UNITED STATES
|
| (Mark One) |
| [X] |
ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2001 OR |
||
| [_] |
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the transition period from to |
|
Commission File Number 0-23113 GUARANTY BANCSHARES,
INC. |
| Texas | 75-1656431 | ||
| (State or other jurisdiction of | (I.R.S.Employer | ||
| incorporation or organization) | Identification Number) | ||
| 100 West Arkansas | 75455 | ||
| Mount Pleasant, Texas | (Zip Code) | ||
| (Address of principal executive offices) | |||
| | changes in interest rates and market prices, which could reduce the Companys net interest margins, asset valuations and expense expectations; |
| | changes in the levels of loan prepayments and the resulting effects on the value of the Companys loan portfolio; |
| | changes in local economic and business conditions which adversely affect the Companys customers and their ability to transact profitable business with the Company, including the ability of its borrowers to repay their loans according to their terms or a change in the value of the related collateral; |
| | increased competition for deposits and loans adversely affecting rates and terms; |
| | the timing, impact and other uncertainties of the Companys potential future acquisitions, including the Companys ability to identify suitable future acquisition candidates, the success or failure in the integration of their operations, and the Companys ability to enter new markets successfully and capitalize on growth opportunities; |
| | increased credit risk in the Companys assets and increased operating risk caused by a material change in commercial, consumer and/or real estate loans as a percentage of the total loan portfolio; |
| | the failure of assumptions underlying the establishment of and provisions made to the allowance for loan losses; |
| | changes in the availability of funds resulting in increased costs or reduced liquidity; |
| | changes in the Companys ability to pay dividends on its Common Stock; |
| | increased asset levels and changes in the composition of assets and the resulting impact on the Companys capital levels and regulatory capital ratios; |
| | the Companys ability to acquire, operate and maintain cost effective and efficient systems without incurring unexpectedly difficult or expensive but necessary technological changes; |
| | the loss of senior management or operating personnel and the potential inability to hire qualified personnel at reasonable compensation levels; |
| | the effects of the Internal Revenue Services examination regarding the Companys leveraged leasing transactions; |
| | changes in economic and business conditions which would adversely affect the value of the Aircraft Finance Trust (AFT), and cause the Company to not fully realize its current investment in AFT; and |
| | changes in status and government regulations or their interpretations applicable to bank holding companies and the Companys present and future banking and other subsidiaries, including changes in tax requirements and tax rates. |
|
- 3 - |
All written or oral forward-looking statements attributable to the Company are expressly qualified in their entirety by these cautionary statements. |
| Item 1. | Business |
Under Federal Reserve policy, a bank holding company is expected to act as a source of financial strength to each of its banking subsidiaries and commit resources to their support. Such support may be required at times when, absent this Federal Reserve policy, a holding company may not be inclined to provide it. As discussed below, a bank holding company in certain circumstances could be required to guarantee the capital plan of an undercapitalized banking subsidiary. In the event of a bank holding companys bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code, the trustee will be deemed to have assumed and is required to cure immediately any deficit under any commitment by the debtor holding company to any of the federal banking agencies to maintain the capital of an insured depository institution, and any claim for breach of such obligation will generally have priority over most other unsecured claims. Financial Modernization. On October 26, 2001, President Bush signed the USA Patriot Act of 2001. Enacted in response to the terrorist attacks in New York, Pennsylvania and Washington, D.C. on September 11, 2001, the Patriot Act is intended to strengthen U.S. law enforcements and the intelligence communities ability to work cohesively to combat terrorism on a variety of fronts. The potential impact of the Act on financial institutions of all kinds is significant and wide ranging. The Act contains sweeping anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws and requires various regulations, including: |
| | due diligence requirements for financial institutions that administer, maintain or manage private bank accounts or correspondent accounts for non-U.S. persons; |
| | standards for verifying customer identification at account opening; |
| | rules to promote cooperation among financial institutions, regulators, and law enforcement entities in identifying parties that may be involved in terrorism or money laundering; |
| | reports by non-financial trades and businesses filed with the Treasury Departments Financial Crimes Enforcement Network for transactions exceeding $10,000; and; |
| | filing of suspicious activities reports regarding securities by brokers and dealers if they believe a customer may be violating U.S. laws and regulations. |
|
