Attached files

file filename
EX-31.1 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex311.htm
EX-32.2 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex322.htm
EX-21.1 - LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF PORTER BANCORP, INC. - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex211.htm
EX-31.2 - SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex312.htm
EX-99.1 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.15 - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex991.htm
EX-32.1 - SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex321.htm
EX-23.1 - CONSENT OF CROWE HORWATH LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex231.htm
EX-99.2 - CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 30.15 - Porter Bancorp, Inc.dex992.htm
Table of Contents

 

 

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

 

 

FORM 10-K

 

 

(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, 2009

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: 001-33033

 

 

PORTER BANCORP, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

Kentucky   61-1142247

(State or other jurisdiction of

incorporation or organization)

  (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)

 

2500 Eastpoint Parkway, Louisville, Kentucky   40223
(Address of principal executive offices)   (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (502) 499-4800

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

Title of each class

 

Name of each exchange on which registered

Common Stock, no par value   NASDAQ Global Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

 

 

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer (as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act).    Yes  ¨     No  x

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨    No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨    No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, or a smaller reporting company. See definition of “accelerated filer”, “large accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. (Check one):

Large accelerated filer  ¨    Accelerated filer  ¨    Non-accelerated filer  x    Smaller reporting company  ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).    Yes  ¨    No  x

The aggregate market value of the voting common equity held by non-affiliates computed by reference to the price at which the common equity was last sold as of the close of business on June 30, 2009, was $41,673,750 based upon the last sales price reported for such date on the NASDAQ Global Market.

The number of shares outstanding of the registrant’s Common Stock, no par value, as of February 28, 2010, was 8,756,259.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s Proxy Statement for the Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 20, 2010 are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

 

 

 


Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

          Page
No.
PART I       1

Item 1.

   Business    1

Item 1A.

   Risk Factors    10

Item 1B.

   Unresolved Staff Comments    17

Item 2.

   Properties    18

Item 3.

   Legal Proceedings    18

Item 4.

   Reserved    18
PART II       19

Item 5.

   Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities    19

Item 6.

   Selected Financial Data    22

Item 7.

   Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation    23

Item 7A.

   Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk    44

Item 8.

   Financial Statements and Supplementary Data    46

Item 9.

   Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure    77

Item 9A.

   Controls and Procedures    78

Item 9B.

   Other Information    78
PART III       78

Item 10.

   Directors and Executive Officers of the Registrant    78

Item 11.

   Executive Compensation    78

Item 12.

   Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters    78

Item 13.

   Certain Relationships and Related Transactions    78

Item 14.

   Principal Accountant Fees and Services    78
PART IV       79

Item 15.

   Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules    79
   Signatures    79
   Index to Exhibits    80


Table of Contents

PART I

Preliminary Note Concerning Forward-Looking Statements

This report contains statements about the future expectations, activities and events that constitute forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements express our beliefs, assumptions and expectations of our future financial and operating performance and growth plans, taking into account information currently available to us. These statements are not statements of historical fact. The words “believe,” “may,” “should,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “objective,” “seek,” “plan,” “strive” or similar words, or the negatives of these words, identify forward-looking statements.

Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties that may cause our actual results to differ materially from the expectations of future results we expressed or implied in any forward-looking statements. These risks and uncertainties can be difficult to predict and may be out of our control. Factors that could contribute to differences in our results include, but are not limited to our ability to expand and grow our business and operations, including the establishment of additional banking offices and acquisition of additional banks, and our ability to realize the cost savings and revenue enhancements we expect from such activities; changes in the interest rate environment, which may reduce our margins or impact the value of securities, loans, deposits and other financial instruments; general economic or business conditions, either nationally, regionally or locally in the communities we serve, may be worse than expected, resulting in, among other things, a deterioration in credit quality or a reduced demand for credit; the continued service of key management personnel; our ability to attract, motivate and retain qualified employees; factors that increase the competitive pressure among depository and other financial institutions, including product and pricing pressures; the ability of our competitors with greater financial resources to develop and introduce products and services that enable them to compete more successfully than us; legislative or regulatory developments, including changes in laws concerning taxes, banking, securities, insurance and other aspects of the financial services industry; and fiscal and governmental policies of the United States federal government.

Other risks are detailed in Item 1A. “Risk Factors” of this Form 10-K all of which are difficult to predict and many of which are beyond our control.

Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance or results. A forward-looking statement may include the assumptions or bases underlying the forward-looking statement. We have made our assumptions and bases in good faith and believe they are reasonable. We caution you however, that estimates based on such assumptions or bases frequently differ from actual results, and the differences can be material. The forward-looking statements included in this report speak only as of the date of the report. We do not intend to update these statements unless applicable laws require us to do so.

 

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a bank holding company headquartered in Louisville, Kentucky. We are the sixth largest independent banking organization domiciled in the state of Kentucky based on total assets. Through our subsidiary PBI Bank, we operate 18 full-service banking offices in 12 counties in Kentucky. Our markets include metropolitan Louisville in Jefferson County and the surrounding counties of Henry and Bullitt, and extend south along the Interstate 65 corridor to Tennessee. We serve south central Kentucky and southern Kentucky from banking offices in Butler, Green, Hart, Edmonson, Barren, Warren, Ohio, and Daviess Counties. We also have an office in Lexington, Kentucky, the second largest city in Kentucky. PBI Bank is both a traditional community bank with a wide range of commercial and personal banking products, with a focus on commercial real estate and residential real estate lending, and an innovative on-line bank which delivers competitive deposit products and services through an on-line banking division operating under the name of Ascencia. As of December 31, 2009, we had total assets of $1.8 billion, total net loans of $1.4 billion, total deposits of $1.5 billion and stockholders’ equity of $169 million.

History

We were organized in 1988, and historically conducted our banking business through separate community banks under the common control of J. Chester Porter, our chairman, and Maria L. Bouvette, our president and chief executive officer. In 2004, we began to streamline our operations by consolidating our subsidiary banks under common control into a single bank. We completed our reorganization on December 31, 2005, when we acquired the interests of other shareholders in our three partially owned subsidiary bank holding companies in exchange for shares of our common stock, cash and indebtedness. Before December 31, 2005, our company and one of our subsidiary banks were S corporations for federal income tax purposes. Following the consolidation of our four subsidiary banks and the termination of our S corporation elections on December 31, 2005, all of our taxable income became subject to federal income taxes beginning in 2006, which caused our income tax expense to increase compared to the preceding years. See “Item 6. Selected Financial Data – Unaudited Pro Forma Selected Consolidated Financial Data” for more about the consolidation. On December 31, 2005, we also renamed our consolidated subsidiary PBI Bank to create a single brand name for our banking operations throughout our market area.

 

1


Table of Contents

On September 21, 2006, we completed an initial public offering of 1,550,000 shares of common stock. We sold 1,250,000 newly issued shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $30.0 million, and J. Chester Porter and Maria L. Bouvette, our controlling shareholders, together sold 300,000 shares of common stock for an aggregate purchase price of $7.2 million for their own accounts. We received proceeds of $26.6 million, after deducting total expenses of $3.4 million, which consisted of $2.1 million in underwriters’ discounts and commissions and $1.3 million of other expenses.

We completed the acquisition of Ohio County Bancshares, Inc., the holding company for Kentucky Trust Bank, effective October 1, 2007. At the time of the closing, Kentucky Trust Bank operated six retail banking offices in three Kentucky counties, including the Bowling Green and Owensboro markets, and had assets of approximately $120 million. The total acquisition price paid was $12 million, approximately 50% in cash and 50% in Porter Bancorp shares totaling 263,409 shares.

We completed the acquisition of Paramount Bank in Lexington, Kentucky, effective February 1, 2008. Paramount had approximately $75 million in assets and $76 million in deposits. The total acquisition price paid was approximately $5 million in cash.

Our Markets

We operate in markets that include the four largest cities in Kentucky – Louisville, Lexington, Owensboro and Bowling Green – and in other communities along the I-65 corridor.

