on an as needed basis to government-sponsored enterprises, such
as the FHLB. As a result of our review of the FHLB and the federal home loan bank system, we have noted that there were no issues that would result in impairment in our investment.
We classify investments as held to maturity or available for sale at the date of purchase based on our assessment of our internal liquidity requirements. Held
to maturity securities are reported at cost, adjusted for amortization of premium and accretion of discount. We have both the ability and positive intent to hold these securities to maturity. During 2013, we sold held to maturity securities with a
carrying value of $311.4 million. These securities had less than 15% of the purchased par amount remaining at the time of sale. Available for sale securities are reported at fair value. We currently have no securities classified as trading
securities.
Investment Securities
.
At both December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012, investment securities classified as
held to maturity had a carrying value of $39.0 million, all of which were callable by the issuer. Investments classified as available for sale amounted to $297.3 million at December 31, 2013 and $428.1 million at December 31, 2012. At
December 31, 2013, the investment securities portfolio had a weighted-average rate of 1.49% and a fair value of approximately $340.0 million. During 2013 we purchased $298.0 million of investment securities all of which were issued by GSEs.
During 2012 we purchased $407.8 million of investment securities all of which were investment-grade corporate bond issues. We sold these corporate bonds in 2013 as we repositioned our portfolio in anticipation of an increase in market interest
rates. There were no calls of investment securities during 2013. As a result of low market interest rates, $500.0 million of investment securities were called during 2012. As of December 31, 2013, investment securities with an amortized cost of
$298.2 million were pledged as collateral for securities sold under agreements to repurchase. Also, at December 31, 2013, we had $347.1 million in FHLB stock. See Regulation of Hudson City Savings Bank and Hudson City Bancorp.
26
The following table presents our investment securities activity for the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
467,068
|
|
|
$
|
546,378
|
|
|
$
|
4,028,801
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale
|
|
|
298,033
|
|
|
|
407,832
|
|
|
|
|
|
Calls:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(500,000
|
)
|
|
|
(3,400,000
|
)
|
Maturities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity
|
|
|
(9,365
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale
|
|
|
(405,703
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(80,000
|
)
|
Premium (amortization) and discount accretion, net
|
|
|
(491
|
)
|
|
|
(1,376
|
)
|
|
|
5
|
|
Change in unrealized gain or (loss)
|
|
|
(13,248
|
)
|
|
|
14,234
|
|
|
|
(2,428
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in investment securities
|
|
|
(130,774
|
)
|
|
|
(79,310
|
)
|
|
|
(3,482,423
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value at end of year
|
|
$
|
336,294
|
|
|
$
|
467,068
|
|
|
$
|
546,378
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed Securities.
All of our mortgage-backed securities are issued by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae or
Freddie Mac. At December 31, 2013, mortgage-backed securities classified as held to maturity totaled $1.78 billion, or 4.6% of total assets, while $7.17 billion, or 18.6% of total assets, were classified as available for sale. At
December 31, 2013, the mortgage-backed securities portfolio had a weighted-average rate of 2.28% and a fair value of approximately $9.06 billion. Of the mortgage-backed securities we held at December 31, 2013, $7.40 billion, or 82.7% of
total mortgage-backed securities, had adjustable rates and $1.55 billion, or 17.3% of total mortgage-backed securities, had fixed rates. Our mortgage-backed securities portfolio includes real estate mortgage investment conduits (REMICs),
which are securities derived by reallocating cash flows from mortgage pass-through securities or from pools of mortgage loans held by a trust. REMICs are a form of, and are often referred to as, collateralized mortgage obligations
(CMOs). At December 31, 2013, we held $234.0 million of fixed-rate REMICs, which constituted 2.6% of our mortgage-backed securities portfolio. Mortgage-backed security purchases totaled $1.67 billion during 2013 compared with $1.47
billion during 2012. At December 31, 2013, mortgage-backed securities with an amortized cost of $7.89 billion were used as collateral for securities sold under agreements to repurchase.
We sold $8.66 billion of mortgage-backed securities available for sale as part of a restructuring transaction completed in the first quarter of 2011 (the
Restructuring Transaction) which included the extinguishment of $12.5 billion of structured putable borrowings. The extinguishment of the borrowings was funded by the sale of the mortgage-backed securities that had an average yield of
3.20% and $5.00 billion of new short-term fixed-maturity borrowings with an average cost of 0.66%. We decided to complete the Restructuring Transaction due to market events at that time, the unprecedented involvement of the U.S. government and the
GSEs in the mortgage market and the continuance of historically low market interest rates, resulted in an environment in which our balance sheet as a whole and our assets in particular became less responsive to current market conditions. The
extended low interest rate environment caused accelerated prepayment speeds on our mortgage-related assets resulting in interest rate risk and margin compression concerns for us.
Mortgage-backed securities generally yield less than the underlying loans because of the cost of payment guarantees or credit enhancements that reduce credit
risk. However, mortgage-backed securities are more liquid than individual mortgage loans and may be used to collateralize certain borrowings. In general, mortgage-
27
backed securities issued or guaranteed by Ginnie Mae, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are weighted at no more than 20% for risk-based capital purposes, compared to the 50% risk-weighting assigned to
most non-securitized residential mortgage loans.
While mortgage-backed securities are subject to a reduced credit risk as compared to whole loans, they
remain subject to the risk of a fluctuating interest rate environment. Along with other factors, such as the geographic distribution of the underlying mortgage loans, changes in interest rates may alter the prepayment rate of those mortgage loans
and affect both the prepayment rates and value of the mortgage-backed securities. At December 31, 2013, we did not own any principal-only, REMIC residuals, private label mortgage-backed securities or other higher risk securities such as those
backed by sub-prime loans.
The Company had two collateralized borrowings in the form of repurchase agreements totaling $100.0 million with Lehman
Brothers, Inc. Lehman Brothers, Inc. is currently in liquidation under the Securities Industry Protection Act (SIPA). Mortgage-backed securities with an amortized cost of approximately $114.1 million were pledged as collateral for these
borrowings and we demanded the return of this collateral. The trustee for the SIPA liquidation of Lehman Brothers, Inc. (the Trustee) notified the Company in the fourth quarter of 2011 that it no longer holds these securities and
considers our claim to be approximately $13.9 million representing the excess of the fair value of the collateral over the $100 million repurchase price. While we dispute the Trustees calculation of the claim, as a result of the Trustees
position, as of December 31, 2011 we removed the mortgage-backed securities and the borrowings from our balance sheet and recorded the net amount as a receivable included in other assets (the Net Claim). While we intend to pursue
full recovery of our Net Claim, we maintained a reserve of $3.9 million against the receivable balance at December 31, 2013 and 2012. There can be no assurances as to the amount of the final settlement of this transaction.
The following table presents our mortgage-backed securities activity for the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
11,017,499
|
|
|
$
|
13,285,913
|
|
|
$
|
24,034,909
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Purchases:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale
|
|
|
1,671,343
|
|
|
|
1,473,244
|
|
|
|
3,053,146
|
|
Principal payments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity
|
|
|
(877,505
|
)
|
|
|
(1,133,484
|
)
|
|
|
(1,808,661
|
)
|
Available for sale
|
|
|
(2,337,327
|
)
|
|
|
(2,560,457
|
)
|
|
|
(2,791,747
|
)
|
Sales:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity
|
|
|
(311,380
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale
|
|
|
(4,820
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,964,385
|
)
|
Mortgage-backed securities used as collateral for Lehman
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brothers, Inc. repurchase agreement
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(114,005
|
)
|
Premium (amortization) and discount accretion, net
|
|
|
(78,473
|
)
|
|
|
(89,767
|
)
|
|
|
(78,382
|
)
|
Change in unrealized gain or (loss)
|
|
|
(127,318
|
)
|
|
|
42,050
|
|
|
|
(44,962
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
(2,065,480
|
)
|
|
|
(2,268,414
|
)
|
|
|
(10,748,996
|
)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying value at end of year
|
|
$
|
8,952,019
|
|
|
$
|
11,017,499
|
|
|
$
|
13,285,913
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
The following table presents the composition of our money market investments, investment securities and
mortgage-backed securities portfolios in dollar amount and in percentage of each investment type at the dates indicated. The table also presents the mortgage-backed securities portfolio by coupon type.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Percent
of
Total (1)
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Percent
of
Total (1)
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Percent
of
Total (1)
|
|
|
Fair
Value
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Money market investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds sold and other overnight deposits
|
|
$
|
4,190,809
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,190,809
|
|
|
$
|
656,926
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
656,926
|
|
|
$
|
560,051
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
560,051
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government- sponsored enterprises
|
|
$
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
11.60
|
%
|
|
$
|
42,727
|
|
|
$
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
8.35
|
%
|
|
$
|
45,592
|
|
|
$
|
539,011
|
|
|
|
98.65
|
%
|
|
$
|
545,761
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total held to maturity
|
|
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
11.60
|
|
|
|
42,727
|
|
|
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
8.35
|
|
|
|
45,592
|
|
|
|
539,011
|
|
|
|
98.65
|
|
|
|
545,761
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government- sponsored enterprises
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
86.29
|
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate bonds
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
420,590
|
|
|
|
90.05
|
|
|
|
420,590
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities
|
|
|
7,089
|
|
|
|
2.11
|
|
|
|
7,089
|
|
|
|
7,467
|
|
|
|
1.60
|
|
|
|
7,467
|
|
|
|
7,368
|
|
|
|
1.35
|
|
|
|
7,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
|
|
|
297,283
|
|
|
|
88.40
|
|
|
|
297,283
|
|
|
|
428,057
|
|
|
|
91.65
|
|
|
|
428,057
|
|
|
|
7,368
|
|
|
|
1.35
|
|
|
|
7,368
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
$
|
336,294
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
340,010
|
|
|
$
|
467,068
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
473,649
|
|
|
$
|
546,379
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
553,129
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By issuer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass-through certificates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA
|
|
$
|
63,070
|
|
|
|
0.70
|
%
|
|
$
|
65,330
|
|
|
$
|
73,546
|
|
|
|
0.67
|
%
|
|
$
|
76,378
|
|
|
$
|
83,587
|
|
|
|
0.63
|
%
|
|
$
|
86,189
|
|
FNMA
|
|
|
402,848
|
|
|
|
4.50
|
|
|
|
427,950
|
|
|
|
856,840
|
|
|
|
7.78
|
|
|
|
918,252
|
|
|
|
1,154,638
|
|
|
|
8.69
|
|
|
|
1,233,237
|
|
FHLMC
|
|
|
1,123,029
|
|
|
|
12.55
|
|
|
|
1,189,844
|
|
|
|
1,619,119
|
|
|
|
14.69
|
|
|
|
1,722,010
|
|
|
|
2,132,408
|
|
|
|
16.05
|
|
|
|
2,257,772
|
|
REMICS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA
|
|
|
195,517
|
|
|
|
2.18
|
|
|
|
205,699
|
|
|
|
427,252
|
|
|
|
3.88
|
|
|
|
455,852
|
|
|
|
744,890
|
|
|
|
5.61
|
|
|
|
791,225
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total held to maturity
|
|
|
1,784,464
|
|
|
|
19.93
|
|
|
|
1,888,823
|
|
|
|
2,976,757
|
|
|
|
27.02
|
|
|
|
3,172,492
|
|
|
|
4,115,523
|
|
|
|
30.98
|
|
|
|
4,368,423
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass-through certificates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA
|
|
|
804,883
|
|
|
|
8.99
|
|
|
|
804,883
|
|
|
|
1,033,641
|
|
|
|
9.38
|
|
|
|
1,033,641
|
|
|
|
1,166,228
|
|
|
|
8.78
|
|
|
|
1,166,228
|
|
FNMA
|
|
|
3,890,723
|
|
|
|
43.47
|
|
|
|
3,890,723
|
|
|
|
4,135,635
|
|
|
|
37.54
|
|
|
|
4,135,635
|
|
|
|
4,468,029
|
|
|
|
33.63
|
|
|
|
4,468,029
|
|
FHLMC
|
|
|
2,433,438
|
|
|
|
27.18
|
|
|
|
2,433,438
|
|
|
|
2,811,850
|
|
|
|
25.52
|
|
|
|
2,811,850
|
|
|
|
3,452,156
|
|
|
|
25.98
|
|
|
|
3,452,156
|
|
REMICS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA
|
|
|
38,511
|
|
|
|
0.43
|
|
|
|
38,511
|
|
|
|
59,616
|
|
|
|
0.54
|
|
|
|
59,616
|
|
|
|
83,977
|
|
|
|
0.63
|
|
|
|
83,977
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
|
|
|
7,167,555
|
|
|
|
80.07
|
|
|
|
7,167,555
|
|
|
|
8,040,742
|
|
|
|
72.98
|
|
|
|
8,040,742
|
|
|
|
9,170,390
|
|
|
|
69.02
|
|
|
|
9,170,390
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
8,952,019
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
9,056,378
|
|
|
$
|
11,017,499
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,213,234
|
|
|
$
|
13,285,913
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
13,538,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By coupon type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustable-rate
|
|
$
|
7,401,916
|
|
|
|
82.68
|
%
|
|
$
|
7,490,495
|
|
|
$
|
9,475,416
|
|
|
|
86.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
9,606,020
|
|
|
$
|
11,176,049
|
|
|
|
84.12
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,330,814
|
|
Fixed-rate
|
|
|
1,550,103
|
|
|
|
17.32
|
|
|
|
1,565,883
|
|
|
|
1,542,083
|
|
|
|
14.00
|
|
|
|
1,607,214
|
|
|
|
2,109,864
|
|
|
|
15.88
|
|
|
|
2,207,999
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
8,952,019
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
9,056,378
|
|
|
$
|
11,017,499
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
11,213,234
|
|
|
$
|
13,285,913
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
$
|
13,538,813
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment portfolio
|
|
$
|
13,479,122
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
13,587,197
|
|
|
$
|
12,141,493
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
12,343,809
|
|
|
$
|
14,392,343
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
14,651,993
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1)
|
Based on carrying value for each investment type.
|
29
Carrying Values, Rates and Maturities
.