The Company is unable to predict the impact of such laws on its financial condition or results of operations at this time. Under the Financial Services Modernization Act, federal banking regulators adopted rules that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. Pursuant to the rules, financial institutions must provide: |
| | initial notices to customers about their privacy policies, describing the conditions under which they may disclose non-public personal information to nonaffiliated third parties and afflilates; |
| | annual notices of their privacy policies to current customers; and |
| | a reasonable method for customers to opt out of disclosures to nonaffiliated third parties. |
|
These privacy provisions will affect how customer information is transmitted through diversified financial companies and conveyed to outside vendors. It is not possible at this time to assess the impact of the privacy provisions on the Companys financial condition or results of operations. Safe and Sound Banking Practices. Bank holding companies are not permitted to engage in unsafe and unsound banking practices. The Federal Reserves Regulation Y, for example, generally requires a holding company to give the Federal Reserve prior notice of any redemption or repurchase of its own equity securities, if the consideration to be paid, together with the consideration paid for any repurchases or redemptions in the preceding year, is equal to 10% or more of the companys consolidated net worth. The Federal Reserve may oppose the transaction if it believes that the transaction would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice or would violate any law or regulation. Depending upon the circumstances, the Federal Reserve could take the position that paying a dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. - 8 - |
The Federal Reserve has broad authority to prohibit activities of bank holding companies and their non-banking subsidiaries which represent unsafe and unsound banking practices or which constitute violations of laws or regulations, and can assess civil money penalties for certain activities conducted on a knowing and reckless basis, if those activities caused a substantial loss to a depository institution. The penalties can be as high as $1.0 million for each day the activity continues. Anti-Tying Restrictions. Bank holding companies and their affiliates are prohibited from tying the provision of certain services, such as extensions of credit, to other services offered by a holding company or its affiliates. Capital Adequacy Requirements. The Federal Reserve has adopted a system using risk-based capital guidelines to evaluate the capital adequacy of bank holding companies. Under the guidelines, specific categories of assets are assigned different risk weights, based generally on the perceived credit risk of the asset. These risk weights are multiplied by corresponding asset balances to determine a risk-weighted asset base. The guidelines require a minimum total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% (of which at least 4.0% is required to consist of Tier 1 capital elements). Total capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. As of December 31, 2001, the Companys ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 11.52% and its ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 12.58%. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. In addition to the risk-based capital guidelines, the Federal Reserve uses a leverage ratio as an additional tool to evaluate the capital adequacy of bank holding companies. The leverage ratio is a companys Tier 1 capital divided by its average total consolidated assets. Certain highly rated bank holding companies may maintain a minimum leverage ratio of 3.0%, but other bank holding companies may be required to maintain a leverage ratio of up to 200 basis points above the regulatory minimum. As of December 31, 2001, the Companys leverage ratio was 8.44%. The federal banking agencies risk-based and leverage ratios are minimum supervisory ratios generally applicable to banking organizations that meet certain specified criteria, assuming that they have the highest regulatory rating. Banking organizations not meeting these criteria are expected to operate with capital positions well above the minimum ratios. The federal bank regulatory agencies may set capital requirements for a particular banking organization that are higher than the minimum ratios when circumstances warrant. Federal Reserve guidelines also provide that banking organizations experiencing internal growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain strong capital positions substantially above the minimum supervisory levels, without significant reliance on intangible assets. Imposition of Liability for Undercapitalized Subsidiaries. Bank regulators are required to take prompt corrective action to resolve problems associated with insured depository institutions whose capital declines below certain levels. In the event an institution becomes undercapitalized, it must submit a capital restoration plan. The capital restoration plan will not be accepted by the regulators unless each company having control of the undercapitalized institution guarantees the subsidiarys compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institutions holding company is entitled to a priority of payment in bankruptcy. The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5% of the institutions assets at the time it became undercapitalized or the amount necessary to cause the institution to be adequately capitalized. The bank regulators have greater power in