 

   

Louisville/Jefferson, Bullitt and Henry Counties: Our headquarters are in Louisville, the largest city in Kentucky and the sixteenth largest city in the United States. The Louisville metropolitan area includes the consolidated Louisville/Jefferson County and 12 surrounding Kentucky and Southern Indiana counties with an estimated 1.2 million residents in 2007. We also have banking offices in Bullitt County, south of Louisville, and Henry County, east of Louisville. Our six banking offices in these counties also serve the contiguous counties of Spencer, Shelby and Oldham to the east and northeast of Louisville. The area’s employers are diversified across many industries and include the air hub for United Parcel Service (“UPS”), two Ford assembly plants, General Electric’s Consumer and Industrial division, Humana, Norton Healthcare, Brown-Forman and YUM! Brands.

 

   

Lexington/Fayette County: Lexington, located in Fayette County, is the second largest city in Kentucky with an estimated countywide population of over 270,000 in 2006, an increase of 3.9% since the 2000 census. Lexington is the financial, educational, retail, healthcare and cultural hub for Central and Eastern Kentucky. It is known worldwide for its Bluegrass horse farms and Keeneland Race Track, and proudly boasts of itself as “The Horse Capital of the World.” It is also the home of the University of Kentucky and Transylvania University. The area’s employers include Toyota, Lexmark, IBM Global Services and Valvoline.

 

   

Owensboro/Daviess County: Owensboro, located on the banks of the Ohio River, is Kentucky’s third largest city. Daviess County had an estimated countywide population of approximately 94,000 in 2006. The city is called a festival city, with over 20 annual community celebrations that attract visitors from around the world, including its world famous Bar-B-Q Festival which attracts over 80,000 visitors giving Owensboro recognition as “The Bar-B-Q Capital of the World”. It is an industrial, medical, retail and cultural hub for Western Kentucky and the area employers include Owensboro Medical System, Texas Gas, US Bank Home Mortgage and Toyotetsu.

 

   

Southern Kentucky: This market includes Bowling Green, the fourth largest city in Kentucky, located about 60 miles north of Nashville, Tennessee. Bowling Green, located in Warren County, is the home of Western Kentucky University and is the economic hub of an estimated labor market of over 425,000 in 2004. This market also includes thriving communities in the contiguous Barren County, including the city of Glasgow. Major employers in Barren and Warren Counties include GM’s Corvette plant and several other automotive facilities and R.R. Donnelley’s regional printing facility.

 

   

South Central Kentucky: South of the Louisville metropolitan area, we have banking offices in Butler, Edmonson, Green, Hart, and Ohio Counties, which had a combined population of approximately 79,000 in 2006. This region includes stable community markets comprised primarily of agricultural and service-based businesses. Each of our banking offices in these markets has a stable customer base and core deposits that are less sensitive to market competition, which provide us a lower cost source of funds for our lending operations.

Our Products and Services

We meet our customers’ banking needs with a broad range of financial products and services. Our lending services include real estate, commercial, mortgage and consumer loans to small to medium-sized businesses located in our markets, the owners and employees of those businesses, as well as other executives and professionals. We complement our lending operations with an array of retail and commercial deposit products. In addition, we offer our customers drive-through banking facilities, automatic teller machines, night depository, personalized checks, credit cards, debit cards, internet

 

2


Table of Contents

banking, electronic funds transfers through ACH services, domestic and foreign wire transfers, travelers’ checks, cash management, vault services, loan and deposit sweep accounts and lock box services. Through our trust division, we offer personal trust services, employer retirement plan services and personal financial and retirement planning services.

Employees

At December 31, 2009, the Company had 278 full-time equivalent employees. Our employees are not subject to a collective bargaining agreement, and management considers the Company’s relationship with employees to be good.

Competition

The banking business is highly competitive, and we experience competition in our market from many other financial institutions. Competition among financial institutions is based upon interest rates offered on deposit accounts, interest rates charged on loans, other credit and service charges relating to loans, the quality and scope of the services offered, the convenience of banking facilities and, in the case of loans to commercial borrowers, relative lending limits. We compete with commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, mortgage banking firms, consumer finance companies, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds and other mutual funds, as well as super-regional, national and international financial institutions that operate offices within our market area and beyond.

There are a number of banks that offer services exclusively over the internet, such as ING Bank and E*TRADE Bank, and other banks, such as Bank of America and Wells Fargo Bank that market their internet services to their customers nationwide. We believe that only the very largest of the commercial banks with which we compete offer the comprehensiveness of internet banking services that we are able to offer. However, many of the larger banks do have greater market presence and greater financial resources to market their internet banking services. Additionally, new competitors and competitive factors are likely to emerge, particularly in view of the rapid development of internet commerce. On the other hand, there have been some recently published reports indicating that the actual rate of growth in the use of internet banking services by consumers and businesses is lower than had been previously predicted and that many customers still prefer to be able to conduct at least some of their banking transactions at local banking offices. We believe that these findings support our strategic decision to complement our traditional community bank with our uniquely branded online bank to offer customers the benefits of both traditional and internet banking services. We believe that this strategy will contribute to our growth in the future.

Supervision and Regulation

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

Porter Bancorp. Porter Bancorp is registered as a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and is subject to supervision and regulation by the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System. As such, we must file with the Federal Reserve Board annual and quarterly reports and other information regarding our business operations and the business operations of our subsidiaries. We are also subject to examination by the Federal Reserve Board and to operational guidelines established by the Federal Reserve Board. We are subject to the Bank Holding Company Act and other federal laws on the types of activities in which we may engage, and to other supervisory requirements, including regulatory enforcement actions for violations of laws and regulations.

Acquisitions. A bank holding company must obtain Federal Reserve Board approval before acquiring, directly or indirectly, ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting stock or all or substantially all of the assets of a bank, merging or consolidating with any other bank holding company and before engaging, or acquiring a company that is not a bank but is engaged in certain non-banking activities. Federal law also prohibits a person or group of persons from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company without notifying the Federal Reserve Board in advance, and then only if the Federal Reserve Board does not object to the proposed transaction. The Federal Reserve Board has established a rebuttable presumptive standard that the acquisition of 10% or more of the voting stock of a bank holding company with a class of securities registered under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 would constitute an acquisition of control of the bank holding company. In addition, any company is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve Board before acquiring 25% (5% in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of any class of a bank holding company’s voting securities, or otherwise obtaining control or a “controlling influence” over a bank holding company.

Permissible Activities. A bank holding company is generally permitted under the Bank Holding Company Act to engage in or acquire direct or indirect control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any bank, bank holding company or company engaged in any activity that the Federal Reserve Board determines to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident to the business of banking.

 

3


Table of Contents

Under current federal law, a bank holding company may elect to become a financial holding company, which enables the holding company to conduct activities that are “financial in nature.” Activities that are “financial in nature” include securities underwriting, dealing and market making; sponsoring mutual funds and investment companies; insurance underwriting and agency; merchant banking activities; and activities that the Federal Reserve Board has determined to be closely related to banking. No regulatory approval will be required for a financial holding company to acquire a company, other than a bank or savings association, engaged in activities that are financial in nature or incidental to activities that are financial in nature, as determined by the Federal Reserve Board. We have not filed an election to become a financial holding company.

U.S. Treasury Capital Purchase Program. On November 21, 2008, pursuant to the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s (the “U.S. Treasury”) Capital Purchase Program (the “CPP”), established under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), Porter Bancorp issued and sold to the U.S. Treasury in an offering exempt from registration under Section 4(2) of the Securities Act of 1933, (i) 35,000 shares of Porter Bancorp’ Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, no par value and liquidation preference $1,000 per share ($35 million aggregate liquidation preference) (the “Series A Preferred Stock”) and (ii) a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase 314,820 shares (adjusted for stock dividend) of Porter Bancorp’s common stock, at an exercise price of $16.68 per share (adjusted for stock dividend), subject to certain anti-dilution and other adjustments for an aggregate purchase price of $35 million in cash. The securities purchase agreement, dated November 21, 2008, pursuant to which the securities issued to the U.S. Treasury under the CPP were sold, limits the payment of dividends on Porter Bancorp’s common stock to the current quarterly dividend of $0.20 per share without prior approval of the U.S. Treasury, limits Porter Bancorp’s ability to repurchase shares of its common stock (with certain exceptions, including the repurchase of our common stock to offset share dilution from equity-based compensation awards) and grants the holders of the Series A Preferred Stock, the Warrant and the common stock of Porter Bancorp to be issued under the Warrant certain registration rights.