The table below presents information regarding the
carrying values, weighted average rates and contractual maturities of our money market investments, investment securities and mortgage-backed securities at December 31, 2013. Mortgage-backed securities are presented by issuer and by coupon
type. The table does not include the effect of prepayments or scheduled principal amortization. Equity securities have been excluded from this table.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
One Year or Less
|
|
|
More Than One Year
to Five Years
|
|
|
More Than Five Years
to Ten Years
|
|
|
More Than Ten Years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Carrying
Value
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Money market investments:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds sold and other overnight deposits
|
|
$
|
4,190,809
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0
|
%
|
|
$
|
4,190,809
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government- sponsored enterprises
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
$
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total held to maturity
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
290,194
|
|
|
|
1.02
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
|
39,011
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
|
|
329,205
|
|
|
|
1.49
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By issuer:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Held to maturity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass-through certificates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
12,855
|
|
|
|
1.63
|
%
|
|
$
|
50,215
|
|
|
|
1.63
|
%
|
|
$
|
63,070
|
|
|
|
1.63
|
%
|
FNMA
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
4.95
|
|
|
|
1,841
|
|
|
|
5.94
|
|
|
|
4,890
|
|
|
|
4.77
|
|
|
|
396,112
|
|
|
|
2.59
|
|
|
|
402,848
|
|
|
|
2.63
|
|
FHLMC
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
1,526
|
|
|
|
2.67
|
|
|
|
6,755
|
|
|
|
4.71
|
|
|
|
1,114,737
|
|
|
|
2.61
|
|
|
|
1,123,029
|
|
|
|
2.62
|
|
REMICS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,177
|
|
|
|
4.92
|
|
|
|
194,340
|
|
|
|
4.24
|
|
|
|
195,517
|
|
|
|
4.24
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total held to maturity
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
2.34
|
|
|
|
3,367
|
|
|
|
4.46
|
|
|
|
25,677
|
|
|
|
3.19
|
|
|
|
1,755,404
|
|
|
|
2.76
|
|
|
|
1,784,464
|
|
|
|
2.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available for sale:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pass-through certificates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
804,883
|
|
|
|
2.27
|
|
|
|
804,883
|
|
|
|
2.27
|
|
FNMA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,354
|
|
|
|
4.79
|
|
|
|
3,888,369
|
|
|
|
2.09
|
|
|
|
3,890,723
|
|
|
|
2.09
|
|
FHLMC
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,221
|
|
|
|
4.89
|
|
|
|
2,427,217
|
|
|
|
2.21
|
|
|
|
2,433,438
|
|
|
|
2.22
|
|
REMICS:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC and FNMA
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
38,511
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
|
|
38,511
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total available for sale
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,575
|
|
|
|
4.86
|
|
|
|
7,158,980
|
|
|
|
2.16
|
|
|
|
7,167,555
|
|
|
|
2.16
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
16
|
|
|
|
2.34
|
%
|
|
|
3,367
|
|
|
|
4.46
|
%
|
|
|
34,252
|
|
|
|
3.61
|
%
|
|
|
8,914,384
|
|
|
|
2.27
|
%
|
|
|
8,952,019
|
|
|
|
2.28
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
By coupon type:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustable-rate
|
|
|
11
|
|
|
|
1.16
|
|
|
|
1,468
|
|
|
|
1.87
|
%
|
|
|
13,483
|
|
|
|
1.65
|
%
|
|
|
7,386,954
|
|
|
|
2.13
|
%
|
|
|
7,401,916
|
|
|
|
2.13
|
%
|
Fixed-rate
|
|
|
5
|
|
|
|
4.95
|
|
|
|
1,899
|
|
|
|
6.46
|
|
|
|
20,769
|
|
|
|
4.88
|
|
|
|
1,527,430
|
|
|
|
2.96
|
|
|
|
1,550,103
|
|
|
|
2.99
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities
|
|
$
|
16
|
|
|
|
2.34
|
%
|
|
$
|
3,367
|
|
|
|
4.46
|
%
|
|
$
|
34,252
|
|
|
|
3.61
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,914,384
|
|
|
|
2.28
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,952,019
|
|
|
|
2.28
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
4,190,825
|
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
|
$
|
293,561
|
|
|
|
1.06
|
%
|
|
$
|
34,252
|
|
|
|
3.61
|
%
|
|
$
|
8,953,395
|
|
|
|
2.29
|
%
|
|
$
|
13,472,033
|
|
|
|
1.66
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30
Sources of Funds
General
.
Our primary sources of funds are customer deposits, borrowings, scheduled amortization and prepayments of mortgage loans and
mortgage-backed securities, maturities and calls of investment securities and funds provided by our operations. Retail deposits generated through our branch network and wholesale borrowings have been our primary means of funding our growth
initiatives. During 2013, we maintained lower deposit rates to manage deposit reductions at a time when we were experiencing excess liquidity from prepayment activity on mortgage-related assets and limited investment opportunities with attractive
yields. Despite the increase in market interest rates in 2013, market interest rates remained at historically low levels during 2013 and as a result, we continued to reduce the size of our balance sheet, a process that began in 2012. We intend to
restrain any future growth until the yields available on mortgage-related assets and investment securities increase and allow for more profitable growth. We intend to fund such future growth primarily with customer deposits, using borrowed funds as
a supplemental funding source if deposit growth decreases. See Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations Liquidity and Capital Resources.
Deposits
.
We offer a variety of deposit accounts having a range of interest rates and terms. We currently offer passbook and statement
savings accounts, interest-bearing transaction accounts, checking accounts, money market accounts and time deposits. We also offer IRA accounts and qualified retirement plans.
Deposit flows are influenced significantly by general and local economic conditions, changes in prevailing market interest rates, pricing of deposits and
competition. In determining our deposit rates, we consider local competition, U.S. Treasury securities offerings and the rates charged on other sources of funds. Our deposits are primarily obtained from market areas surrounding our branch offices.
We also open deposit accounts through the internet for customers throughout the United States. We rely primarily on paying competitive rates, providing strong customer service and maintaining long-standing relationships with customers to attract and
retain these deposits. We do not use brokers to obtain deposits. Our most direct competition for deposits comes from commercial banks, savings banks, savings and loan associations and credit unions. There are large money-center and regional
financial institutions operating throughout our market area, and we also face strong competition from other community-based financial institutions.
Total
deposits decreased $2.01 billion, or 8.6%, during 2013 due primarily to a decrease of $1.45 billion in our money market accounts, a decrease of $547.1 million in our time deposit accounts, and a decrease of $91.2 million in our interest-bearing
transaction accounts. The decrease in our money market accounts and time deposits is primarily due to maintaining lower deposit rates to manage deposit reductions while we experience excess liquidity from prepayment activity and limited investment
opportunities. These decreases were partially offset by an increase of $61.0 million in our savings accounts. Total core deposits (defined as non-time deposit accounts) represented approximately 42.2% of total deposits as of December 31, 2013
compared with 44.9% as of December 31, 2012. The aggregate balance in our time deposit accounts was $12.40 billion as of December 31, 2013 compared with $12.95 billion as of December 31, 2012. Time deposits with remaining maturities
of less than one year amounted to $7.49 billion at December 31, 2013 compared with $7.64 billion at December 31, 2012. Based on our deposit retention experience and current pricing strategy, we anticipate that a significant portion of
these time deposits will remain with us as renewed time deposits or as transfers to other deposit products at the prevailing rate.