situations where an institution becomes significantly or critically undercapitalized or fails to submit a capital restoration plan. For example, a bank holding company controlling such an institution can be required to obtain prior Federal Reserve approval of proposed dividends, or might be required to consent to a consolidation or to divest the troubled institution or other affiliates. Acquisitions by Bank Holding Companies. The BHC Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve before it may acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any bank, or ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank, if after such acquisition it would own or control, directly or indirectly, more than 5% of the voting shares of such bank. In approving bank acquisitions by bank holding companies, the Federal Reserve is required to consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding company and the banks concerned, the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, and various competitive factors. - 9 - |
Control Acquisitions. The Change in Bank Control Act prohibits a person or group of persons from acquiring control of a bank holding company unless the Federal Reserve has been notified and has not objected to the transaction. Under a rebuttable presumption established by the Federal Reserve, the acquisition of 10% or more of a class of voting stock of a bank holding company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, such as the Company, would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute acquisition of control of the Company. In addition, any company is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve under the BHC Act before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding Common Stock of the Company, or otherwise obtaining control or a controlling influence over the Company. The Bank. The Bank is a Texas-chartered banking association, the deposits of which are insured by the Bank Insurance Fund (BIF) of the FDIC. The Bank is not a member of the Federal Reserve System; therefore, the Bank is subject to supervision and regulation by the FDIC and the Texas Department of Banking (TDB). Such supervision and regulation subjects the Bank to special restrictions, requirements, potential enforcement actions and periodic examination by the FDIC and the TDB. Because the Federal Reserve regulates the bank holding company parent of the Bank, the Federal Reserve also has supervisory authority, which directly affects the Bank. Equivalence to National Bank Powers. The Texas Constitution, as amended in 1986, provides that a Texas-chartered bank has the same rights and privileges that are or may be granted to national banks domiciled in Texas. To the extent that the Texas laws and regulations may have allowed state-chartered banks to engage in a broader range of activities than national banks, the FDICIA has operated to limit this authority. FDICIA provides that no state bank or subsidiary thereof may engage as principal in any activity not permitted for national banks, unless the institution complies with applicable capital requirements and the FDIC determines that the activity poses no significant risk to the insurance fund. In general, statutory restrictions on the activities of banks are aimed at protecting the safety and soundness of depository institutions. Financial Modernization. Under the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, a national bank may establish a financial subsidiary and engage, subject to limitations on investment, in activities that are financial in nature, other than insurance underwriting as principal, insurance company portfolio investment, real estate development, real estate investment and annuity issuance. To do so, a bank must be well capitalized, well managed and have a CRA rating of satisfactory or better. Subsidiary banks of a financial holding company or national banks with financial subsidiaries must remain well capitalized and well managed in order to continue to engage in activities that are financial in nature without regulatory actions or restrictions, which could include divestiture of the financial subsidiary or subsidiaries. In addition, a financial holding company or a bank may not acquire a company that is engaged in activities that are financial in nature unless each of the subsidiary banks of the financial holding company or the bank has a CRA rating of satisfactory or better. Although the powers of state-chartered banks with respect to engaging in financial activities are not specifically addressed in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, state banks, such as the Bank, will have the same if not greater powers as national banks through the parity provision contained in the Texas Constitution. Branching. Texas law provides that a Texas-chartered bank can establish a branch anywhere in Texas provided that the branch is approved in advance by the TDB. The branch must also be approved by the FDIC, which considers a number of factors, including financial history, capital adequacy, earnings prospects, character of management, needs of the community and consistency with corporate powers. Restrictions on Transactions With Affiliates and Insiders. Transactions between the Bank and its nonbanking affiliates, including the Company, are subject to Section 23A of the Federal Reserve Act. In general, Section 23A imposes limits on the amount of such transactions, and also requires certain levels of collateral for loans to affiliated parties. It also limits the amount of advances to third parties, which are