The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (“ARRA”) was enacted on February 17, 2009. ARRA imposes certain new executive compensation and corporate governance obligations on all current and future CPP recipients, including Porter Bancorp, until the institution has redeemed the preferred stock. On June 10, 2009, under the authority granted to it under EESA and ARRA, the U. S. Treasury issued an interim final rule under Section 111 of EESA, as amended by ARRA, regarding compensation and corporate governance restrictions that would be imposed on CPP recipients, effective June 15, 2009. As a CPP recipient with currently outstanding CPP obligations, we are subject to the compensation and corporate governance restrictions and requirements set forth in the interim final rule. The restrictions and requirements provided for in the implementing regulations are generally as follows: (1) required us to establish an independent compensation committee, (2) required us to adopt a corporate policy on luxury or excessive expenditures; (3) requires our compensation committee to conduct semi-annual risk assessments to assure that our compensation arrangements do not encourage “unnecessary and excessive risks” or the manipulation of earnings to increase compensation; (4) requires us to recoup or “clawback” any bonus, retention award or incentive compensation paid by us to a senior executive officer or any of our next 20 most highly compensated employees, if the payment was based on financial statements or other performance criteria that are later found to be materially inaccurate; (5) prohibits us from making severance payments or “golden parachutes” to any of our senior executive officers or next five most highly compensated employees; (6) prohibits us from paying or accruing bonuses, retention awards or incentive compensation, except for certain long-term stock awards, to our five most highly compensated employees; (7) prohibits us from providing tax gross-ups to any of our senior executive officers or next 20 most highly compensated employees; (8) requires us to provide enhanced disclosure of perquisites to the FDIC and the U.S. Treasury; (9) requires us to disclose to the FDIC and the U.S. Treasury the use and role of compensation consultants; (10) requires our chief executive officer and chief financial officer to provide period certifications about our compensation practices and compliance with the interim final rule; and (11) requires us to provide an annual non-binding shareholder vote, or “say-on-pay” proposal, to approve the compensation of our executives, consistent with regulations promulgated by the Securities and Exchange Commission. On January 12, 2010, the SEC adopted final regulations setting forth the parameters for such say-on pay proposals for public company CPP participants.

Capital Adequacy Requirements. The Federal Reserve Board 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%. At least half of the total capital must be composed of common equity, retained earnings, senior perpetual preferred stock issued to the U. S. Treasury under the CPP and qualifying perpetual preferred stock and certain hybrid capital instruments, less certain intangible assets (“Tier 1 capital”). The remainder may consist of certain subordinated debt, certain hybrid capital instruments, qualifying preferred stock and a limited amount of the allowance for loan losses (“Tier 2 capital”). Total capital is the sum of Tier 1 and Tier 2 capital. To be considered well-capitalized under the risk-based capital guidelines, an institution must maintain a total capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 10% and a Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets ratio of 6% or greater. As of December 31, 2009, our ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 13.8% and our ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 11.9%, both ratios significantly above the required amounts.

 

4


Table of Contents

In addition to the risk-based capital guidelines, the Federal Reserve Board uses a leverage ratio as an additional tool to evaluate the capital adequacy of bank holding companies. The leverage ratio is a company’s 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 4.0%. As of December 31, 2009, our leverage ratio of 9.6% was significantly above the required amount.

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 Board 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.

Dividends. Under Federal Reserve policy, bank holding companies should pay cash dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. The policy provides that bank holding companies should not declare a level of cash dividends that undermines the bank holding company’s ability to serve as a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries.

Porter Bancorp is a legal entity separate and distinct from PBI Bank. The majority of our revenue is from dividends paid to us by PBI Bank. PBI Bank is subject to laws and regulations that limit the amount of dividends it can pay. If, in the opinion of a federal regulatory agency, an institution under its jurisdiction is engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice, the agency may require, after notice and hearing, that the institution cease and desist from such practice. The federal banking agencies have indicated that paying dividends that deplete an institution’s capital base to an inadequate level would be an unsafe and unsound banking practice. Under FDICIA, an insured institution may not pay any dividend if payment would cause it to become undercapitalized or if it already is undercapitalized. Moreover, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC have issued policy statements providing that bank holding companies and banks should generally pay dividends only out of current operating earnings. A bank holding company may still declare and pay a dividend if it does not have current operating earnings if the bank holding company expects profits for the entire year and the bank holding company obtains the prior consent of the Federal Reserve.

Under Kentucky law, dividends by Kentucky banks may be paid only from current or retained net profits. Before any dividend may be declared for any period (other than with respect to preferred stock), a bank must increase its capital surplus by at least 10% of the net profits of the bank for the period until the bank’s capital surplus equals the amount of its stated capital attributable to its common stock. Moreover, the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions must approve the declaration of dividends if the total dividends to be declared by a bank for any calendar year would exceed the bank’s total net profits for such year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years, less any required transfers to surplus or a fund for the retirement of preferred stock or debt. We are also subject to the Kentucky Business Corporation Act, which generally prohibits dividends to the extent they result in the insolvency of the corporation from a balance sheet perspective or in the corporation becoming unable to pay debts as they come due. PBI Bank did not pay any dividends in 2009.

Prior to November 21, 2011, unless Porter Bancorp has redeemed all of the Series A Preferred Stock issued to the U.S. Treasury on November 21, 2008 or unless the U.S. Treasury has transferred all the preferred securities to a third party, the consent of the U.S. Treasury will be required for Porter Bancorp to declare or pay any dividend or make any distribution on common stock other than (i) regular quarterly cash dividends of not more than the current level of $0.20 per share, as adjusted for any stock split, stock dividend, reverse stock split, reclassification or similar transaction, (ii) dividends payable solely in shares of common stock and (iii) dividends or distributions of rights or junior stock in connection with a shareholders’ rights plan.

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 subsidiary’s compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institution’s holding company is entitled to a priority of payment in bankruptcy.

 

5


Table of Contents

The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5% of the institution’s 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 Board approval of proposed dividends, or might be required to consent to a consolidation or to divest the troubled institution or other affiliates.

Source of Financial Strength. Under Federal Reserve policy, a bank holding company is expected to act as a source of financial strength to, and to commit resources to support, its bank subsidiaries. This support may be required at times when, absent such a policy, the bank holding company may not be inclined to provide it. In addition, any capital loans by the bank holding company to its bank subsidiaries are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of the bank subsidiary. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of subsidiary banks will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to a priority of payment.

PBI Bank. PBI Bank, a Kentucky chartered commercial bank, is subject to regular bank examinations and other supervision and regulation by both the FDIC and the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions (“KDFI”). Kentucky’s banking statutes contain a “super-parity” provision that permits a well-rated Kentucky banking corporation to engage in any banking activity which could be engaged in by a national bank operating in any state; a state bank, a thrift or savings bank operating in any other state; or a federal chartered thrift or federal savings association meeting the qualified thrift lender test and operating in any state could engage, provided the Kentucky bank first obtains a legal opinion specifying the statutory or regulatory provisions that permit the activity.

Capital Requirements. Similar to the Federal Reserve Board’s requirements for bank holding companies, the FDIC has adopted risk-based capital requirements for assessing state non-member banks’ capital adequacy. The FDIC’s risk-based capital guidelines require that all banks maintain a minimum ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8.0% and a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 4.0%. To be well-capitalized, a bank must have a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of at least 10.0% and a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 6.0%. PBI Bank has agreed with its primary regulators to maintain a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of at least 12.0% and a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 9% by June 30,2010. As of December 31, 2009, PBI Bank’s ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets was 12.6% and its ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets was 10.7%.