31
The following table presents our deposit activity for the years indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Total deposits at beginning of year
|
|
$
|
23,483,917
|
|
|
$
|
25,507,760
|
|
|
$
|
25,173,126
|
|
Net (decrease) increase in deposits
|
|
|
(2,193,979
|
)
|
|
|
(2,262,527
|
)
|
|
|
6,120
|
|
Interest credited
|
|
|
182,391
|
|
|
|
238,684
|
|
|
|
328,514
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits at end of year
|
|
$
|
21,472,329
|
|
|
$
|
23,483,917
|
|
|
$
|
25,507,760
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net (decrease) increase
|
|
$
|
(2,011,588
|
)
|
|
$
|
(2,023,843
|
)
|
|
$
|
334,634
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Percent (decrease) increase
|
|
|
(8.57
|
)%
|
|
|
(7.93
|
)%
|
|
|
1.33
|
%
|
At December 31, 2013, we had $5.12 billion in time deposits with balances of $100,000 and over maturing as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity Period
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
3 months or less
|
|
$
|
1,062,369
|
|
Over 3 months through 6 months
|
|
|
864,900
|
|
Over 6 months through 12 months
|
|
|
985,208
|
|
Over 12 months
|
|
|
2,204,716
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
5,117,193
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
The following table presents the distribution of our deposit accounts at the dates indicated by dollar amount and
percent of portfolio, and the weighted average nominal interest rate on each category of deposits.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of total
deposits
|
|
|
Weighted
average
nominal
rate
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of total
deposits
|
|
|
Weighted
average
nominal
rate
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Percent
of total
deposits
|
|
|
Weighted
average
nominal
rate
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Savings
|
|
$
|
1,009,237
|
|
|
|
4.70
|
%
|
|
|
0.15
|
%
|
|
$
|
948,194
|
|
|
|
4.04
|
%
|
|
|
0.25
|
%
|
|
$
|
870,887
|
|
|
|
3.41
|
%
|
|
|
0.49
|
%
|
Interest-bearing demand
|
|
|
2,208,985
|
|
|
|
10.29
|
|
|
|
0.24
|
|
|
|
2,300,145
|
|
|
|
9.79
|
|
|
|
0.33
|
|
|
|
1,984,962
|
|
|
|
7.78
|
|
|
|
0.68
|
|
Money market
|
|
|
5,188,632
|
|
|
|
24.16
|
|
|
|
0.20
|
|
|
|
6,634,308
|
|
|
|
28.25
|
|
|
|
0.35
|
|
|
|
8,456,020
|
|
|
|
33.15
|
|
|
|
0.87
|
|
Noninterest-bearing demand
|
|
|
661,221
|
|
|
|
3.08
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
649,925
|
|
|
|
2.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
604,449
|
|
|
|
2.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
9,068,075
|
|
|
|
42.23
|
|
|
|
0.19
|
|
|
|
10,532,572
|
|
|
|
44.85
|
|
|
|
0.32
|
|
|
|
11,916,318
|
|
|
|
46.71
|
|
|
|
0.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time deposits $100,000 and over
|
|
|
5,117,193
|
|
|
|
23.83
|
|
|
|
1.29
|
|
|
|
5,171,558
|
|
|
|
22.02
|
|
|
|
1.38
|
|
|
|
5,254,687
|
|
|
|
20.61
|
|
|
|
1.67
|
|
Time deposits less than $100,000
|
|
|
5,915,254
|
|
|
|
27.55
|
|
|
|
1.05
|
|
|
|
6,385,130
|
|
|
|
27.19
|
|
|
|
1.17
|
|
|
|
6,931,362
|
|
|
|
27.17
|
|
|
|
1.43
|
|
Qualified retirement plans
|
|
|
1,371,807
|
|
|
|
6.39
|
|
|
|
1.44
|
|
|
|
1,394,657
|
|
|
|
5.94
|
|
|
|
1.53
|
|
|
|
1,405,393
|
|
|
|
5.51
|
|
|
|
1.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total time deposits
|
|
|
12,404,254
|
|
|
|
57.77
|
|
|
|
1.19
|
|
|
|
12,951,345
|
|
|
|
55.15
|
|
|
|
1.29
|
|
|
|
13,591,442
|
|
|
|
53.29
|
|
|
|
1.56
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits
|
|
$
|
21,472,329
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
0.77
|
%
|
|
$
|
23,483,917
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
0.85
|
%
|
|
$
|
25,507,760
|
|
|
|
100.00
|
%
|
|
|
1.19
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33
The following table presents, by rate category, the amount of our time deposit accounts outstanding at the dates
indicated.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
Time deposit accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.50% or less
|
|
$
|
2,792,287
|
|
|
$
|
2,495,055
|
|
|
$
|
310
|
|
0.51% to 1.00%
|
|
|
4,954,935
|
|
|
|
4,455,625
|
|
|
|
5,968,954
|
|
1.01% to 1.50%
|
|
|
1,682,361
|
|
|
|
2,591,004
|
|
|
|
2,501,696
|
|
1.51% to 2.00%
|
|
|
856,167
|
|
|
|
765,595
|
|
|
|
1,165,895
|
|
2.01% to 2.50%
|
|
|
808,720
|
|
|
|
1,054,713
|
|
|
|
1,899,498
|
|
2.51% to 3.00%
|
|
|
328,296
|
|
|
|
499,653
|
|
|
|
948,342
|
|
3.01% and over
|
|
|
981,488
|
|
|
|
1,089,700
|
|
|
|
1,106,747
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
12,404,254
|
|
|
$
|
12,951,345
|
|
|
$
|
13,591,442
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table presents, by rate category, the remaining period to maturity of time deposit accounts outstanding as of
December 31, 2013.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Period to Maturity from December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
Within
three
months
|
|
|
Over three
to six
months
|
|
|
Over six
months to
one year
|
|
|
Over one
to two
years
|
|
|
Over two
to three
years
|
|
|
Over
three
years
|
|
|
Total
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Time deposit accounts:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.50% or less
|
|
$
|
1,341,093
|
|
|
$
|
837,044
|
|
|
$
|
613,962
|
|
|
$
|
171
|
|
|
$
|
17
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
2,792,287
|
|
0.51% to 1.00%
|
|
|
927,031
|
|
|
|
1,238,686
|
|
|
|
1,341,507
|
|
|
|
1,445,361
|
|
|
|
1,927
|
|
|
|
423
|
|
|
$
|
4,954,935
|
|
1.01% to 1.50%
|
|
|
409,330
|
|
|
|
140,371
|
|
|
|
87,664
|
|
|
|
627,011
|
|
|
|
208,370
|
|
|
|
209,615
|
|
|
$
|
1,682,361
|
|
1.51% to 2.00%
|
|
|
19,589
|
|
|
|
18,022
|
|
|
|
9,622
|
|
|
|
18,435
|
|
|
|
212,500
|
|
|
|
577,999
|
|
|
$
|
856,167
|
|
2.01% to 2.50%
|
|
|
2,874
|
|
|
|
6,336
|
|
|
|
63,183
|
|
|
|
292,854
|
|
|
|
443,455
|
|
|
|
18
|
|
|
$
|
808,720
|
|
2.51% to 3.00%
|
|
|
43,528
|
|
|
|
55,892
|
|
|
|
20,576
|
|
|
|
208,278
|
|
|
|
22
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
328,296
|
|
3.01% and over
|
|
|
66,472
|
|
|
|
60
|
|
|
|
243,247
|
|
|
|
671,697
|
|
|
|
12
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
981,488
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
2,809,917
|
|
|
$
|
2,296,411
|
|
|
$
|
2,379,761
|
|
|
$
|
3,263,807
|
|
|
$
|
866,303
|
|
|
$
|
788,055
|
|
|
$
|
12,404,254
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average rate
|
|
|
0.68
|
%
|
|
|
0.74
|
%
|
|
|
1.11
|
%
|
|
|
1.70
|
%
|
|
|
2.00
|
%
|
|
|
1.59
|
%
|
|
|
1.19
|
%
|
Borrowings.
We have entered into agreements with selected brokers and the FHLB to repurchase securities sold to
these parties. These agreements are recorded as financing transactions as we have maintained effective control over the transferred securities. The dollar amount of the securities underlying the agreements continues to be carried in our securities
portfolio. The obligations to repurchase the securities are reported as a liability in the consolidated statements of financial condition. The securities underlying the agreements are delivered to the party with whom each transaction is executed.
They agree to resell to us the same securities at the maturity or put date of the agreement. We retain the right of substitution of the underlying securities throughout the terms of the agreements.
We have also obtained advances from the FHLB, which are generally secured by a blanket lien against our mortgage portfolio. Borrowings with the FHLB are
generally limited to approximately twenty times the amount of FHLB stock owned.
34
Borrowed funds at December 31 are summarized as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB
|
|
$
|
800,000
|
|
|
|
4.53
|
%
|
|
$
|
800,000
|
|
|
|
4.53
|
%
|
Other brokers
|
|
|
6,150,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
|
|
|
6,150,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total securities sold under agreements to repurchase
|
|
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
|
4.45
|
|
|
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
|
4.45
|
|
Advances from the FHLB
|
|
|
5,225,000
|
|
|
|
4.77
|
|
|
|
5,225,000
|
|
|
|
4.77
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total borrowed funds
|
|
$
|
12,175,000
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
$
|
12,175,000
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued interest payable
|
|
$
|
64,061
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$
|
64,061
|
|
|
|
|
|
The average balances of borrowings and the maximum amount outstanding at any month-end are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At or for the Year Ended December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
Repurchase Agreements:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average balance outstanding during the year
|
|
$
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
$
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
$
|
9,127,800
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum balance outstanding at any month-end during the year
|
|
$
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
$
|
6,950,000
|
|
|
$
|
14,750,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average rate during the period
|
|
|
4.51
|
%
|
|
|
4.52
|
%
|
|
|
4.37
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLB Advances:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average balance outstanding during the year
|
|
$
|
5,225,000
|
|
|
$
|
6,623,094
|
|
|
$
|
13,349,342
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum balance outstanding at any month-end during the year
|
|
$
|
5,225,000
|
|
|
$
|
7,875,000
|
|
|
$
|
14,875,000
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted average rate during the period
|
|
|
4.84
|
%
|
|
|
4.02
|
%
|
|
|
3.44
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Since market interest rates have remained very low for an extended period of time, we have not had any lenders put borrowings
back to us. At December 31, 2013, we had $6.4 billion of borrowed funds with put dates within one year, including $4.0 billion that can be put back to the Company quarterly. If interest rates were to decrease, or remain consistent with current
rates, we believe these borrowings would probably not be put back and our average cost of existing borrowings would not decrease even as market interest rates decrease. Conversely, if interest rates increase above the market interest rate for
similar borrowings, we believe these borrowings would likely be put back at their next put date and our cost to replace these borrowings would increase. However, we believe, given current market conditions, that the likelihood that a significant
portion of these borrowings would be put back will not increase substantially unless interest rates were to increase by at least 250 basis points.
We did
not enter into any new repurchase agreements during 2013.
35
The scheduled maturities and potential put dates of our borrowings as of December 31, 2013 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Borrowings by Scheduled
Maturity Date
|
|
|
Borrowings by Earlier of
Scheduled Maturity or Next
Potential Put Date
|
|
Year
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
Principal
|
|
|
Weighted
Average
Rate
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
2014
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
|
|
%
|
|
$
|
6,400,000
|
|
|
|
4.44
|
%
|
2015
|
|
|
75,000
|
|
|
|
4.62
|
|
|
|
275,000
|
|
|
|
4.10
|
|
2016
|
|
|
3,925,000
|
|
|
|
4.92
|
|
|
|
3,925,000
|
|
|
|
4.92
|
|
2017
|
|
|
2,475,000
|
|
|
|
4.37
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2018
|
|
|
700,000
|
|
|
|
3.65
|
|
|
|
250,000
|
|
|
|
3.10
|
|
2019
|
|
|
1,725,000
|
|
|
|
4.62
|
|
|
|
1,325,000
|
|
|
|
4.69
|
|
2020
|
|
|
3,275,000
|
|
|
|
4.53
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total
|
|
$
|
12,175,000
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
$
|
12,175,000
|
|
|
|
4.59
|
%
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The amortized cost and fair value of the underlying securities used as collateral for securities sold under agreements to
repurchase are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
At December 31,
|
|
|
|
2013
|
|
|
2012
|
|
|
2011
|
|
|
|
(In thousands)
|
|
Amortized cost of collateral:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government-sponsored enterprise securities
|
|
$
|
298,190
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
500,000
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
7,886,833
|
|
|
|
8,672,162
|
|
|
|
8,467,397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total amortized cost of collateral
|
|
$
|
8,185,023
|
|
|
$
|
8,672,162
|
|
|
$
|
8,967,397
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value of collateral:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States government-sponsored enterprise securities
|
|
$
|
290,194
|
|
|
$
|
|
|
|
$
|
500,464
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities
|
|
|
8,045,674
|
|
|
|
8,991,053
|
|
|
|
8,747,418
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total fair value of collateral
|
|
$
|
8,335,868
|
|
|
$
|
8,991,053
|
|
|
$
|
9,247,882
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Subsidiaries
Hudson City
Savings has two wholly owned and consolidated subsidiaries: HudCiti Service Corporation and HC Value Broker Services, Inc. HudCiti Service Corporation, which qualifies as a New Jersey investment company, has two wholly owned and consolidated
subsidiaries: Hudson City Preferred Funding Corporation and Sound REIT, Inc. Hudson City Preferred Funding and Sound REIT qualify as real estate investment trusts, pursuant to the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and had $2.16 billion and
$9.7 million, respectively, of residential mortgage loans outstanding at December 31, 2013.
HC Value Broker Services, Inc., whose primary operating
activity is the referral of insurance applications, formed a strategic alliance that jointly markets insurance products with Savings Bank Life Insurance of Massachusetts.
36
Personnel
As of December 31, 2013, we had 1,458 full-time employees and 123 part-time employees. Employees are not represented by a collective bargaining unit and
we consider our relationship with our employees to be good.
REGULATION OF HUDSON CITY SAVINGS BANK AND HUDSON CITY BANCORP
General
Hudson City Savings has been a federally
chartered savings bank since January 1, 2004 when it converted from a New Jersey chartered savings bank. Its deposit accounts are insured up to applicable limits by the FDIC under the Deposit Insurance Fund (DIF). On July 21,
2010, President Obama signed the Reform Act. Pursuant to the Reform Act, on July 21, 2011, the OTS effectively merged into the OCC, with the OCC assuming all functions and authority from the OTS relating to federally chartered savings banks,
and the FRB assuming all functions and authority from the OTS relating to savings and loan holding companies. As a result, Hudson City Savings is now regulated, examined and supervised by the OCC and Hudson City Bancorp is now regulated, examined
and supervised by the FRB.
Hudson City Savings must file reports with the OCC concerning its activities and financial condition, and must obtain
regulatory approval from the OCC prior to entering into certain transactions, such as mergers with, or acquisitions of, other depository institutions. The OCC conducts periodic examinations to assess Hudson City Savings compliance with various
regulatory requirements. The OCC has primary enforcement responsibility over Hudson City Savings and has substantial discretion to impose an enforcement action if Hudson City Savings fails to comply with applicable regulatory requirements,
particularly with respect to its capital requirements. In addition, the FDIC has the authority to recommend to the OCC that enforcement action be taken with respect to a particular federally chartered savings bank and, if action is not taken by the
OCC, the FDIC has the authority to take such action under certain circumstances. We are also subject to supervision, examination and regulation by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB).