collateralized by the securities or obligations of the Company or its subsidiaries. Affiliate transactions are also subject to Section 23B of the Federal Reserve Act which generally requires that certain transactions between the Bank and its affiliates be on terms substantially the same, or at least as favorable to the Bank, as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with or involving other nonaffiliated persons. The restrictions on loans to directors, executive officers, principal shareholders and their related interests (collectively referred to herein as insiders) contained in the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation O apply to all insured institutions and their subsidiaries and holding companies. These restrictions include limits on loans to one borrower and conditions that must be met before such a loan can be made. There is also an aggregate limitation on all loans to insiders and their related interests. These loans cannot exceed the institutions total unimpaired capital and surplus, and the FDIC may determine that a lesser amount is appropriate. Insiders are subject to enforcement actions for knowingly accepting loans in violation of applicable restrictions. - 10 - |
Restrictions on Distribution of Subsidiary Bank Dividends and Assets. Dividends paid by the Bank have provided a substantial part of the Companys operating funds and it is anticipated that dividends paid by the Bank to the Company will continue to be the Companys principal source of operating funds. Capital adequacy requirements serve to limit the amount of dividends that may be paid by the Bank. Under federal law, the Bank cannot pay a dividend if, after paying the dividend, the Bank will be undercapitalized. The FDIC may declare a dividend payment to be unsafe and unsound even though the Bank would continue to meet its capital requirements after the dividend. Because the Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from its subsidiaries, its right to participate in the distribution of assets of any subsidiary upon the subsidiarys liquidation or reorganization will be subject to the prior claims of the subsidiarys creditors. In the event of a liquidation or other resolution of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors and other general or subordinated creditors are entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of holders of any obligation of the institution to its shareholders, including any depository institution holding company (such as the Company) or any shareholder or creditor thereof. Examinations. The FDIC periodically examines and evaluates insured banks. Based upon such an evaluation, the FDIC may revalue the assets of the institution and require that it establish specific reserves to compensate for the difference between the FDIC-determined value and the book value of such assets. The TDB also conducts examinations of state banks but may accept the results of a federal examination in lieu of conducting an independent examination. Audit Reports. Insured institutions with total assets of $500 million or more must submit annual audit reports prepared by independent auditors to federal and state regulators. In some instances, the audit report of the institutions holding company can be used to satisfy this requirement. Auditors must receive examination reports, supervisory agreements and reports of enforcement actions. In addition, financial statements prepared in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America, managements certifications concerning responsibility for the financial statements, internal controls and compliance with legal requirements designated by the FDIC, and an attestation by the auditor regarding the statements of management relating to the internal controls must be submitted. For institutions with total assets of more than $3 billion, independent auditors may be required to review quarterly financial statements. FDICIA requires that independent audit committees be formed, consisting of outside directors only. The committees of such institutions must include members with experience in banking or financial management, must have access to outside counsel, and must not include representatives of large customers. Capital Adequacy Requirements. The FDIC has adopted regulations establishing minimum requirements for the capital adequacy of insured institutions. The FDIC may establish higher minimum requirements if, for example, a bank has previously received special attention or has a high susceptibility to interest rate risk. The FDICs risk-based capital guidelines generally require state banks to have a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 4.0% and a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8.0%. The capital categories have the same definitions for the Bank as for the Company. As of December 31, 2001, the Banks ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 10.83% and its ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 11.85%. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. The FDICs leverage guidelines require state banks to maintain Tier 1 capital of no less than 5.0% of average total assets, except in the case of certain highly rated banks for which the requirement is 3.0% of average total assets. The TDB has issued a policy, which generally requires state chartered banks to maintain a leverage ratio (defined in accordance with federal capital guidelines) of 6.0%. As of December 31, 2001, the Banks ratio of Tier 1 capital to average total assets (leverage ratio) was 8.25%. See Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations. - 11 - |