The FDIC also requires a minimum leverage ratio of 3.0% of Tier 1 capital to total assets for the highest rated banks and an additional cushion of approximately 100-200 basis points for all other banks. As of December 31, 2009, PBI Bank’s leverage ratio was 8.6%. The leverage ratio operates in tandem with the FDIC’s risk-based capital guidelines and places a limit on the amount of leverage a bank can undertake by requiring a minimum level of capital to total assets.

Prompt Corrective Action. Pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), the FDIC must take prompt corrective action to resolve the problems of undercapitalized institutions. FDIC regulations define the levels at which an insured institution would be considered “well capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” and “critically undercapitalized.” 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 “undercapitalized” if it fails to meet any one of the ratios required to be adequately capitalized. As of December 31, 2009, PBI Bank was “well capitalized” as defined by the FDIC. A depository institution may be deemed to be in a capitalization category that is lower than is indicated by its actual capital position if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating. The degree of regulatory scrutiny increases and the permissible activities of a bank decreases, as the bank moves downward through the capital categories. Depending on a bank’s level of capital, the FDIC’s corrective powers include:

 

   

requiring a capital restoration plan;

 

   

placing limits on asset growth and restriction on activities;

 

   

requiring the bank to issue additional voting or other capital stock or to be acquired;

 

   

placing restrictions on transactions with affiliates;

 

   

restricting the interest rate the bank may pay on deposits;

 

   

ordering a new election of the bank’s board of directors;

 

6


Table of Contents
   

requiring that certain senior executive officers or directors be dismissed;

 

   

prohibiting the bank from accepting deposits from correspondent banks;

 

   

requiring the bank to divest certain subsidiaries;

 

   

prohibiting the payment of principal or interest on subordinated debt; and

 

   

ultimately, appointing a receiver for the bank.

In the event an institution is required to submit a capital restoration plan, the institution’s holding company must guaranty the subsidiary’s compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institution’s 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 institution’s 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 Board approval of proposed dividends, or might be required to consent to a consolidation or to divest the troubled institution or other affiliates.

Deposit Insurance Assessments. The deposits of PBI Bank are insured by the DIF of the FDIC up to the limits set forth under applicable law and are subject to the deposit insurance premium assessments of the DIF. The FDIC imposes a risk-based deposit premium assessment system, which was amended pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 (the “Reform Act”). Under this system, as amended, the assessment rates for an insured depository institution vary according to the level of risk incurred in its activities. To arrive at an assessment rate for a banking institution, the FDIC places it in one of four risk categories determined by reference to its capital levels and supervisory ratings. The assessment rate schedule can change from time to time, at the discretion of the FDIC, subject to certain limits.

On May 22, 2009, the FDIC also implemented a special assessment equal to five basis points of each insured depository institution’s assets minus Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, but no more than ten basis points multiplied by the institution’s assessment base for the second quarter of 2009. As a result, PBI Bank paid a special assessment of $781,000 on September 30, 2009.

On November 12, 2009, the FDIC amended the final rule adopted on May 22, 2009 to restore losses to the DIF. The new rule required insured institutions to prepay on December 30, 2009, an estimated quarterly risk-based assessment for the 4th quarter of 2009 and for all 2010, 2011, and 2012. An institution’s assessment is calculated by taking the institution’s actual September 30, 2009 assessment and adjusting it quarterly by an estimated 5% annual growth rate through the end of 2012. Further, the FDIC incorporated a uniform 3 basis point increase effective January 1, 2011. On December 30, 2009, PBI Bank prepaid $7.9 million of FDIC insurance premiums for the next three years. The entire amount of the prepaid assessment was recorded as a prepaid expense. As of December 31, 2009, and each quarter thereafter, each institution is to record an expense, or a charge to earnings, for its quarterly assessment invoiced on its quarterly statement and an offsetting credit to the prepaid assessment until the asset is exhausted.

Safety and Soundness Standards. The FDIA requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to prescribe standards, by regulations or guidelines, relating to internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings, stock valuation and compensation, fees and benefits, and such other operational and managerial standards as the agencies deem appropriate. Guidelines adopted by the federal bank regulatory agencies establish general standards relating to internal controls and information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth and compensation, fees and benefits. In general, the guidelines require, among other things, appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage the risk 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 stockholder. In addition, the agencies adopted regulations that authorize, but do not require, an agency to order an institution that has been given notice by an agency that it is not satisfying any of such safety and soundness standards to submit a compliance plan. If, after being so notified, an institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan or fails in any material respect to implement an acceptable compliance plan, the agency must issue an order directing action to correct the deficiency and may issue an order directing other actions of the types to which an undercapitalized institution is subject under the “prompt corrective action” provisions of FDIA. See “Prompt Corrective Actions” above. If an institution fails to comply with such an order, the agency may seek to enforce such order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil money penalties.

Branching. Kentucky law permits Kentucky chartered banks to establish a banking office in any county in Kentucky. A Kentucky bank may also establish a banking office outside of Kentucky. Well capitalized Kentucky banks that have been in operation at least three years and that satisfy certain criteria relating to, among other things, their composite and management

 

7


Table of Contents

ratings, may establish a banking office in Kentucky without the approval of the KDFI upon notice to the KDFI and any other state bank with its main office located in the county where the new banking office will be located. Branching by all other banks requires the approval of the KDFI, who must ascertain and determine that the public convenience and advantage will be served and promoted and that there is reasonable probability of the successful operation of the banking office.

The transaction 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.

An out-of-state bank is permitted to establish banking offices in Kentucky only by merging with a Kentucky bank. De novo branching into Kentucky by an out-of-state bank is not permitted. This difficulty for out-of-state banks to branch in Kentucky may limit the ability of a Kentucky bank to branch into many states, as several states have reciprocity requirements for interstate branching.

Insider Credit Transactions. 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 depository institutions and their subsidiaries. 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 institution’s total unimpaired capital and surplus.

Consumer Protection Laws. PBI Bank is subject to 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, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement and Procedures Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, and the Federal Trade Commission 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.

Privacy. Federal law currently contains extensive customer privacy protections provisions. Under these provisions, a financial institution must provide to its customers, at the inception of the customer relationship and annually thereafter, the institution’s policies and procedures regarding the handling of customers’ nonpublic personal financial information. These provisions also provide that, except for certain limited exceptions, an institution may not provide such personal information to unaffiliated third parties unless the institution discloses to the customer that such information may be so provided and the customer is given the opportunity to opt out of such disclosure. Federal law makes it a criminal offense, except in limited circumstances, to obtain or attempt to obtain customer information of a financial nature by fraudulent or deceptive means.

Community Reinvestment Act. The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires the FDIC to assess our record in meeting the credit needs of the communities we serve, including low- and moderate-income neighborhoods and persons. The FDIC’s assessment of our record is made available to the public. The assessment also is part of the Federal Reserve Board’s consideration of applications to acquire, merge or consolidate with another banking institution or its holding company, to establish a new banking office or to relocate an office.

Bank Secrecy Act. The Bank Secrecy Act of 1970 (“BSA”) was enacted to deter money laundering, establish regulatory reporting standards for currency transactions and improve detection and investigation of criminal, tax and other regulatory violations. BSA and subsequent laws and regulations require us to take steps to prevent the use of PBI Bank in the flow of illegal or illicit money, including, without limitation, ensuring effective management oversight, establishing sound policies and procedures, developing effective monitoring and reporting capabilities, ensuring adequate training and establishing a comprehensive internal audit of BSA compliance activities. In recent years, federal regulators have increased the attention paid to compliance with the provisions of BSA and related laws, with particular attention paid to “Know Your Customer” practices. Banks have been encouraged by regulators to enhance their identification procedures prior to accepting new customers in order to deter criminal elements from using the banking system to move and hide illegal and illicit activities.