This regulation and supervision establishes a comprehensive framework of activities in which a federal savings bank can engage and is intended primarily for
the protection of the DIF and depositors and other consumers. The regulatory structure also gives the regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement activities and examination policies, including
policies with respect to the classification of assets and the establishment of adequate loan loss reserves for regulatory purposes. Any change in laws and regulations (including laws concerning taxes, banking, securities, accounting and insurance),
whether by the FRB, OCC, FDIC, CFPB or another government agency, or through legislation, could have a material adverse impact on Hudson City Bancorp and Hudson City Savings and their operations and shareholders.
Certain of the regulatory requirements that are or will be applicable to Hudson City Bancorp and Hudson City Savings are described below. This description of
statutes and regulations is not intended to be a complete explanation of such statutes and regulations and their effects on Hudson City Bancorp and Hudson City Savings and is qualified in its entirety by reference to the actual statutes and
regulations.
Informal Regulatory Agreement Memorandum of Understanding.
On March 30, 2012, the Bank entered into the Bank
MOU with the OCC, which is substantially similar to and replaced the memorandum of understanding the Bank entered into with our former regulator, the OTS, on June 24, 2011. In accordance with the Bank MOU, the Bank has adopted and has
implemented enhanced operating policies and procedures that are intended to enable us to continue to (a) reduce our level of interest rate risk, (b) reduce our funding concentration, (c) diversify our funding sources, (d) enhance
our liquidity position, (e) monitor and manage loan modifications and (f) maintain our capital position in accordance with our existing capital plan. In addition, we developed the Strategic Plan for the Bank which establishes objectives
for the Banks overall risk profile, earnings performance, growth and balance sheet mix and to enhance our enterprise risk management program.
37
The Company entered into the Company MOU with the FRB on April 24, 2012, which is substantially similar to
and replaced the memorandum of understanding the Company entered into with our former regulator, the OTS, on June 24, 2011. In accordance with the Company MOU, the Company must, among other things support the Banks compliance with the
Bank MOU. The Company MOU also requires the Company to: (a) obtain approval from the FRB prior to receiving a capital distribution from the Bank or declaring a dividend to shareholders and (b) obtain approval from the FRB prior to
repurchasing or redeeming any Company stock or incurring any debt with a maturity of greater than one year. Under the Company MOU the Company was required to submit a comprehensive Capital Plan and a comprehensive Earnings Plan to the FRB.
The Board and management are continuing to implement the items required by the Bank MOU and the Company MOU, including proceeding with the implementation of
our Strategic Plan. However, a finding by our regulators that the Company or the Bank failed to comply with the MOU could result in additional regulatory scrutiny, constraints on our business, or formal enforcement action. Any of those events could
have a material adverse effect on our future operations, financial condition, growth, the Merger or other aspects of our business.
Regulatory
Reform.
On July 21, 2010, the President signed into law the Reform Act. The Reform Act imposes new restrictions and extends the framework of regulatory oversight for financial institutions, including depository institutions. In
addition, the Reform Act changed the jurisdictions of existing bank regulatory agencies and in particular transferred the regulation of federal savings associations from the OTS to the OCC, effective July 21, 2011. Savings and loan holding
companies are now regulated by the FRB. The Reform Act also created the CFPB, which is authorized to supervise certain consumer financial services companies and insured depository institutions with more than $10 billion in total assets for consumer
protection purposes. The CFPB has examination and enforcement authority with respect to compliance with such federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations by institutions under its supervision and is authorized to conduct investigations
to determine whether any person is, or has, engaged in conduct that violates such laws or regulations. Investigations may be conducted jointly with the federal bank regulatory agencies (the Agencies), and the CFPB may bring an
administrative enforcement proceeding or civil actions in Federal district court. As a new independent bureau within the FRB, the CFPB may impose requirements more severe than the previous bank regulatory agencies.
In addition, the Reform Act provides that the same standards for federal preemption of state consumer financial laws apply to both national banks and federal
savings associations and eliminates the applicability of preemption to subsidiaries and affiliates of national banks and federal savings associations. The Reform Act also includes provisions, some of which have resulted in final rulemaking and some
of which are subject to further rulemaking by the Agencies, that may affect our future operations. We will not be able to determine the impact of these provisions until final rules are promulgated to implement these provisions and other regulatory
guidance is provided interpreting these provisions.
The following aspects of the Reform Act are related to the operations of Hudson City Bancorp:
|
|
|
Authority over savings and loan holding companies transferred to the FRB;
|
|
|
|
Leverage capital requirements and risk based capital requirements applicable to depository institutions and bank holding companies will be extended to thrift holding companies; and
|
|
|
|
The Federal Deposit Insurance Act was amended to direct federal regulators to require depository institution holding companies to serve as a source of strength for their depository institution subsidiaries.
|
38
Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Regulation of Mortgage Origination and Servicing.
On
July 21, 2011, the CFPB took over rulemaking responsibility for the federal consumer financial protection laws, such as the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, or Regulation X, and the Truth in Lending Act, or Regulation Z, among others. The
CFPB has exclusive examination and primary enforcement authority with respect to compliance with such federal consumer financial protections laws and regulations by institutions under its supervision and is authorized to conduct investigations to
determine whether any person is, or has, engaged in conduct that violates the federal consumer financial laws. In January 2013, the CFPB issued a series of final rules, described below, related to mortgage loan origination and mortgage loan
servicing, which went into effect on January 10, 2014. Compliance with these rules has increased our overall regulatory compliance costs, which are included in non-interest expense.
Ability to Pay Rules.
The CFPB adopted final rules, referred to as the Ability to Pay Rules, that (i) prohibit creditors, such as
Hudson City Savings, from extending mortgage loans without regard for the consumers ability to repay, (ii) specify the types of income and assets that may be considered in the ability-to-repay determination, the permissible sources for
verification, and the required methods of calculating a loans monthly payments and (iii) establish certain protections from liability for loans that meet the requirements of a Qualified Mortgage. Previously, Regulation Z
prohibited creditors from extending higher-priced mortgage loans without regard for the consumers ability to repay. The Ability to Pay Rules extend application of this requirement to all loans secured by dwellings, not just higher-priced
mortgages.
As defined by the CFPB, a Qualified Mortgage is a mortgage that meets the following standards prohibiting or limiting certain high risk
product and features:
|
(1)
|
No excessive upfront points and fees generally points and fees paid by the borrower must not exceed 3% of the total amount borrowed;
|
|
(2)
|
No toxic loan features prohibited features are: interest only-loans, negative-amortization loans, terms beyond 30 years and balloon loans; and
|
|
(3)
|
Limited on debt-to-income ratios borrowers total debt-to-income ratios must be no higher than 43%.
|
Lenders that generate Qualified Mortgage loans will receive specific protections against borrower lawsuits that could result from failing to satisfy the
ability-to-pay rule. There are two levels of liability protections for Qualified Mortgages: the Safe Harbor protection and the Rebuttable Presumption protection. Safe Harbor Qualified Mortgages are lower-priced loans with interest rates closer to
the prime rate, issued to borrowers with high credit scores. Borrowers suing lenders under Safe Harbor qualified mortgages are faced with overcoming the pre-determined legal conclusion that the lender has satisfied the ability-to-repay rule.
Rebuttable Presumption qualified mortgages are loans at higher prices that are granted to borrowers with lower credit scores. Lenders generating Rebuttable Presumption Qualified Mortgages receive the protection of a presumption that they have
legally satisfied the ability-to-pay rule while the borrower can rebut that presumption by proving that the lender did not consider the borrowers living expenses after their mortgage and other debts. In addition, Qualified Mortgages are exempt
from the new appraisal requirement rules described below under Appraisal Rules.
As a result of these final rules, beginning in January 2014,
we only originate mortgage loans that meet the requirements of a qualified mortgage except we may continue to originate interest-only loans, subject to our compliance with the ability to repay provisions of the rule.
Mortgage Servicing Rules
.
The CFPB also issued final rules concerning mortgage servicing standards, which amend both Regulation X and
Regulation Z. The Regulation X rule requires servicers to provide certain information to borrowers, to provide protections to such borrowers in connection with force-placed insurance, to establish policies and procedures to achieve certain
delineated objectives, to correct errors asserted by
39
borrowers, and to evaluate borrowers applications for available loss mitigation options. The Regulation Z rule requires creditors, assignees and servicers to provide interest rate
adjustment notices for adjustable-rate mortgages, periodic statements for residential mortgage loans, prompt crediting of mortgage payments, and responses to requests for payoff amounts.
Loan Originator Qualification and Compensation Rule
.
The CFPB also issued a final rule implementing requirements and restrictions imposed
by the Reform Act concerning, among other things, qualifications of individual loan originators and the compensation practices with respect to such persons. The rule prohibits loan origination organizations from basing compensation for themselves or
individual loan originators on any of the origination transactions terms or conditions and prohibits such persons from receiving compensation from another person in connection with the same transaction. The rule also imposes duties on loan
originator organizations to ensure that their individual loan originators meet certain licensing or qualification standards and extends existing recordkeeping requirements.
Federally Chartered Savings Bank Regulation
Activity Powers.
Hudson City Savings derives its lending, investment and other activity powers primarily from the Home Owners Loan
Act, as amended, commonly referred to as HOLA, and the regulations of the OCC thereunder. Under these laws and regulations, federal savings banks, including Hudson City Savings, generally may invest in real estate mortgages, consumer and commercial
loans, certain types of debt securities and certain other assets.
These investment powers are subject to various limitations, including (1) a
prohibition against the acquisition of any corporate debt security unless the debt securities may be sold with reasonable promptness at a price that corresponds reasonably to their fair value and such securities are investment grade, (2) a
limit of 400% of an associations capital on the aggregate amount of loans secured by non-residential real estate property, (3) a limit of 20% of an associations assets on commercial loans, with the amount of commercial loans in
excess of 10% of assets being limited to small business loans, (4) a limit of 35% of an associations assets on the aggregate amount of consumer loans and acquisitions of certain debt securities, (5) a limit of 5% of assets on
non-conforming loans (certain loans in excess of the specific limitations of HOLA), and (6) a limit of the greater of 5% of assets or an associations capital on certain construction loans made for the purpose of financing what is or is
expected to become residential property. Hudson City Savings may also establish service corporations that may engage in activities not otherwise permissible for Hudson City Savings, including certain real estate equity investments and securities and
insurance brokerage activities.
Capital Requirements.
The OCC capital regulations currently require federally chartered savings banks
to meet three minimum capital ratios: a 1.5% tangible capital ratio, a 4.0% (3.0% if the savings bank received the highest rating on its most recent examination) leverage (core capital) ratio and an 8.0% total risk-based capital ratio. Under the
Final Capital Rules (described below), which will go into effect for Hudson City Savings on January 1, 2015, a federally chartered savings bank must also maintain a minimum common equity tier 1 capital ratio of 4.5%, and the minimum Tier 1
risk-based capital ratio has been increased from 4.0% to 6.0%. In assessing an institutions capital adequacy, the OCC takes into consideration not only these numeric factors but qualitative factors as well, and has the authority to establish
higher capital requirements for individual institutions where necessary. Hudson City Savings, as a matter of prudent management, targets as its goal the maintenance of capital ratios that exceed these minimum requirements and that are consistent
with Hudson City Savings risk profile. Generally, under existing risk-based and leverage capital rules, banks, bank holding companies and savings associations (collectively, banking organizations) are required to deduct certain assets from
Tier 1 capital, and though a banking organization is permitted to net any associated deferred tax liability against some of such assets prior to making the deduction from Tier 1 capital, such netting generally is not permitted for goodwill and other
intangible assets arising from a taxable business combination. In these cases, the full or gross carrying amount of the asset is deducted. However, banking organizations may reduce the amount of goodwill arising from a taxable business combination
that they may deduct from Tier 1 capital by the amount of any deferred tax liability associated with that goodwill. We have no deferred tax liabilities associated with goodwill and, as a result, the full amount of our goodwill is deducted from Tier
1 capital.
40
For banking organizations that elect to apply this rule, the amount of goodwill deducted from Tier 1 capital
would reflect the maximum exposure to loss in the event that the entire amount of goodwill is impaired or derecognized for financial reporting purposes. A banking organization that reduces the amount of goodwill deducted from Tier 1 capital by the
amount of the deferred tax liability is not permitted to net this deferred tax liability against deferred tax assets when determining regulatory capital limitations on deferred tax assets.