Corrective Measures for Capital Deficiencies. The federal banking regulators are required to take prompt corrective action with respect to capital-deficient institutions. Agency regulations define, for each capital category, the levels at which institutions are well capitalized, adequately capitalized, under capitalized, significantly under capitalized and critically under capitalized. A well capitalized bank has a total risk based capital ratio of 10.0% or higher; a Tier 1 risk based capital ratio of 6.0% or higher; a leverage ratio of 5.0% or higher; and is not subject to any written agreement, order or directive requiring it to maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure. An adequately capitalized bank has a total risk based capital ratio of 8.0% or higher; a Tier 1 risk based capital ratio of 4.0% or higher; a leverage ratio of 4.0% or higher (3.0% or higher if the bank was rated a composite 1 in its most recent examination report and is not experiencing significant growth); and does not meet the criteria for a well capitalized bank. A bank is under capitalized if it fails to meet any one of the ratios required to be adequately capitalized. The Bank is classified as well capitalized for purposes of the FDICs prompt corrective action regulations. In addition to requiring undercapitalized institutions to submit a capital restoration plan, agency regulations contain broad restrictions on certain activities of undercapitalized institutions including asset growth, acquisitions, branch establishment, and expansion into new lines of business. With certain exceptions, an insured depository institution is prohibited from making capital distributions, including dividends, and is prohibited from paying management fees to control persons if the institution would be undercapitalized after any such distribution or payment. As an institutions capital decreases, the FDICs enforcement powers become more severe. A significantly undercapitalized institution is subject to mandated capital raising activities, restrictions on interest rates paid and transactions with affiliates, removal of management, and other restrictions. The FDIC has only very limited discretion in dealing with a critically undercapitalized institution and is virtually required to appoint a receiver or conservator. Banks with risk-based capital and leverage ratios below the required minimums may also be subject to certain administrative actions, including the termination of deposit insurance upon notice and hearing, or a temporary suspension of insurance without a hearing in the event the institution has no tangible capital. Management believes that the Company meets all capital adequacy requirements to which it is subject at December 31, 2001. The Banks capital ratios exceeded the minimum requirements for well capitalized institutions under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action at December 31, 2001. As a result, the Company does not believe that FDICIAs prompt corrective action regulations will have any material effect on the activities or operations of the Bank. It should be noted, however, that a banks capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying the FDICs prompt corrective action regulations and that the capital category may not constitute an accurate representation of the Banks overall financial condition or prospects. Deposit Insurance Assessments. The Bank must pay assessments to the FDIC for federal deposit insurance protection. The FDIC has adopted a risk-based assessment system as required by FDICIA. Under this system, FDIC-insured depository institutions pay insurance premiums at rates based on their risk classification. Institutions assigned to higher-risk classifications (that is, institutions that pose a greater risk of loss to their respective deposit insurance funds) pay assessments at higher rates than institutions that pose a lower risk. An institutions risk classification is assigned based on its capital levels and the level of supervisory concern the institution poses to the regulators. In addition, the FDIC can impose special assessments in certain instances. The current range of BIF assessments is between 0% and 0.27% of deposits. The FDIC established a process for raising or lowering all rates for insured institutions semi-annually if conditions warrant a change. Under this new system, the FDIC has the flexibility to adjust the assessment rate schedule twice a year without seeking prior public comment, but only within a range of five cents per $100 above or below the premium schedule adopted. Changes in the rate schedule outside the five-cent range above or below the current schedule can be made by the FDIC only after a full rulemaking with opportunity for public comment. On September 30, 1996, President Clinton signed into law an act that contained a comprehensive approach to recapitalize the Savings Association Insurance Fund (SAIF) and assure the payment of the Financing Corporations (FICO) bond obligations. Under this new act, banks insured under the BIF are required to pay a portion of the interest due on bonds that were issued by FICO to help shore up the ailing Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corporation in 1987. The FDIC also applies an assessment against BIF-assessable deposits to be paid to the Financing Corporation (FICO) to assist in paying interest of FICO bonds, which financed the resolution of the thrift industry crisis. The FICO assessment is approximately 1.22 basis points, on an annual basis, on BIF-insured deposits. - 12 - |