USA Patriot Act. The USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) contains anti-money laundering measures affecting insured depository institutions, broker-dealers and certain other financial institutions. The Patriot Act requires financial institutions to implement policies and procedures to combat money laundering and the financing of terrorism, including standards for verifying customer identification at account opening, and rules to promote cooperation among financial institutions, regulators and law enforcement entities in identifying parties that may be involved in terrorism or money laundering, and grants the Secretary of the Treasury broad authority to establish regulations and to impose requirements and restrictions on financial institutions’ operations. In addition, the Patriot Act requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to consider the effectiveness of a financial institution’s anti-money laundering activities when reviewing bank mergers and bank holding company acquisitions.

 

8


Table of Contents

Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program. Under the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program (TLGP), the FDIC guarantees U.S. depository institutions’ transaction accounts and certain qualifying senior unsecured debt. We are a participant in the TLGP’s Transaction Account Guarantee Program (TAGP), which applies to, among others, all U.S. depository institutions insured by the FDIC and all United States bank holding companies, unless they have opted out. Under the TAGP, all non-interest bearing transaction accounts maintained at PBI Bank are insured in full by the FDIC until June 30, 2010, regardless of the standard maximum deposit insurance amounts. Although the TAGP was originally scheduled to expire on December 31, 2009, the FDIC implemented a final rule, effective as of October 1, 2009, extending the transaction account guarantee program by six months until June 30, 2010 (subject to the option of participating institutions to opt out of such six-month extension). PBI Bank chose to remain in the TAGP during the six month extension. Separately, Congress extended the temporary increase in the standard coverage limit to $250,000 until December 31, 2013.

The TLGP’s Debt Guarantee Program guarantees certain qualifying senior unsecured debt of U.S. depository institutions. The program has been extended for senior unsecured debt issued after April 1, 2009 and before October 31, 2009 and maturing on or before December 31, 2012. On October 20, 2009, the FDIC established a limited, six-month emergency guarantee facility upon expiration of the Debt Guarantee Program. Under this emergency guarantee facility, certain participating entities can apply to the FDIC for permission to issue FDIC-guaranteed debt during the period starting October 31, 2009 through April 30, 2010. The fee for issuing debt under the emergency facility will be at least 300 basis points, which the FDIC reserves the right to increase on a case-by-case basis, depending upon the risks presented by the issuing entity. We have not participated in this program.

Effect on Economic Environment. The policies of regulatory authorities, including the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve Board, have a significant effect on the operating results of bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. Among the means available to the Federal Reserve Board 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 Board 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 our business and earnings and those of our subsidiaries cannot be predicted.

Recently Enacted and Future Legislation. Various laws, regulations and governmental programs affecting financial institutions and the financial industry are from time to time introduced in Congress or otherwise promulgated by regulatory agencies. Such measures may change the operating environment of Porter Bancorp and its subsidiaries in substantial and unpredictable ways. The nature and extent of future legislative, regulatory or other changes affecting financial institutions is very unpredictable at this time.

On February 18, 2009 the U.S. Treasury outlined the Homeowner Affordability and Stability Plan, which includes measures that could impact Porter Bancorp, including measures to (i) implement a comprehensive homeowner stability initiative that incentivizes financial institutions to reduce homeowners’ monthly mortgage payments, (ii) develop clear and consistent guidelines for loan modifications that participants will be obligated to use and (iii) authorize judicial modifications of home mortgages in personal bankruptcy cases, which modifications must be accepted by the loan servicer or lender. During the course of 2009, the Treasury Department announced numerous programs in implementation of the plan, and sent various legislative proposals to the Congress for consideration. We continue to monitor these developments and assess their potential impact on our business.

In November 2009, the Federal Reserve Board adopted its final rule under Regulation E regarding overdraft fees, which becomes effective for new accounts on July 1, 2010, and for existing accounts on August 15, 2010. This rule generally prohibits financial institutions from charging overdraft fees for ATM and one-time debit card transactions that overdraw consumer deposit accounts, unless the consumer “opts in” to having such overdrafts authorized and paid. The change will impact the amount of overdraft fees banks will be able to charge in the future.

We cannot predict what other legislation or economic policies of the various regulatory authorities might be enacted or adopted or what other regulations might be adopted or the effects thereof. Future legislation and policies and the effects thereof might have a significant influence on overall growth and distribution of loans, investments and deposits and affect interest rates charged on loans or paid on time and savings deposits. Such legislation and policies have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and are expected to continue to do so in the future.

 

9


Table of Contents

Available Information

We file reports with the SEC including our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current event reports on Form 8-K and proxy statements, as well as any amendments to those reports. The public may read and copy any materials the Registrant files with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F Street, NE, Washington, DC 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. Our annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act are accessible at no cost on our web site at http://www.pbibank.com, under the Investors Relations section, once they are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. A shareholder may also request a copy of our Annual Report or Form 10-K free of charge upon written request to: Corporate General Counsel, Porter Bancorp, Inc., 2500 Eastpoint Parkway, Louisville, Kentucky 40223.

 

Item 1A. Risk Factors

An investment in our common stock involves a number of risks. Realization of any of the risks described below could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flow and/or future prospects.

Our business has been and may continue to be adversely affected by current conditions in the financial markets and by economic conditions generally.

The capital and credit markets have been experiencing unprecedented levels of volatility and disruption for more than a year. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit availability for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’ underlying financial strength. Reduced consumer spending and the absence of liquidity in the global credit markets during the current recession have depressed business activity across a wide range of industries. Unemployment has also increased significantly. Ongoing weakness in business and economic conditions generally or specifically in our markets has had, and could continue to have one or more of the following adverse effects on our business:

 

   

A decrease in the demand for loans and other products and services offered by us;

 

   

A decrease in the value of collateral securing our loans;

 

   

An impairment of certain intangible assets, such as goodwill;

 

   

An increase in the number of customers who become delinquent, file for protection under bankruptcy laws or default on their loans.

Overall, during the past two years, the general business environment has had an adverse effect on our business, and it is not certain that the environment will improve in the near term. Until conditions improve, we expect our businesses, financial condition and results of operations to be adversely affected.

Current market developments could continue to adversely affect our industry, businesses and results of operations.

Over the past two years, the financial services industry as a whole, as well as the securities markets generally, have been materially and adversely affected by very significant declines in the values of nearly all asset classes and by a very serious lack of liquidity. Financial institutions in particular have been subject to increased volatility and an overall loss in investor confidence. The loss of confidence in the financial sector, increased volatility in the financial markets and reduced business activity could continue to adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further negative market developments may affect consumer confidence levels and may cause adverse changes in payment patterns, causing increases in delinquencies and default rates, which may impact our charge-offs and provisions for credit losses. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult market conditions on us and others in the financial services industry.

A large percentage of our loans are collateralized by real estate, and further disruptions in the real estate market may result in losses and adversely affect our profitability.

Approximately 89.1% of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2009 was comprised of loans collateralized by real estate. The declining economic conditions have caused a decrease in demand for real estate which has resulted in flat to declining real estate values in our markets. Further disruptions in the real estate market could significantly impair the value of our collateral and our ability to sell the collateral upon foreclosure. The real estate collateral in each case provides an alternate source of repayment in the event of default by the borrower and may deteriorate in value during the time the credit is extended. If real estate values decline further, it will become more likely that we would be required to increase our allowance for loan losses. If during a period of reduced real estate values, we are required to liquidate the collateral securing a loan to satisfy the debt or to increase our allowance for loan losses, it could materially reduce our profitability and adversely affect our financial condition.

 

10


Table of Contents

We have a significant percentage of real estate construction and development loans, which carry a higher degree of risk. The poor condition of the residential construction and commercial development real estate markets may lead to increased non-performing assets in our loan portfolio and increased provision expense for losses on loans, which could have a material adverse effect on our capital, financial condition and results of operations.

Approximately 21.5% of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2009 consisted of real estate construction and development loans. These loans generally carry a higher degree of risk than long-term financing of existing properties because repayment depends on the ultimate completion of the project and usually on the sale of the property. If we are forced to foreclose on a project prior to completion, we may not be able to recover the entire unpaid portion of the loan or we may be required to fund additional money to complete the project or hold the property for an indeterminate period of time. Any of these outcomes may result in losses and adversely affect our profitability.