At December 31, 2013, Hudson City Savings exceeded each of the applicable capital requirements as shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
OCC Requirements
|
|
|
|
Bank Actual
|
|
|
Minimum Capital
Adequacy
|
|
|
For Classification as
Well-Capitalized
|
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
Amount
|
|
|
Ratio
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands)
|
|
December 31, 2013
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible capital
|
|
$
|
4,145,444
|
|
|
|
10.82
|
%
|
|
$
|
574,791
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Leverage (core) capital
|
|
|
4,145,444
|
|
|
|
10.82
|
|
|
|
1,532,777
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
$
|
1,915,971
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
Total-risk-based capital
|
|
|
4,361,710
|
|
|
|
25.31
|
|
|
|
1,378,687
|
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
|
|
1,723,359
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
December 31, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible capital
|
|
$
|
4,059,774
|
|
|
|
10.09
|
%
|
|
$
|
603,356
|
|
|
|
1.50
|
%
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
|
|
n/a
|
|
Leverage (core) capital
|
|
|
4,059,774
|
|
|
|
10.09
|
|
|
|
1,608,950
|
|
|
|
4.00
|
|
|
$
|
2,011,188
|
|
|
|
5.00
|
%
|
Total-risk-based capital
|
|
|
4,309,575
|
|
|
|
21.59
|
|
|
|
1,596,842
|
|
|
|
8.00
|
|
|
|
1,996,053
|
|
|
|
10.00
|
|
The Reform Act requires the Agencies to establish consolidated risk-based and leverage capital requirements for insured
depository institutions, depository institution holding companies and systemically important nonbank financial companies. These requirements must be no less than those to which insured depository institutions are currently subject. As a result, we
will become subject to consolidated capital requirements which we have not been subject to previously.
In addition, on September 12, 2010, the Basel
Committee adopted the Basel III capital rules. These rules, which will be phased in over a period of years, set new standards for common equity, Tier 1 and total capital, determined on a risk-weighted basis. The Basel III capital rules will be
implemented through regulations issued by the Agencies.
In July 2013, the OCC and the FRB issued their final regulatory capital rules, which subjects all
federal savings associations and their FRB regulated holding companies, including Hudson City Savings and Hudson City Bancorp, to a new consolidated regulatory capital framework (the Final Capital Rules). The Final Capital Rules are
consistent with the parallel interim final regulatory capital rule published by the FDIC in September 2013.
The Final Capital Rules revise the quantity
and quality of capital required by: (1) establishing a new minimum common equity Tier 1 ratio of 4.5% of risk-weighted assets; (2) raising the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio from 4.0% to 6.0% of risk-weighted assets; (3) maintaining the
minimum total capital ratio of 8.0% of risk-weighted assets; and (4) maintaining a minimum Tier 1 capital to adjusted average consolidated assets, known as the leverage ratio, of 4.0%.
41
Furthermore, the Final Capital Rules add a requirement for a minimum common equity Tier 1 capital conservation
buffer of 2.5% of risk-weighted assets, or the Conservation Buffer, to be applied to the common equity Tier 1 capital ratio, the Tier 1 capital ratio and the total capital ratio. Failure to maintain the Conservation Buffer will result in
restrictions on capital distributions and certain discretionary cash bonus payments to executive officers. The required minimum Conservation Buffer will be phased in incrementally, starting at 0.625% on January 1, 2016 and increasing to 1.25%
on January 1, 2017, 1.875% on January 1, 2018 and 2.5% on January 1, 2019. If a banking organizations Conservation Buffer is less than the required minimum and its net income for the four calendar quarters preceding the
applicable calendar quarter, net of any capital distributions and associated tax effects not already reflected in net income, or Eligible Retained Income, is negative, it would be prohibited from making capital distributions or certain discretionary
cash bonus payments to executive officers. As a result, under the Final Capital Rules, should we fail to maintain the Conservation Buffer we would be subject to limits on, and in the event we have negative Eligible Retained Income for any four
consecutive calendar quarters, we would be prohibited in, our ability to obtain capital distributions from Hudson City Savings. If we do not receive sufficient cash dividends from Hudson City Savings, then we may not have sufficient funds to pay
dividends or repurchase our common stock.
Moreover, the Final Capital Rules revise existing and establish new risk weights for certain exposures,
including, among other exposures, residential mortgage loans, commercial loans, which generally include commercial real estate loans, multi-family loans, past due loans and GSE exposures. Under the Final Capital Rules, residential mortgage loans
guaranteed by the U.S. government or its agencies maintain their current risk-based capital treatment (a risk weight of 0% for those unconditionally guaranteed and a risk weight of 20% for those that are conditionally guaranteed). Residential
mortgage loans secured by a first-lien on an owner-occupied or rented one-to four-family residential property that meet prudential underwriting standards, are not 90 days or more past due or carried on non-accrual status, and that are not
restructured or modified have a risk weight of 50%. All other residential mortgage loans have a risk weight of 100%. Under the Final Capital Rules, pre-sold construction loans have a risk weight of 50%, unless the purchase contract is cancelled, in
which case the risk weight is 100%. Multi-family mortgage loans have a risk weight of 50%. High-volatility commercial real estate exposures have a risk weight of 150%, preferred stock issued by a GSE has a risk weight of 100% and exposures to GSEs
that are not equity exposures have a risk weight of 20%.
The new minimum regulatory capital ratios and changes to the calculation of risk-weighted assets
(each as described above) under the Final Capital Rules will be phased in to allow banking organizations time to meet the new capital standards, with the initial provisions effective for Hudson City Bancorp and Hudson City Savings on January 1,
2015. We are continuing to review and prepare for the impact that the Reform Act, Basel III capital standards and related rulemaking will have on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
The Reform Act requires national banks and federal savings associations with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion to conduct annual stress
tests. On October 9, 2012, the OCC published its final rules requiring annual capital-adequacy stress tests for national banks and federal savings associations with consolidated assets of more than $10 billion (the Stress Test
Rule). Hudson City must conduct its first stress test using financial data as of September 30, 2013 and report the results of the stress test to the OCC on or before March 31, 2014. In addition, between June 15th and 30th,
beginning in 2015, the Bank will be required to publicly disclose a summary of the results of the stress test conducted in the prior year. The Stress Test Rule also requires each institution to establish and maintain a system of controls, oversight,
and documentation, including policies and procedures, designed to ensure that the stress testing processes used by the institution are effective in meeting the requirements of the rule.
In addition, in May 2012, the Agencies adopted final supervisory guidance which outlines high-level principles for stress testing practices, applicable
to all banking organizations with more than $10 billion in total consolidated assets. The proposed guidance provides an overview of how a banking organization should structure its stress testing activities and ensure they fit into overall risk
management. The guidance outlines
42
broad principles for a satisfactory stress testing framework and describes the manner in which stress testing should be employed as an integral component of risk management that is applicable at
various levels of aggregation within a banking organization, as well as for contributing to capital and liquidity planning. This guidance is applicable to a companys general stress testing activities and does not implement the stress testing
requirements imposed by the Reform Act, which is covered by separate rulemaking by the Agencies (as described above).
The Volcker Rule.
In
December 2013, the Agencies, the SEC and the CFTC (the Regulators) adopted final rules implementing Section 619 of the Reform Act. Section 619 and the final implementing rules are, commonly known as the Volcker
Rule. All banking organizations were granted until July 21, 2015 to conform their activities and investments to the requirements of the final Volcker Rule.
The Volcker Rule prohibits banking entities from acquiring and retaining an ownership interest in, sponsoring, or having certain relationships with a
covered fund. The Volcker Rule generally treats as a covered fund any entity that would be an investment company under the Investment Company Act of 1940 (the 1940 Act), but for the application of the exemptions from SEC
registration set forth in Section 3(c)(1) (fewer than 100 beneficial owners) or Section 3(c)(7) (qualified purchasers) of the 1940 Act. In addition to prohibiting a banking entity from sponsoring or having an ownership interest in a
covered fund, the Volker Rule also limits the term of relationships between banking entities and covered funds, and imposes new disclosure obligations for covered funds serviced by banking entities. The Volcker Rule also imposes corporate
governance, compliance and control program, record keeping, regulatory reporting, training and audit requirements on banking entities. These requirements become more stringent and detailed based upon the size of the banking organization and scope
and nature of its activities. Under the Volcker Rule, banking entities are also prohibited from engaging in proprietary trading.
The Company does not
currently anticipate that the Volcker Rule will have a material effect on the operations of the Company and its subsidiaries, as the Company does not engage in proprietary trading, does not have any ownership interest in any funds that are not
permitted under the Volcker Rule and does not engage in any other the activities prohibited by the Volcker Rule. As a depositary institution with over $ 10 billion in assets, we will need to adopt additional policies and systems to ensure compliance
with the Volcker Rule. The costs of developing and implementing such policies and systems are not expected to be material.
Interest Rate
Risk.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act (FDICIA), required that the Agencies revise their risk-based capital standards to take into account interest rate risk, concentration of risk and the risks of
non-traditional activities. The OCC regulations do not include a specific interest rate risk component of the risk based capital requirement. However, the OCC expects all federal savings associations to have an independent interest rate risk
measurement process in place that measures both earnings and capital at risk, as described in the IRR Advisory and the 1996 IRR policy statement (each described below).
In June 1996, the Agencies adopted a Joint Agency Policy Statement on interest rate risk (the 1996 IRR policy statement). The 1996 IRR policy
statement provides guidance to examiners and bankers on sound practices for managing interest rate risk. The 1996 IRR policy statement also outlines fundamental elements of sound management that have been identified in prior regulatory guidance
and discusses the importance of these elements in the context of managing interest rate risk. Specifically, the guidance emphasizes the need for active board of director and senior management oversight and a comprehensive risk management
process that effectively identifies, measures and controls interest rate risk.
In January 2010, the Agencies released an Advisory on Interest Rate Risk
Management (the IRR Advisory) to remind institutions of the supervisory expectations regarding sound practices for managing interest rate risk. While some degree of interest rate risk is inherent in the business of banking, the Agencies
expect institutions to have sound risk management practices in place to measure, monitor and control interest rate risk exposures, and interest rate risk management should be an integral component of an institutions risk management
43
infrastructure. The Agencies expect all institutions to manage their interest rate risk exposures using processes and systems commensurate with their earnings and capital levels, complexity,
business model, risk profile and scope of operations, and the IRR Advisory reiterates the importance of effective corporate governance, policies and procedures, risk measuring and monitoring systems, stress testing, and internal controls related to
the interest rate risk exposures of institutions.
The IRR Advisory encourages institutions to use a variety of techniques to measure interest rate risk
exposure, including simple maturity gap analysis, income measurement and valuation measurement for assessing the impact of changes in market rates, as well as simulation modeling to measure interest rate risk exposure. Institutions are encouraged to
use the full complement of analytical capabilities of their interest rate risk simulation models. The IRR Advisory also reminds institutions that stress testing, which includes both scenario and sensitivity analysis, is an integral component of
interest rate risk management. The IRR Advisory indicates that institutions should regularly assess interest rate risk exposures beyond typical industry conventions, including changes in rates of greater magnitude (e.g., up and down 300 and 400
basis points, as compared to up and down 200 basis points, which has been the general practice) across different tenors to reflect changing slopes and twists of the yield curve.
The IRR Advisory emphasizes that effective interest rate risk management not only involves the identification and measurement of interest rate risk, but also
the appropriate actions to control this risk. The adequacy and effectiveness of an institutions interest rate risk management process and the level of its interest rate risk exposure are critical factors in the Agencies evaluation of an
institutions sensitivity to changes in interest rates and capital adequacy.
Safety and Soundness Standards.
Pursuant to the
requirements of the FDICIA, as amended by the Riegle Community Development and Regulatory Improvement Act of 1994, the Agencies adopted guidelines establishing general standards relating to internal controls, information and internal audit systems,
loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings and compensation, fees and benefits. In general, the guidelines require, among other things, appropriate systems and practices to identify and
manage the risks and exposures specified in the guidelines. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the
services performed by an executive officer, employee, director, or principal shareholder.
In addition, the OCC adopted regulations pursuant to FDICIA to
require a savings bank that is given notice by the OCC that it is not satisfying any of such safety and soundness standards to submit a compliance plan to the OCC. If, after being so notified, a savings bank fails to submit an acceptable compliance
plan or fails in any material respect to implement an accepted compliance plan, the OCC may issue an order directing corrective and other actions of the types to which a significantly undercapitalized institution is subject under the prompt
corrective action provisions of FDICIA. If a savings bank fails to comply with such an order, the OCC may seek to enforce such an order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil monetary penalties.