Enforcement Powers. The FDIC and the other federal banking agencies have broad enforcement powers, including the power to terminate deposit insurance, impose substantial fines and other civil and criminal penalties and appoint a conservator or receiver. Failure to comply with applicable laws, regulations and supervisory agreements could subject the Company or its banking subsidiaries, as well as officers, directors and other institution-affiliated parties of these organizations, to administrative sanctions and potentially substantial civil money penalties. The appropriate federal banking agency may appoint the FDIC as conservator or receiver for a banking institution (or the FDIC may appoint itself, under certain circumstances) if any one or more of a number of circumstances exist, including, without limitation, the fact that the banking institution is undercapitalized and has no reasonable prospect of becoming adequately capitalized; fails to become adequately capitalized when required to do so; fails to submit a timely and acceptable capital restoration plan; or materially fails to implement an accepted capital restoration plan. The TDB also has broad enforcement powers over the Bank, including the power to impose orders, remove officers and directors, impose fines and appoint supervisors and conservators. Brokered Deposit Restrictions. Adequately capitalized institutions cannot accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits except with a waiver from the FDIC, and are subject to restrictions on the interest rates that can be paid on such deposits. Undercapitalized institutions may not accept, renew or roll over brokered deposits. Cross-Guarantee Provisions. The Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery and Enforcement Act of 1989 (FIRREA) contains a cross-guarantee provision which generally makes commonly controlled insured depository institutions liable to the FDIC for any losses incurred in connection with the failure of a commonly controlled depository institution. Community Reinvestment Act. The CRA and the regulations issued thereunder are intended to encourage banks to help meet the credit needs of their service area, including low and moderate income neighborhoods, consistent with the safe and sound operations of the banks. These regulations also provide for regulatory assessment of a banks record in meeting the needs of its service area when considering applications to establish branches, merger applications and applications to acquire the assets and assume the liabilities of another bank. FIRREA requires federal banking agencies to make public a rating of a banks performance under the CRA. In the case of a bank holding company, the CRA performance record of the banks involved in the transaction are reviewed in connection with the filing of an application to acquire ownership or control of shares or assets of a bank or to merge with any other bank holding company. An unsatisfactory record can substantially delay or block the transaction. Consumer Laws and Regulations. In addition to the laws and regulations discussed herein, the Bank is also subject to certain consumer laws and regulations that are designed to protect consumers in transactions with banks. While the list set forth herein is not exhaustive, these laws and regulations include the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Electronic Funds Transfer Act, the Expedited Funds Availability Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, and the Fair Housing Act, among others. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits or making loans to such customers. The Bank must comply with the applicable provisions of these consumer protection laws and regulations as part of their ongoing customer relations. Instability of Regulatory Structure. Various legislation, such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which expanded the powers of banking institutions and bank holding companies, and proposals to overhaul the bank regulatory system and limit the investments that a depository institution may make with insured funds, is from time to time introduced in Congress. Such legislation may change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Company and the Bank in substantial and unpredictable ways. The Company cannot determine the ultimate effect that the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act will have or the effect that potential legislation, if enacted, or implementing regulations with respect thereto, would have, upon the financial condition or results of operations of the Company or its subsidiaries. Expanding Enforcement Authority. One of the major additional burdens imposed on the banking industry by FDICIA is the increased ability of banking regulators to monitor the activities of banks and their holding companies. In addition, the Federal Reserve and FDIC possess extensive authority to police unsafe or unsound practices and violations of applicable laws and regulations by depository institutions and their holding companies. For example, the FDIC may terminate the deposit insurance of any institution, which it determines has engaged in an unsafe or unsound practice. The agencies can also assess civil money penalties, issue cease and desist or removal orders, seek injunctions, and publicly disclose such actions. FDICIA, FIRREA and other laws have expanded the agencies authority in recent years, and the agencies have not yet fully tested the limits of their powers. - 13 - |