The residential construction and commercial development real estate markets continue to experience challenging economic conditions. Further disruptions in these markets may lead to additional valuation adjustments on our loan portfolios and real estate owned as we continue to reassess the fair value of our non-performing assets, the loss severities of loans in default and the fair value of real estate owned. We also may realize additional losses in connection with our disposition of non-performing assets. A weak real estate market could further reduce demand for residential housing, which, in turn, could adversely affect the development and construction activities of residential real estate developers. Consequently, the longer the current economic conditions persist, the more likely they are to adversely affect the ability of residential real estate developer borrowers to repay these loans and the value of property used as collateral for such loans. If these economic conditions and market factors negatively affect some of our larger loans, then we could see a sharp increase in our total net-charge offs and also be required to significantly increase our allowance for loan losses. Any further increase in our non-performing assets and related increases in our provision expense for losses on loans could negatively affect our business and could have a material adverse effect on our capital, financial condition and results of operations.

Our decisions regarding credit risk may not be accurate, and our allowance for loan losses may not be sufficient to cover actual losses, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We maintain an allowance for loan losses at a level we believe is adequate to absorb probable incurred losses in our loan portfolio based on historical loan loss experience, specific problem loans, value of underlying collateral and other relevant factors. If our assessment of these factors is ultimately inaccurate, the allowance may not be sufficient to cover actual future loan losses, which would adversely affect our operating results. Our estimates are subjective and their accuracy depends on the outcome of future events. Changes in economic, operating and other conditions that are generally beyond our control could cause actual loan losses to increase significantly. In addition, bank regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their supervisory functions, periodically review the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses. Regulatory agencies have from time to time required us to increase our provision for loan losses or to recognize further loan charge-offs when their judgment has differed from ours, which could have a material negative impact on our operating results.

We may experience additional classified loans and non-performing assets in the foreseeable future if the real estate markets remain weak and cause more borrowers to default. Further, the value of the collateral underlying a given loan, and the realizable value of such collateral in a foreclosure sale, likely will be negatively affected if the real estate market remains weak, and therefore may result in an inability to realize a full recovery in the event that a borrower defaults on a loan. Any additional non-performing assets, loan charge-offs, increases in the provision for loan losses or any inability by us to realize the full value of underlying collateral in the event of a loan default, could negatively affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations and the price of our securities.

Our profitability depends significantly on local economic conditions.

Because most of our business activities are conducted in central Kentucky and most of our credit exposure is in that region, we are at risk from adverse economic or business developments affecting this area, including declining regional and local business activity, a downturn in real estate values and agricultural activities and natural disasters. To the extent the central Kentucky economy remains weak, the rates of delinquencies, foreclosures, bankruptcies and losses in our loan portfolio will likely increase. Moreover, the value of real estate or other collateral that secures our loans could be adversely affected by the economic downturn or a localized natural disaster. The economic downturn has had a negative impact on our financial results and may continue to have a negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects.

 

11


Table of Contents

Our small to medium-sized business target market may have fewer resources to weather the downturn in the economy.

Our strategy includes lending to small and medium-sized businesses and other commercial enterprises. Small and medium-sized businesses frequently have smaller market shares than their competitors, may be more vulnerable to economic downturns, often need substantial additional capital to expand or compete and may experience substantial variations in operating results, any of which may impair a borrower’s ability to repay a loan. In addition, the success of a small or medium-sized business often depends on the management talents and efforts of one or two persons or a small group of persons, and the death, disability or resignation of one or more of these persons could have a material adverse impact on the business and its ability to repay our loan. A continued economic downturn could have a more pronounced negative impact on our target market, which could cause us to incur substantial credit losses that could materially harm our operating results.

Our profitability is vulnerable to fluctuations in interest rates.

Changes in interest rates could harm our financial condition or results of operations. Our results of operations depend substantially on net interest income, the difference between interest earned on interest-earning assets (such as investments and loans) and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities (such as deposits and borrowings). Interest rates are highly sensitive to many factors, including governmental monetary policies and domestic and international economic and political conditions. Factors beyond our control, such as inflation, recession, unemployment and money supply may also affect interest rates. If our interest-earning assets mature or reprice more quickly than our interest-bearing liabilities in a given period as a result of decreasing interest rates, our net interest income may decrease. Likewise, our net interest income may decrease if interest-bearing liabilities mature or reprice more quickly than interest-earning assets in a given period as a result of increasing interest rates.

Fixed-rate loans increase our exposure to interest rate risk in a rising rate environment because interest-bearing liabilities would be subject to repricing before assets become subject to repricing. Adjustable-rate loans decrease the risk associated with changes in interest rates but involve other risks, such as the inability of borrowers to make higher payments in an increasing interest rate environment. At the same time, for secured loans, the marketability of the underlying collateral may be adversely affected by higher interest rates. In a declining interest rate environment, there may be an increase in prepayments on loans as the borrowers refinance their loans at lower interest rates, which could reduce net interest income and harm our results of operations.

If we cannot obtain adequate funding, we may not be able to meet the cash flow requirements of our depositors and borrowers, or meet the operating cash needs of the Company to fund corporate expansion or other activities.

Our liquidity policies and limits are established by the Board of Directors of PBI Bank, with operating limits set by the Asset Liability Committee (“ALCO”), based upon analyses of the ratio of loans to deposits and the percentage of assets funded with non-core or wholesale funding. The ALCO regularly monitors the overall liquidity position of PBI Bank and the Company to ensure that various alternative strategies exist to cover unanticipated events that could affect liquidity. Liquidity is the ability to meet cash flow needs on a timely basis at a reasonable cost. If our liquidity policies and strategies don’t work as well as intended, then we may be unable to make loans and to repay deposit liabilities as they become due or are demanded by customers. The ALCO follows established board approved policies and monitors guidelines to diversify our wholesale funding sources to avoid concentrations in any one-market source. Wholesale funding sources include Federal funds purchased, securities sold under repurchase agreements, non-core brokered deposits, and Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) advances that are collateralized with mortgage-related assets.

We maintain a portfolio of securities that can be used as a secondary source of liquidity. There are other available sources of liquidity, including the ability to acquire additional non-core brokered deposits, additional collateralized borrowings such as FHLB advances, the issuance of debt securities, and the issuance of preferred or common securities in public or private transactions. If we were unable to access any of these funding sources when needed, we might not be able to meet the needs of our customers, which could adversely impact our financial condition, our results of operations, cash flows and our level of regulatory-qualifying capital.

We may need to raise additional capital in the future, but that capital may not be available when needed or at all.

We may need to raise additional capital in the future to provide us with sufficient capital resources and liquidity to meet our commitments and business needs. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial performance. Capital may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. An inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a materially adverse effect on our businesses, financial condition and results of operations.

 

12


Table of Contents

There may be future sales or other dilution of our equity, which may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

We are not restricted from issuing additional common stock, including securities that are convertible into or exchangeable for, or that represent the right to receive, common stock. The issuance of additional shares of common stock or the issuance of convertible securities would dilute the ownership interest of our existing common shareholders. The market price of our common stock could decline as a result of this offering as well as other sales of a large block of shares of our common stock or similar securities in the market after this offering, or the perception that such sales could occur.

Our issuance of securities to the U.S. Department of the Treasury may limit our ability to return capital to our shareholders and is dilutive to our common shares. In addition, the dividend rate increases substantially after five years if we cannot redeem the shares by that time.