Prompt Corrective Action.
FDICIA established a system of prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions.
Under this system, the bank regulators are required to take certain, and authorized to take other, supervisory actions against undercapitalized institutions, based upon five categories of capitalization which FDICIA created: well
capitalized, adequately capitalized, undercapitalized, significantly undercapitalized and critically undercapitalized. The severity of the action authorized or required to be taken under the
prompt corrective action regulations increases as a banks capital decreases within the three undercapitalized categories. All banks are prohibited from paying dividends or other capital distributions or paying management fees to any
controlling person if, following such distribution, the bank would be undercapitalized. The OCC is required to monitor closely the condition of an undercapitalized bank and to restrict the growth of its assets.
44
An undercapitalized bank is required to file a capital restoration plan with the OCC within 45 days of the
date the bank receives notices that it is within any of the three undercapitalized categories, and the plan must be guaranteed by every parent holding company. The aggregate liability of a parent holding company is limited to the lesser of:
|
1.
|
an amount equal to five percent of the banks total assets at the time it became undercapitalized; and
|
|
2.
|
the amount that is necessary (or would have been necessary) to bring the bank into compliance with all capital standards applicable with respect to such bank as of the time it fails to comply with the plan.
|
If a bank fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it were significantly undercapitalized. Banks that are
significantly or critically undercapitalized are subject to a wider range of regulatory requirements and restrictions. Under the OCC regulations, generally, a federally chartered savings bank is treated as well capitalized if its total risk-based
capital ratio is 10.0% or greater and its Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio is 6.0% or greater, and its leverage ratio is 5.0% or greater, and it is not subject to any order or directive by the OCC to meet a specific capital level. As of
December 31, 2013, Hudson City Savings met the applicable requirements to be considered well capitalized. Under the Final Capital Rules (described above), which will go into effect for Hudson City Savings on January 1, 2015, to
be well capitalized, an insured depository institution must also maintain a common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.5% or greater, and the minimum Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio needed to be considered well capitalized was increased from
6.0% to 8.0%.
In addition to measures taken under the prompt corrective action provisions with respect to undercapitalized institutions, insured banks
and their holding companies may be subject to potential enforcement actions by their regulators for unsafe and unsound practices in conducting their business or for violations of law or regulation, including the filing of a false or misleading
regulatory report. Enforcement actions under this authority may include the issuance of cease and desist orders, the imposition of civil money penalties, the issuance of directives to increase capital, formal and informal agreements, or removal and
prohibition orders against institution-affiliated parties (generally bank insiders). Further, the FRB may bring an enforcement action against a depository institution holding company either to address undercapitalization in the holding
company or to require the holding company to take measures to remediate undercapitalization or other safety and soundness concerns in a depository institution subsidiary.
Insurance Activities.
Hudson City Savings is generally permitted to engage in certain activities through its subsidiaries. However, the
federal banking agencies have adopted regulations prohibiting depository institutions from conditioning the extension of credit to individuals upon either the purchase of an insurance product or annuity or an agreement by the consumer not to
purchase an insurance product or annuity from an entity that is not affiliated with the depository institution. The regulations also require prior disclosure of this prohibition to potential insurance product or annuity customers.
Deposit Insurance.
Hudson City Savings is a member of the DIF and pays its deposit insurance assessments to the DIF.
Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, as amended (FDIA), the FDIC may terminate the insurance of an institutions deposits upon a finding
that the institution has engaged in unsafe or 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. The management of Hudson City
Savings does not know of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to termination of deposit insurance.
In determining the deposit insurance
assessment to be paid by insured depository institutions,, the FDIC generally assigns an institution to one of four risk categories based on the institutions most recent supervisory
45
ratings and capital ratios. For institutions within Risk Category I, assessment rates generally depend upon a combination of CAMELS (capital adequacy, asset quality, management, earnings,
liquidity, sensitivity to market risk) component ratings and financial ratios, assessment rates depend on a combination of long-term debt issuer ratings, CAMELS component ratings and financial ratios. In addition, an institutions base
assessment rate is generally subject to following adjustments: (i) a decrease for the institutions long-term unsecured debt, including most senior and subordinated debt, (ii) an increase for brokered deposits above a threshold amount
and (iii) an increase for unsecured debt held that is issued by another insured depository institution. The FDIC also annually establishes a designated reserve ratio (DRR) of estimated insured deposits. The DRR will remain at 2.00%,
which is the same ratio that has been in effect since January 1, 2011 1. The FDIC is authorized to change deposit insurance assessment rates as necessary, to maintain the DRR, , without further notice-and-comment rulemaking, provided that:
(i) no such adjustment can be greater than three basis points from one quarter to the next, (ii) adjustments cannot result in rates more than three basis points above or below the base rates and (iii) rates cannot be negative.
As a result of the failures of a number of banks and thrifts, during the financial crisis, there was a significant increase in the loss provisions of the DIF.
This resulted in a decline in the DIF reserve ratio during 2008 below the then minimum DRR of 1.15%. As a result, the FDIC was required to establish a restoration plan to restore the reserve ratio to 1.15% within a period of eight years.
The Reform Act gave the FDIC much greater discretion to manage the DIF, including where to set the DRR. Among other things, the Reform Act (i) raises the
minimum reserve, which the FDIC is required to set each year, to 1.35% (from the former minimum of 1.15%) and removed the upper limit on the reserve ratio (which was formerly capped at 1.5%); (ii) requires that the fund reserve ratio reach
1.35% by September 30, 2020; and (iii) requires that the FDIC offset the effect of requiring the reserve ratio to reach 1.35% on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion, so that more of the
cost of raising the reserve ratio will be borne by the institutions with more than $10 billion in assets, such as Hudson City Savings. In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a restoration plan to ensure that the DIF reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by
September 30, 2020, as required by the Reform Act. The FDIC is expected to pursue further rulemaking regarding the method that will be used to reach the reserve ratio of 1.35% so that more of the cost of raising the reserve ratio to 1.35% will
be borne by institutions with more than $10 billion in assets.
For 2013, Hudson City Savings had an assessment rate of approximately 17.86 basis points
resulting in a deposit insurance assessment of $71.2 million. The deposit insurance assessment rates are in addition to the FICO payments. Total expense for 2013, including the FICO assessment, was $73.5 million.
In November 2009, the FDIC adopted a final rule which required insured depository institutions to prepay their projected quarterly deposit insurance
assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011 and
2012 on December 30, 2009, together with their regular deposit insurance
assessment for the third quarter of 2009, which for Hudson City Savings totaled $162.5 million.
The FDIC deposit insurance assessments are in addition to
the assessments for payments on the bonds issued in the late 1980s by the Financing Corporation to recapitalize the now defunct Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation. The Financing Corporation payments will continue until the bonds mature
in 2017 through 2019. Our expense for these payments totaled $2.3million in 2013.
Transactions with Affiliates of Hudson City
Savings.
Hudson City Savings is subject to the affiliate and insider transaction rules set forth in Sections 23A, 23B, 22(g) and 22(h) of the Federal Reserve Act (FRA), and Regulation W and Regulation O issued by
the FRB. These provisions, among other things, prohibit or limit a savings bank from extending credit to, or entering into certain transactions with, its affiliates (which for Hudson City Savings would include Hudson City Bancorp) and principal
shareholders, directors and executive officers. The OCC is authorized to impose additional restriction on transactions with affiliates if necessary to protect the safety and soundness of a savings institution.
46
In addition, the FRB regulations include additional restrictions on savings banks under Section 11 of HOLA,
including provisions prohibiting a savings bank from making a loan to an affiliate that is engaged in non-bank holding company activities and provisions prohibiting a savings association from purchasing or investing in securities issued by an
affiliate that is not a subsidiary. FRB regulations also include certain specific exemptions from these prohibitions. The FRB and the OCC require each depository institution that is subject to Sections 23A and 23B of the FRA to implement
policies and procedures to ensure compliance with Regulation W regarding transactions with affiliates.
Section 402 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (Sarbanes-Oxley) prohibits the extension of personal loans to directors and executive officers of issuers (as defined in Sarbanes-Oxley). The prohibition, however, does not apply to mortgages advanced by an insured
depository institution, such as Hudson City Savings, that are subject to the insider lending restrictions of Section 22(h) of the FRA.
The Reform
Act imposes further restrictions on transactions with affiliates and extensions of credit to executive officers, director and principal shareholders, by, among other things, expanding covered transactions to include securities lending, repurchase
agreement and derivatives activities with affiliates. These changes became effective on July 21, 2012.
Privacy Standards.
Hudson
City Savings is subject to OCC regulations implementing the privacy protection provisions of the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (Gramm-Leach). These regulations require Hudson City Savings to disclose its privacy policy, including identifying
with whom it shares non-public personal information, to customers at the time of establishing the customer relationship and annually thereafter.
The regulations also require Hudson City Savings to provide its customers with initial and annual notices that accurately reflect its privacy policies and
practices. In addition, Hudson City Savings is required to provide its customers with the ability to opt-out of having Hudson City Savings share their non-public personal information with unaffiliated third parties before they can
disclose such information, subject to certain exceptions.
Hudson City Savings is subject to regulatory guidelines establishing standards for safeguarding
customer information. These regulations implement certain provisions of Gramm-Leach. The guidelines describe the Agencies expectations for the creation, implementation and maintenance of an information security program, which would include
administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the size and complexity of the institution and the nature and scope of its activities. The standards set forth in the guidelines are intended to ensure the security and confidentiality
of customer records and information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records and protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information that could result in substantial
harm or inconvenience to any customer.
Community Reinvestment Act.
Under the Community Reinvestment Act (CRA), as
implemented by OCC regulations, any federally chartered savings bank, including Hudson City Savings, has a continuing and affirmative obligation consistent with its safe and sound operation to help meet the credit needs of its entire community,
including low and moderate income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institutions discretion to develop the types of products and services that it
believes are best suited to its particular community. The CRA requires the OCC, in connection with its examination of a federally chartered savings bank, to assess the depository institutions record of meeting the credit needs of its community
and to take such record into account in its evaluation of certain applications by such institution.
Current CRA regulations rate an institution based on
its actual performance in meeting community needs. In particular, the evaluation system focuses on three tests:
|
|
|
a lending test, to evaluate the institutions record of making loans in its service areas;
|
47
|
|
|
an investment test, to evaluate the institutions record of investing in community development projects, affordable housing, and programs benefiting low or moderate income individuals and businesses; and
|
|
|
|
a service test, to evaluate the institutions delivery of services through its branches, ATMs and other offices.
|
The CRA also requires all institutions to make public disclosure of their CRA ratings. Hudson City Savings has received a satisfactory rating in
its most recent CRA examination. The Agencies adopted regulations implementing the requirement under Gramm-Leach that insured depository institutions publicly disclose certain agreements that are in fulfillment of the CRA. Hudson City Savings has no
such agreements in place at this time.
Loans to One Borrower.
Under HOLA, savings banks are generally subject to the
national bank limits on loans to one borrower. Generally, savings banks may not make a loan or extend credit to a single or related group of borrowers in excess of 15% of the institutions unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus. Additional
amounts may be loaned, not in excess of 10% of unimpaired capital and unimpaired surplus, if such loans or extensions of credit are secured by readily-marketable collateral. Hudson City Savings is in compliance with applicable loans to one borrower
limitations. At December 31, 2013, Hudson City Savings largest aggregate amount of loans to one borrower totaled $7.9 million. These loans were restructured during 2010 to allow for a deferment of principal payments. These loans were
not performing in accordance with the restructuring agreement which resulted in a charge-off of $873,000 during the year ended December 31, 2012. These loans are included in troubled debt restructurings and classified as substandard at
December 31, 2013. The borrower has no affiliation with Hudson City Savings.
Interagency Guidance on Nontraditional Mortgage Product
Risks.
On October 4, 2006, the Agencies published the Interagency Guidance on Nontraditional Mortgage Product Risks (the Guidance). The Guidance describes sound practices for managing risk, as well as marketing,
originating and servicing nontraditional mortgage products, which include, among other things, interest only loans. The Guidance sets forth supervisory expectations with respect to loan terms and underwriting standards, portfolio and risk management
practices and consumer protection. For example, the Guidance indicates that originating interest only loans with reduced documentation is considered a layering of risk and that institutions are expected to demonstrate mitigating factors to support
their underwriting decision and the borrowers repayment capacity.