Effect on Economic Environment. The policies of regulatory authorities, including the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve, have a significant effect on the operating results of bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. Among the means available to the Federal Reserve to affect the money supply are open market operations in U.S. Government securities, changes in the discount rate on member bank borrowings, and changes in reserve requirements against member bank deposits. These means are used in varying combinations to influence overall growth and distribution of bank loans, investments and deposits, and their use may affect interest rates charged on loans or paid for deposits. Federal Reserve monetary policies have materially affected the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the future. The nature of future monetary policies and the effect of such policies on the business and earnings of the Company and the Bank cannot be predicted. |
| Item 2. | Properties |
|
The Company conducts business at eleven banking locations, two of which are located in Mount Pleasant, eight are located in the Northeast Texas communities of Bogata, Commerce, Deport, Paris, Pittsburg, Sulphur Springs, Talco, Texarkana and one located in the west Texas community of Fort Stockton. The Companys headquarters are located at 100 West Arkansas in Mount Pleasant in a two-story office building. The Company owns all of its locations. The following table sets forth specific information on each of the Companys locations: |
| Location |
Address |
Deposits at December 31, 2001 |
|||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (Dollars in thousands) | |||||||
| Bogata | 110 Halesboro Street, Bogata, Texas 75417 | $ 15,780 | |||||
| Commerce | 1108 Park Street, Commerce, Texas 75429 | 23,595 | |||||
| Deport | 111 Main Street, Deport, Texas 75435 | 9,417 | |||||
| Fort Stockton | #1 Spring Drive, Fort Stockton, Texas 75435 | | (1) | ||||
| Mount Pleasant-Downtown | 100 West Arkansas, Mount Pleasant, Texas 75455 | 160,610 | |||||
| Mount Pleasant-South | 2317 South Jefferson, Mount Pleasant, Texas 75455 | 4,036 | |||||
| Paris | 3250 Lamar Avenue, Paris, Texas 75460 | 64,074 | |||||
| Pittsburg | 116 South Greer Blvd., Pittsburg, Texas 75686 | 17,016 | |||||
| Sulphur Springs | 919 Gilmer Street, Sulphur Springs, Texas 75482 | 54,741 | |||||
| Talco | 104 Broad Street, Talco, Texas 75487 | 14,266 | |||||
| Texarkana | 2202 St. Michael Drive, Texarkana, Texas 75503 | 19,744 | |||||
|
(1) Location operates as a loan production office. - 14 - |
| Item 3. | Legal Proceedings |
|
The Company faces ordinary routine litigation arising in the normal course of business. In the opinion of management, liabilities (if any) arising from such claims will not have a material adverse effect upon the business, results of operations or financial condition of the Company. In March 2000, the Company filed an action in the District Court of Titus County, Texas against Guaranty Federal Bank, F.S.B., (Guaranty Federal) a thrift institution, after the Company discovered that Guaranty Federal was using the name, Guaranty Bank, in its business dealings. The case sought a declaratory judgment that the Company has the sole right to the name Guaranty Bank. In November 2001, a settlement was reached. In exchange for $3.0 million, the Company dropped the lawsuit against Guaranty Federal and the Company agreed to change its name by December 31, 2002. At December 31, 2001, the financial statements of the Company reflect the effect of this settlement. As disclosed by the Company in its Form S-1 filed with the Commission on May 6, 1998, the Internal Revenue Service has been conducting a review of the Companys ownership interest in certain partnerships and the tax treatment of losses in such partnerships. On October 5, 2001, the Company was notified that the Internal Revenue Service has disallowed an item of partnership loss in the amount of $487,313 for taxable year 1992 with respect to one of the partnerships under examination in which the Company is a partner. Based upon advice of counsel, the Company believes that the Internal Revenue Services disallowance is unsupported by competent authority. Accordingly, the Company is seeking an administrative review of the Internal Revenue Services determination. In the event that the administrative review is unsuccessful, the Company intends to seek a judicial review of this matter. Although unlikely, an adverse judicial determination with respect to this matter may have an adverse material effect on the Companys financial results. |
| Item 4. | Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders |
|
No matters were submitted to a vote of security holders during the fourth quarter of 2001. PART II |
| Item 5. | Market for Registrants Common Equity and Related Shareholder Matters |
|
The Common Stock began trading on May 21, 1998 and is listed on the Nasdaq National Market System (Nasdaq NMS) under the symbol GNTY. Prior to that date, the Companys Common Stock was privately held and not listed on any public exchange or actively traded. The Company had a total of 3,004,428 shares outstanding at December 31, 2001. As of December 31, 2001, there were 420 registered shareholders of record. The number of beneficial shareholders is unknown to the Company at this time. - 15 - |
The following table presents the high and low Common Stock prices reported on the Nasdaq NMS by quarter during the two years ended December 31, 2001: |
| 2001 |
2000 | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| High |
Low |
High |
Low | ||||||
| Fourth quarter | $ 14 | .10 | $ 11 | .01 | |||||