On November 21, 2008, as part of the Capital Purchase Program established under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”), we sold $35 million of senior preferred stock to the U.S. Treasury. We also issued to the U.S. Treasury a warrant to purchase 299,829 shares of our common stock at $17.51 per share, subject to certain anti-dilution and other adjustments. The warrant is now exercisable for 314,821 shares at an exercise price of $16.68, based on our 5% stock dividend paid on November 19, 2009. The terms of the transaction with the U.S. Treasury limit our ability to pay dividends and repurchase our shares. For three years after issuance or until the U.S. Treasury no longer holds any preferred shares, we will not be able to increase our dividends above the current quarterly amount nor repurchase any of our shares without the U.S. Treasury’s approval with limited exceptions, most significantly the repurchase of our common stock to offset share dilution from equity-based compensation awards. Also, we will not be able to pay any dividends at all unless we are current on our dividend payments on the preferred shares. These restrictions, as well as the dilutive impact of the warrant, may have an adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

Unless we are able to redeem the preferred stock during the first five years, the dividends on this capital will increase substantially at that point, from 5% (approximately $1.75 million annually) to 9% (approximately $3.15 million annually). Depending on market conditions and our financial performance at the time, this increase in dividends could significantly impact our capital and liquidity.

The U.S. Treasury has the unilateral ability to change some of the restrictions imposed on us by virtue of our sale of securities to it.

Our agreement with the U.S. Treasury under which it purchased our senior preferred stock imposes restrictions on the conduct of our business, including restrictions related to our payment of dividends, repurchases of our stock and our executive compensation and corporate governance. The U.S. Treasury has the right under this agreement to unilaterally amend it to the extent required to comply with any future changes in federal statutes. The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (“ARRA”) amended provisions of EESA relating to compensation and governance as they affect companies that have participated in the CPP. In some cases, these amendments require action by the U.S. Treasury to implement them. These amendments could have an adverse impact on the conduct of our business, as could additional amendments in the future that impose further requirements or amend existing requirements.

Our chairman and our president and chief executive officer together have sufficient voting power to elect or remove our directors, to determine the vote on any matter that requires shareholder approval, and otherwise control our company. In exercising their voting power, they may act according to their own interests, which may be adverse to your interests.

As of December 31, 2009, J. Chester Porter and Maria L. Bouvette beneficially owned approximately 5,768,398 shares, or 65.7% of our outstanding common stock. Mr. Porter and Ms. Bouvette each have made testamentary arrangements that provide for the other to retain voting control of his or her common stock in the event of death. Accordingly, they will be able to exercise control over our business and affairs and will be able to determine the outcome of any matter submitted to a vote of our shareholders, including the election and removal of our entire board of directors, any amendment of our articles of incorporation (including any amendment that changes the rights of our common stock) and any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets. Mr. Porter and Ms. Bouvette could take actions or make decisions in their self-interest that are opposed to your best interests. They could remove directors who take actions or make decisions they oppose but are favored by our other shareholders. They may be less receptive to the desires communicated by shareholders. Neither our articles of incorporation, our bylaws, nor Kentucky law requires the vote of more than a simple majority of our outstanding shares of common stock to approve a matter submitted for shareholder approval, subject to the general statutory requirement that any transaction in which one or more directors have a direct or indirect interest (other than as a shareholder) must be “fair” to the corporation. Mr. Porter and Ms. Bouvette have a level of concentrated control that could discourage others from initiating any potential merger, takeover or other change of control transaction that may otherwise give you the opportunity to realize a premium over the then-prevailing market price of our common stock. As a result, the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected.

 

13


Table of Contents

We are a “controlled company” within the meaning of the NASDAQ corporate governance rules because J. Chester Porter and Maria L. Bouvette together own more than 50% of our sole class of voting stock. As a controlled company, our controlling shareholders have greater power to make decisions in their own self-interest and against the interests of other shareholders, and investors and other shareholders will have fewer procedural and substantive protections against the exercise of this power.

A “controlled company” may elect not to comply with the following NASDAQ corporate governance rules, which require that:

 

   

a majority of its board of directors consists of “independent directors,” which the NASDAQ rules define as persons who are not either officers or employees of the company and have no relationships that, in the opinion of the board of directors, would interfere with the exercise of independent judgment in carrying out their responsibilities as directors;

 

   

decisions regarding the compensation paid to executive officers are made either by a compensation committee composed entirely of independent directors or by a majority of the independent directors;

 

   

nominations for election to the board of directors are made either by a nominating committee composed entirely of independent directors with a written charter addressing the committee’s purpose and responsibilities or by a majority of the independent directors.

As a result of our controlled company status Mr. Porter, a non-independent director, serves on our nominating and governance committee. We expect Mr. Porter to continue to serve on our nominating and corporate governance committee for the foreseeable future. Although a majority of our directors are independent directors, they have all been selected by Mr. Porter and Ms. Bouvette, who together have the voting power to remove directors who oppose actions or decisions they favor. Mr. Porter and Ms. Bouvette also have the power to elect a majority of directors who are not independent directors. Our board may elect to dispense with the nominating and governance committee at any time without shareholder consent. Accordingly, our shareholders have fewer procedural and substantive protections than shareholders of companies subject to all of the NASDAQ corporate governance requirements.

If we are unable to manage our growth effectively, our operations could be negatively affected.

Financial institutions like us that have experience rapid growth face various risks and difficulties, including:

 

   

attracting funding to support additional growth;

 

   

maintaining asset quality;

 

   

attracting and retaining qualified management; and

 

   

maintaining adequate regulatory capital.

In addition, in order to manage our growth and maintain adequate information and reporting systems within our organization, we must identify, hire and retain additional qualified employees, particularly in the accounting and operational areas of our business.

If we do not manage our growth effectively, our business, financial condition, results of operations and future prospects could be negatively affected, and we may not be able to continue to implement our business strategy and successfully conduct our operations.

We may not be able to maintain our historical earnings trends if we are not able to continue to grow.

We have expanded our business through both organic growth and a number of strategic acquisitions. Our ability to continue our organic growth depends, in part, upon our ability to expand our market presence, successfully attract core deposits and identify attractive commercial lending opportunities. If we are not able to do this successfully, we may not be able to maintain our historical earnings trends.

Our ability to implement our strategy for continued growth also depends on our ability to continue to identify and integrate acquisition targets profitably. We may not be able to continue this trend, nor may future acquisitions always be profitable. In addition, increased regulatory scrutiny may limit the ability to make future acquisitions. We also expect that competition for suitable acquisition candidates will be significant. We compete with other banks or financial service companies with similar acquisition strategies, many of which are larger and have greater financial and other resources than we do. We may not be able to successfully identify and acquire suitable acquisition targets on acceptable terms and conditions.

 

14


Table of Contents

Higher FDIC deposit insurance premiums and assessments could significantly increase our non-interest expense.

FDIC insurance premiums increased significantly in 2009 and we expect to pay higher FDIC premiums in the future. Recent bank failures have substantially depleted the insurance fund of the FDIC and reduced the fund’s ratio of reserves to insured deposits. The FDIC adopted a revised risk-based deposit insurance assessment schedule on February 27, 2009, which raised deposit insurance premiums. On May 22, 2009, the FDIC also implemented a special assessment equal to five basis points of each insured depository institution’s assets minus Tier 1 capital as of June 30, 2009, but no more than ten basis points multiplied by the institution’s assessment base for the second quarter of 2009. As a result, PBI Bank paid a special assessment of $781,000 on September 30, 2009.

On November 12, 2009, the FDIC adopted a new rule which required insured institutions to prepay on December 30, 2009, an estimated quarterly risk-based assessment for the 4th quarter of 2009 and for all 2010, 2011, and 2012. On December 30, 2009, PBI Bank prepaid $7.9 million of FDIC insurance premiums for the next three years. See the “Supervision – PBI Bank – Deposit Insurance Assessment” section of Item 1. “Business.”

We participate in the FDIC’s Transaction Account Guarantee Program, or TAGP, for non-interest-bearing transaction deposit accounts. The TAGP is a component of the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program, or TLGP. Banks that participate in the TAGP paid the FDIC annualized fees of ten basis points on the amounts in such accounts above the amounts covered by FDIC deposit insurance through December 31, 2009. The FDIC has established an extension period for the TAGP to run from January 1, 2010 through June 30, 2010. During the extension period, the fees for participating banks will range from 15 to 25 basis points, depending on the risk category to which the bank is assigned for deposit insurance assessment purposes.