On June 29, 2007, the Agencies issued the Statement on Subprime
Mortgage Lending (the Statement) to address the growing concerns facing the sub-prime mortgage market, particularly with respect to rapidly rising sub-prime default rates that may indicate borrowers do not have the ability to repay
adjustable-rate sub-prime loans originated by financial institutions. In particular, the Agencies expressed concern in the Statement that current underwriting practices do not take into account that many subprime borrowers are not prepared for
payment shock and that the current subprime lending practices compound risk for financial institutions. The Statement describes the prudent safety and soundness and consumer protection standards that financial institutions should follow
to ensure borrowers obtain loans that they can afford to repay. The Statement also reinforces the April 17, 2007 Interagency Statement on Working with Mortgage Borrowers, in which the Agencies encouraged institutions to work constructively with
residential borrowers who are financially unable or reasonably expected to be unable to meet their contractual payment obligations on their home loans.
Prior to January 10, 2014, we purchased and originated reduced documentation loans (including interest-only reduced documentation loans). However, as of
January 10, 2014, we no longer purchase or originate such loans. In addition, we do not originate or purchase sub-prime loans, negative amortization loans or option ARM loans. During 2013 and 2012, originations of reduced documentation loans
totaled $780.2 million and $895.7 million, respectively, of which all were one-to four-family loans. Included in our loan portfolio at December 31, 2013 are $4.27 billion of amortizing reduced documentation loans and $826.5 million of reduced
documentation interest-only loans. See Residential Mortgage Lending, and Item 7 Managements Discussion and Analysis Asset Quality.
48
We have evaluated the Guidance and the Statement to determine our compliance and, as necessary, modified our risk
management practices, underwriting guidelines and consumer protection standards.
Appraisal Rules
.
In January 2013, pursuant to
the Reform Act, the Agencies issued final rules on appraisal requirements for higher-priced mortgage loans which became effective in January 2014. For mortgage loans with an annual percentage rate the exceeds a certain threshold, the Bank must
obtain an appraisal using a licensed or certified appraiser. The appraiser must prepare a written appraisal report based on a physical inspection of the interior of the property. The Bank must also then disclose to applicants information about the
purpose of the appraisal and provide them with a free copy of the appraisal report. Qualified mortgages are exempt from these appraisal requirements.
Qualified Thrift Lender (QTL) Test.
The HOLA requires savings associations to meet a Qualified Thrift Lender (the QTL
test). Under the QTL test, a savings association is required to maintain at least 65% of its portfolio assets (total assets less (1) specified liquid assets up to 20% of total assets, (2) intangibles, including goodwill,
and (3) the value of property used to conduct business) in certain qualified thrift investments (primarily residential mortgages and related investments, including certain mortgage-backed securities, credit card loans, student
loans, and small business loans) on a monthly basis during at least 9 out of every 12 months. As of December 31, 2013, Hudson City Savings held 98.3% of its portfolio assets in qualified thrift investments and had more than 75% of its portfolio
assets in qualified thrift investments for each of the 12 months ending December 31, 2013. Therefore, Hudson City Savings qualified under the QTL test.
A savings association that fails the QTL test will immediately be prohibited from: (1) making any new investment or engaging in any new activity not
permissible for a national bank, (2) paying dividends, unless such payment would be permissible for a national bank, is necessary to meet the obligations of a company that controls the savings association, and is specifically approved by the
OCC and the FRB, and (3) establishing any new branch office in a location not permissible for a national bank in the associations home state. A savings association that fails to meet the QTL test is deemed to have violated the HOLA and
may be subject to OCC enforcement action. In addition, if the association does not requalify under the QTL test within three years after failing the test, the association would be prohibited from retaining any investment or engaging in any activity
not permissible for a national bank.
Limitation on Capital Distributions.
The OCC regulations impose limitations upon certain capital
distributions by federal savings banks, such as certain cash dividends, payments to repurchase or otherwise acquire its shares, payments to shareholders of another institution in a cash out merger and other distributions charged against capital.
The OCC regulates all capital distributions by Hudson City Savings directly or indirectly to Hudson City Bancorp, including dividend payments. A federal
savings association, such as Hudson City Savings, must file a notice or seek affirmative approval from the OCC at least 30 days prior to each proposed capital distribution. Whether an application is required is based on a number of factors
including whether the institution qualifies for expedited treatment under the OCC rules and regulations or if the total amount of all capital distributions (including each proposed capital distribution) for the applicable calendar year exceeds net
income for that year to date plus the retained net income for the preceding two years. Currently, Hudson City Savings must seek approval from the OCC for future capital distributions. In addition, as a subsidiary of a savings and loan holding
company, Hudson City Savings must receive approval from the FRB before declaring a dividend.
During 2013, we were required to file applications with the
OCC and the FRB for proposed capital distributions, all of which were approved. Hudson City Savings paid dividends to Hudson City Bancorp totaling $100.0 million in 2013.
49
Hudson City Savings may not pay dividends to Hudson City Bancorp if, after paying those dividends, it would fail
to meet the required minimum levels under risk-based capital guidelines and the minimum leverage and tangible capital ratio requirements or if the dividend would violate a prohibition contained in any statute, regulation or agreement. Under the
FDIA, an insured depository institution such as Hudson City Savings is prohibited from making capital distributions, including the payment of dividends, if, after making such distribution, the institution would become undercapitalized
(as such term is used in the FDIA). Payment of dividends by Hudson City Savings also may be restricted at any time at the discretion of the OCC if it deems the payment to constitute an unsafe and unsound banking practice.
In addition, Hudson City Savings may not declare or pay cash dividends on or repurchase any of its shares of common stock if the effect thereof would cause
shareholders equity to be reduced below the amounts required for the liquidation account which was established as a result of Hudson City Savings conversion to a stock holding company structure.
Liquidity.
Hudson City Savings maintains sufficient liquidity to ensure its safe and sound operation, in accordance with OCC regulations.
Assessments.
The OCC charges assessments to recover the cost of examining federal savings banks and their affiliates. We also pay
semi-annual assessments for the holding company. We paid a total of $6.1 million in assessments for the year ended December 31, 2013.
Branching.
Federally chartered savings banks may branch nationwide to the extent allowed by federal statute.
Anti-Money Laundering and Customer Identification
Hudson
City Savings is subject to the Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT Act), and its implementing regulations. The USA PATRIOT Act gives the
federal government powers to address terrorist threats through enhanced domestic security measures, expanded surveillance powers, increased information sharing, and broadened anti-money laundering requirements. By way of amendments to the Bank
Secrecy Act, Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act takes measures intended to encourage information sharing among bank regulatory agencies and law enforcement bodies. Further, certain provisions of Title III impose affirmative obligations on a broad
range of financial institutions, including banks, thrifts, brokers, dealers, credit unions, money transfer agents and parties registered under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act and the implementing regulations impose the following requirements on financial institutions:
|
|
|
Establishment of anti-money laundering programs.
|
|
|
|
Establishment of a program specifying procedures for obtaining identifying information from customers seeking to open new accounts, including verifying the identity of customers within a reasonable period of time.
|
|
|
|
Establishment of enhanced due diligence policies, procedures and controls designed to detect and report money-laundering.
|
|
|
|
Prohibitions on correspondent accounts for foreign shell banks and compliance with record keeping obligations with respect to correspondent accounts of foreign banks.
|
|
|
|
Bank regulators are directed to consider a holding companys effectiveness in combating money laundering when ruling on Bank Holding Company Act and Bank Merger Act applications.
|
50
Federal Home Loan Bank System
Hudson City Savings is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank system, which consists of twelve regional Federal Home Loan Banks, each subject to supervision
and regulation by the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA). The Federal Home Loan Bank provides a central credit facility primarily for member thrift institutions as well as other entities involved in home mortgage lending. It is funded
primarily from proceeds derived from the sale of consolidated obligations of Federal Home Loan Banks. It makes loans to members (i.e., advances) in accordance with policies and procedures, including collateral requirements, established by the
respective boards of directors of the Federal Home Loan Banks. These policies and procedures are subject to the regulation and oversight of the FHFA. All long-term advances are required to provide funds for residential home financing. The FHFA has
also established standards of community or investment service that members must meet to maintain access to such long-term advances.
Hudson City Savings,
as a member of the FHLB, is currently required to acquire and hold shares of FHLB Class B stock. The Class B stock has a par value of $100 per share and is redeemable upon five years notice, subject to certain conditions. The Class B
stock has two subclasses, one for membership stock purchase requirements and the other for activity-based stock purchase requirements. The minimum stock investment requirement in the FHLB Class B stock is the sum of the membership stock
purchase requirement, determined on an annual basis at the end of each calendar year, and the activity-based stock purchase requirement, determined on a daily basis. For Hudson City Savings, the membership stock purchase requirement is 0.2% of the
Mortgage-Related Assets, as defined by the FHLB, which consists principally of residential mortgage loans and mortgage-backed securities, including CMOs and REMICs, held by Hudson City Savings. The activity-based stock purchase requirement for
Hudson City Savings is equal to the sum of: (1) 4.5% of outstanding borrowings from the FHLB; (2) 4.5% of the outstanding principal balance of Acquired Member Assets, as defined by the FHLB, and delivery commitments for Acquired Member
Assets; (3) a specified dollar amount related to certain off-balance sheet items, which for Hudson City Savings is zero; and (4) a specified percentage ranging from 0 to 5% of the carrying value on the FHLBs balance sheet of
derivative contracts between the FHLB and Hudson City Savings, which for Hudson City Savings is also zero. The FHLB can adjust the specified percentages and dollar amount from time to time within the ranges established by the FHLB capital plan. At
December 31, 2013, the amount of FHLB stock held by us satisfies the requirements of the FHLB capital plan.
Federal Reserve System
FRB regulations require federally chartered savings banks to maintain non-interest-earning cash reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and
demand deposit accounts). A reserve of 3% is to be maintained against net transaction accounts between $13.3 million and $89.0 million (subject to adjustment by the FRB) plus a reserve of 10% (subject to adjustment by the FRB) against that
portion of total transaction accounts in excess of $89.0 million. The first $13.3 million of otherwise reservable balances (subject to adjustment by the FRB) is exempt from the reserve requirements. Hudson City Savings is in compliance with the
foregoing requirements. Because required reserves must be maintained in the form of either vault cash, a non-interest-bearing account at a Federal Reserve Bank or a pass-through account as defined by the FRB, the effect of this reserve requirement
is to reduce Hudson City Savings interest-earning assets. Federal Home Loan Bank system members are also authorized to borrow from the Federal Reserve discount window, but FRB regulations require institutions to exhaust all Federal
Home Loan Bank sources before borrowing from a Federal Reserve Bank.
Pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Federal Reserve
Banks pay interest on depository institutions required and excess reserve balances. The interest rate paid on required reserve balances is currently the average target federal funds rate over the reserve maintenance period. The rate on excess
balances will be set equal to the lowest Federal Open Market Committee of the FRB target rate in effect during the reserve maintenance period.
51
Federal Savings and Loan Holding Company Regulation
Hudson City Bancorp is a unitary savings and loan holding company within the meaning of HOLA. As a result of the Reform Act, Hudson City Bancorp is now subject
to regulation, examination, supervision and reporting requirements by the FRB. In addition, the FRB has enforcement authority over Hudson City Bancorp and its subsidiaries other than Hudson City Savings Bank. Among other things, this authority
permits the FRB to restrict or prohibit activities that are determined to be a serious risk to the subsidiary savings bank.
Restrictions Applicable
to New Savings and Loan Holding Companies.
Gramm-Leach also restricts the powers of new unitary savings and loan holding companies. Under Gramm-Leach, all unitary savings and loan holding companies formed after May 4, 1999, such as
Hudson City Bancorp, are limited to financially related activities permissible for bank holding companies, as defined under Gramm-Leach. Accordingly, Hudson City Bancorps activities are restricted to:
|
|
|
furnishing or performing management services for the savings institution subsidiary of such holding company;
|
|
|
|
conducting an insurance agency or escrow business;
|
|
|
|
holding, managing, or liquidating assets owned or acquired from the savings institution subsidiary of such holding company;
|
|
|
|
holding or managing properties used or occupied by the savings institution subsidiary of such holding company;
|
|
|
|
acting as trustee under a deed of trust;
|
|
|
|
any other activity (i) that the FRB, by regulation, has determined to be permissible for bank holding companies under Section 4(c) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (the BHC Act), unless the
FRB, by regulation, prohibits or limits any such activity for savings and loan holding companies, or (ii) which multiple savings and loan holding companies were authorized by regulation to directly engage in on March 5, 1987;
|
|
|
|
purchasing, holding, or disposing of stock acquired in connection with a qualified stock issuance if the purchase of such stock by such holding company is approved by the FRB; and
|
|
|
|
any activity permissible for financial holding companies under section 4(k) of the BHC Act.
|
Activities
permissible for financial holding companies under section 4(k) of the BHC Act include:
|
|
|
lending, exchanging, transferring, investing for others, or safeguarding money or securities;
|
|
|
|
insurance activities or providing and issuing annuities, and acting as principal, agent, or broker;
|
|
|
|
financial, investment, or economic advisory services;
|
|
|
|
issuing or selling instruments representing interests in pools of assets that a bank is permitted to hold directly;
|
52
|
|
|
underwriting, dealing in, or making a market in securities;
|
|
|
|
activities previously determined by the FRB to be closely related to banking;
|
|
|
|
activities that bank holding companies are permitted to engage in outside of the U.S.; and
|
|
|
|
portfolio investments made by an insurance company.
|
In addition, Hudson City Bancorp cannot be acquired or
acquire a company unless the acquirer or target, as applicable, is engaged solely in financial activities.
Restrictions Applicable to All Savings
and Loan Holding Companies.
Except under limited circumstances, Federal law prohibits a savings and loan holding company, including Hudson City Bancorp, directly or indirectly, from:
|
|
|
acquiring control (as defined under HOLA) of another savings institution (or a holding company parent) without prior FRB approval;
|
|
|
|
acquiring, through merger, consolidation, or purchase of assets, another savings institution or a holding company thereof, or acquiring all or substantially all of the assets of such institution (or a holding company)
without prior FRB approval;
|
|
|
|
acquiring or retaining more than 5% of the voting shares of a non-subsidiary savings association, a non-subsidiary holding company, or a non-subsidiary company engaged in activities other than those permitted by the
HOLA; or
|
|
|
|
acquiring or retaining control of a depository institution that is not federally insured.
|
In evaluating
applications by holding companies to acquire savings associations, the FRB must consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the company and institution involved, the effect of the acquisition on the risk to the DIF, the
convenience and needs of the community and competitive factors.
A savings and loan holding company may not acquire as a separate subsidiary an insured
institution that has a principal office outside of the state where the principal office of its subsidiary institution is located, except:
|
|
|
in the case of certain emergency acquisitions approved by the FDIC;
|
|
|
|
if such holding company controls a savings institution subsidiary that operated a home or branch office in such additional state as of March 5, 1987; or
|
|
|
|
if the laws of the state in which the savings institution to be acquired is located specifically authorize a savings institution chartered by that state to be acquired by a savings institution chartered by the state
where the acquiring savings institution or savings and loan holding company is located or by a holding company that controls such a state chartered association.
|
In general, a savings and loan holding company, with the prior approval of the FRB, may engage in all activities that bank holding companies may engage in
under any regulation that the FRB has promulgated under Section 4(c) of the BHC Act. Prior approval from the FRB is not required, however, if: (1) the savings and loan holding company received a composite rating of 1 or
2 in its most recent examination, and it is not in troubled condition, and the holding company does not propose to commence the activity by an acquisition of a going concern, or (2) the activity is otherwise permissible under
another provision of HOLA, for which prior notice to or approval from the FRB is not required.
53
Other Holding Company Restrictions.
Pursuant to the terms of the Company MOU, we are required
to seek approval from the FRB at least 30 days prior to declaring any future cash dividend. Each dividend request submitted to the FRB must evidence our compliance with applicable guidance regarding payment of dividends issued by the FRB. This
process enables the FRB to comment on, object to or otherwise prohibit us from paying the proposed dividend. The supervisory guidance issued by the FRB states that we should either eliminate, defer or significantly reduce dividends if (i) our
net income available to common shareholders over the past year is insufficient to fully fund a dividend, (ii) our prospective rate of earnings retention is not consistent with our capital needs and our overall current or prospective financial
condition or (iii) we will not meet, or are in danger of not meeting, our minimum regulatory capital adequacy ratios.
As discussed above, the Reform
Act requires the Agencies to establish consolidated risk-based and leverage capital requirements for insured depository institutions, depository institution holding companies and systemically important nonbank financial companies. These requirements
must be no less than those to which insured depository institutions are currently subject. In addition, the Reform Act specifically authorizes the FRB to issue regulations relating to capital requirements for savings and loan holding companies. As
described above, in October 2013, the OCC and the FRB published the Final Capital Rules, which subject all federal savings associations and their FRB regulated holding companies, including Hudson City Savings and Hudson City Bancorp, to a new
consolidated regulatory capital framework. As a result, effective January 1, 2015, we will become subject to consolidated capital requirements which we have not been subject to previously. In addition, pursuant to the Reform Act, we are
required to serve as a source of strength for Hudson City Savings.
In October of 2012, the FRB published two final rules with stress testing requirements
for certain bank holding companies, state member banks, and savings and loan holding companies. In accordance with these rules, the FRB began conducting supervisory stress tests in the fall of 2012 for the 19 bank holding companies that participated
in the 2009 Supervisory Capital Assessment Program and subsequent Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Reviews. The final rule also required these companies to conduct their own stress tests, with the results to be publicly disclosed in March 2013.
In addition to the stress test requirements applicable to these 19 bank holding companies, under the final rule institutions, such as Hudson City
Bancorp, are required to conduct annual stress tests as of September 30
th
. Institutions with less than $50 billion in assets, such as Hudson City Bancorp, are required to submit regulatory
reports to the FRB on their stress tests by March 31st. A summary of the company-run stress tests is required to be published.
In September of 2013,
the FRB issued an interim final rule to clarify how companies should incorporate the Basel III regulatory capital reforms into their capital and business projections during the next cycle of capital plan submissions and stress tests and provides a
one-year transition period during which bank holding companies with more than $10 billion but less than $50 billion in total consolidated assets would not be required to reflect the Final Capital Rules in their stress tests for the stress test cycle
that begins October 1, 2013. In this interim final rule, the FRB is providing bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of more than $10 but less than $50 billion with a one-year transition period to incorporate the revised capital
framework into their company-run stress tests. With respect to the stress test cycle that began on October 1, 2013, these companies will estimate their pro forma capital levels and ratios over the planning horizon using the capital rules in
effect as of the beginning of the stress test cycle beginning on October 1, 2013, and will not reflect the impact of the revised capital framework in their company-run stress tests. In particular, for this stress test cycle, these companies
will not calculate common equity tier 1 capital as defined in the revised capital framework or incorporate the effects of any changes to the definition of capital, any new or additional deductions from capital, or any changes to the calculation of
risk-weighted assets.
54
Federal Securities Law
Hudson City Bancorps securities are registered with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. As such, Hudson City Bancorp is
subject to the information, proxy solicitation, insider trading, and other requirements and restrictions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Delaware Corporation Law
Hudson City Bancorp is
incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware, and is therefore subject to regulation by the State of Delaware. In addition, the rights of Hudson City Bancorps shareholders are governed by the Delaware General Corporation Law.
TAXATION
Federal
General.
The following discussion is intended only as a summary and does not purport to be a comprehensive description of the tax rules
applicable to Hudson City Savings or Hudson City Bancorp. For federal income tax purposes, Hudson City Bancorp reports its income on the basis of a taxable year ending December 31, using the accrual method of accounting, and is generally
subject to federal income taxation in the same manner as other corporations. Hudson City Savings and Hudson City Bancorp constitute an affiliated group of corporations and are therefore eligible to report their income on a consolidated basis. The
Companys tax returns are currently under audit by the Internal Revenue Service for the tax years 2009, 2010 and 2011.
Distributions.
To the extent that Hudson City Savings makes non-dividend distributions to Shareholders, such distributions will be considered to result in distributions from Hudson City Savings unrecaptured tax bad debt reserve base year
reserve, i.e., its reserve as of December 31, 1987, to the extent thereof and then from its supplemental reserve for losses on loans, and an amount based on the amount distributed will be included in Hudson City Savings taxable
income. Non-dividend distributions include distributions in excess of Hudson City Savings current and accumulated earnings and profits, distributions in redemption of stock and distributions in partial or complete liquidation. However,
dividends paid out of Hudson City Savings current or accumulated earnings and profits, as calculated for federal income tax purposes, will not constitute non-dividend distributions and, therefore, will not be included in Hudson City
Savings income.
The amount of additional taxable income created from a non-dividend distribution is equal to the lesser of Hudson City
Savings base year reserve and supplemental reserve for losses on loans or an amount that, when reduced by the tax attributable to the income, is equal to the amount of the distribution. Thus, in certain situations, approximately one and
one-half times the non-dividend distribution would be included in gross income for federal income tax purposes, assuming a 35% federal corporate income tax rate. Hudson City Savings does not intend to pay dividends that would result in the recapture
of any portion of its bad debt reserve.
Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax.
In addition to the regular corporate income tax, corporations
generally are subject to an alternative minimum tax, or AMT, in an amount equal to 20% of alternative minimum taxable income, to the extent the AMT exceeds the corporations regular income tax. The AMT is available as a credit against future
regular income tax. We do not expect to be subject to the AMT.
Elimination of Dividends; Dividends Received Deduction.
Hudson City Bancorp
may exclude from its income 100% of dividends received from Hudson City Savings because Hudson City Savings is a member of the affiliated group of corporations of which Hudson City Bancorp is the parent.
55
State
New Jersey State Taxation.
Hudson City Savings files New Jersey Corporate Business income tax returns. Generally, the income of savings
institutions in New Jersey, which is calculated based on federal taxable income, subject to certain adjustments, is subject to New Jersey tax at a rate of 9.00%. Savings institutions must also calculate, as part of their corporate tax return, an
Alternative Minimum Assessment (AMA), which for Hudson City Savings is based on New Jersey gross receipts. Hudson City Savings must calculate its corporate business tax and the AMA, then pay the higher amount. In future years, if the
corporate business tax is greater than the AMA paid in prior years, Hudson City Savings may apply the prepaid AMA against its corporate business taxes (up to 50% of the corporate business tax, subject to certain limitations). Hudson City Savings is
not currently under audit with respect to its New Jersey income tax returns. During 2011, the State of New Jersey completed an audit of the Banks tax returns for tax years 2007, 2008 and 2009.
Hudson City Bancorp is required to file a New Jersey income tax return and will generally be subject to a state income tax at a 9.00% rate. However, if Hudson
City Bancorp meets certain requirements, it may be eligible to elect to be taxed as a New Jersey Investment Company, which would allow it to be taxed at a rate of 3.60%. Further, investment companies are not subject to the AMA. If Hudson City
Bancorp does not qualify as an investment company, it would be subject to taxation at the higher of the 9.00% corporate business rate on taxable income or the AMA.
Delaware State Taxation.
As a Delaware holding company not earning income in Delaware, Hudson City Bancorp is exempt from Delaware corporate
income tax but is required to file annual returns and pay annual fees and a franchise tax to the State of Delaware.
New York State
Taxation.
New York State imposes an annual franchise tax on banking corporations, based on net income allocable to New York State, at a rate of 7.1%. If, however, the application of an alternative minimum tax (based on taxable assets
allocated to New York, alternative net income, or a flat minimum fee) results in a greater tax, an alternative minimum tax will be imposed. In addition, New York State imposes a tax surcharge of 17.0% of the New York State Franchise Tax,
calculated using an annual franchise tax rate of 9.00% (which represents the 2000 annual franchise tax rate), allocable to business activities carried on in the Metropolitan Commuter Transportation District. These taxes apply to Hudson City Savings.
During 2013, the State of New York completed an audit of the Banks tax returns for tax years 2006 through 2008.
Connecticut State
Taxation.
Connecticut imposes an income tax based on net income allocable to the State of Connecticut, at a rate of 7.5%.
New York City
Taxation.
Hudson City Savings is also subject to the New York City Financial Corporation Tax calculated, subject to a New York City income and expense allocation, on a similar basis as the New York State Franchise Tax. A significant portion
of Hudson City Savings entire net income is derived from outside the New York City jurisdiction which has the effect of significantly reducing the New York City taxable income of Hudson City Savings.