To the extent that assessments under the TAGP are insufficient to cover any loss or expenses arising from the TLGP, the FDIC is authorized to impose an emergency special assessment on all FDIC-insured depository institutions. The FDIC has authority to impose charges for the TLGP upon depository institution holding companies, as well. These charges would cause the premiums and TAGP assessments charged by the FDIC to increase. These actions could significantly increase our non-interest expense for the foreseeable future.

We are a holding company and depend on our subsidiaries for dividends and distributions.

We are a legal entity separate and distinct from our banking and other subsidiaries. Our principal source of cash flow, from which we fund any dividends paid to our shareholders, is dividends from PBI Bank. There are statutory and regulatory limitations on the payment of dividends by PBI Bank to us, as well as by us to our shareholders. Regulations of the Federal Reserve affect our ability to pay dividends and other distributions to our shareholders. Regulations of the FDIC and the KDFI affect the ability of PBI Bank to pay dividends and other distributions to us, which requires the consent of those regulators. See the “Supervision-Porter Bancorp-Dividends” section of Item 1. “Business” and the “Dividends” section of Item 5. “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We face strong competition from other financial institutions and financial service companies, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

We compete with other financial institutions in attracting deposits and making loans. Our competition in attracting deposits comes principally from other commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds and other mutual funds. Our competition in making loans comes principally from other commercial banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, mortgage banking firms and consumer finance companies. In addition, competition for business in the Louisville metropolitan area has grown in recent years as changes in banking law have allowed several banks to enter the market by establishing new branches. Likewise, competition is increasing in the other growing markets we have targeted, which may adversely affect our ability to execute our plans for expansion. Moreover, our advantage from having operated a nationally recognized online banking division since 1999 may diminish, as nearly all of our competitors now offer online banking and may become more successful in attracting online business over time as they become more experienced.

 

15


Table of Contents

Competition in the banking industry may also limit our ability to attract and retain banking clients. We maintain smaller staffs of associates and have fewer financial and other resources than larger institutions with which we compete. Financial institutions that have far greater resources and greater efficiencies than we do may have several marketplace advantages resulting from their ability to:

 

   

offer higher interest rates on deposits and lower interest rates on loans than we can;

 

   

offer a broader range of services than we do;

 

   

maintain more branch locations than we do; and

 

   

mount extensive promotional and advertising campaigns.

In addition, banks and other financial institutions with larger capitalization and other financial intermediaries may not be subject to the same regulatory restrictions as we are and may have larger lending limits than we do. Some of our current commercial banking clients may seek alternative banking sources as they develop needs for credit facilities larger than we can accommodate. If we are unable to attract and retain customers, we may not be able to maintain growth and our results of operations and financial condition may otherwise be negatively impacted.

We depend on our senior management team, and the unexpected loss of one or more of our senior executives could impair our relationship with customers and adversely affect our business and financial results.

Our future success significantly depends on the continued services and performance of our key management personnel, particularly J. Chester Porter, chairman of the board, Maria L. Bouvette, president and chief executive officer, and David B. Pierce, chief financial officer. We do not have employment agreements with any of our senior executives. Our future performance will depend on our ability to motivate and retain these and other key officers. The loss of the services of members of our senior management or other key officers or the inability to attract additional qualified personnel as needed could materially harm our business.

While management continually monitors and improves our system of internal controls, data processing systems, and corporate wide processes and procedures, we may suffer losses from operational risk in the future.

Management maintains internal operational controls and we have invested in technology to help us process large volumes of transactions. However, we may not be able to continue processing at the same or higher levels of transactions. If our systems of internal controls should fail to work as expected, if our systems were to be used in an unauthorized manner, or if employees were to subvert the system of internal controls, significant losses could occur.

We process large volumes of transactions on a daily basis and are exposed to numerous types of operation risk, which could cause us to incur substantial losses. Operational risk resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people, and systems includes the risk of fraud by employees or persons outside of our company, the execution of unauthorized transactions by employees, errors relating to transaction processing and systems, and breaches of the internal control system and compliance requirements. This risk of loss also includes potential legal actions that could arise as a result of the operational deficiency or as a result of noncompliance with applicable regulatory standards.

We establish and maintain systems of internal operational controls that provide management with timely and accurate information about our level of operational risk. While not foolproof, these systems have been designed to manage operational risk at appropriate, cost effective levels. We have also established procedures that are designed to ensure that policies relating to conduct, ethics and business practices are followed. Nevertheless, we experience loss from operational risk from time to time, including the effects of operational errors, and these losses may be substantial.

We operate in a highly regulated environment and, as a result, are subject to extensive regulation and supervision that could adversely affect our financial performance and our ability to implement our growth and operating strategies.

We are subject to examination, supervision and comprehensive regulation by federal and state regulatory agencies, which is described under “Item 1 - Business—Supervision and Regulation.” Regulatory oversight of banks is primarily intended to protect depositors, the federal deposit insurance funds, and the banking system as a whole, not our shareholders. Compliance with these regulations is costly and may make it more difficult to operate profitably.

Federal and state banking laws and regulations govern numerous matters including the payment of dividends, the acquisition of other banks and the establishment of new banking offices. We must also meet specific regulatory capital requirements. Our failure to comply with these laws, regulations and policies or to maintain our capital requirements could affect our ability to pay dividends on common stock, our ability to grow through the development of new offices and our ability to make acquisitions. These limitations may prevent us from successfully implementing our growth and operating strategies.

 

16


Table of Contents

In addition, the laws and regulations applicable to banks could change at any time, which could significantly impact our business and profitability. For example, new legislation or regulation could limit the manner in which we may conduct our business, including our ability to attract deposits and make loans. Events that may not have a direct impact on us, such as the bankruptcy or insolvency of a prominent U.S. corporation, can cause legislators and banking regulators and other agencies such as the Financial Accounting Standards Board, the SEC, the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board and various taxing authorities to respond by adopting and or proposing substantive revisions to laws, regulations, rules, standards, policies and interpretations. The nature, extent, and timing of the adoption of significant new laws and regulations, or changes in or repeal of existing laws and regulations may have a material impact on our business and results of operations. Changes in regulation may cause us to devote substantial additional financial resources and management time to compliance, which may negatively affect our operating results.

Changes in banking laws could have a material adverse effect on us.

We are subject to changes in federal and state laws as well as changes in banking and credit regulations, and governmental economic and monetary policies. We cannot predict whether any of these changes may adversely and materially affect us. The current regulatory environment for financial institutions entails significant potential increases in compliance requirements and associated costs. Federal and state banking regulators also possess broad powers to take supervisory actions as they deem appropriate. These supervisory actions may result in higher capital requirements, higher insurance premiums and limitations on our activities that could have a material adverse effect on our business and profitability.

Legislative and regulatory actions taken now or in the future to address the current liquidity and credit crisis in the financial industry may significantly affect our financial condition, results of operation, liquidity or stock price.

Recent events in the financial services industry and, more generally, in the financial markets and the economy, have led to various proposals for changes in the regulation of the financial services industry. Earlier in 2009, legislation proposing significant structural reforms to the financial services industry was introduced in the U.S. Congress. Among other things, the legislation proposes the establishment of a Consumer Financial Protection Agency, which would have broad authority to regulate providers of credit, savings, payment and other consumer financial products and services. Additional legislative proposals include the Federal Reserve’s proposed guidance on incentive compensation policies at banking organizations and the FDIC’s proposed rules tying employee compensation to assessments for deposit insurance. Proposals have also been introduced to limit a lender’s ability to foreclose on mortgages or make such foreclosures less economically viable, including by allowing Chapter 13 bankruptcy plans to “cram down” the value of certain mortgages on a consumer’s principal residence to its market value and/or reset interest rates and monthly payments to permit defaulting debtors to remain in their home.

While there can be no assurance that any or all of these regulatory or legislative changes will ultimately be adopted, any such changes, if enacted or adopted, may impact the profitability of our business activities, require we change certain of our business practices or affect retention of key personnel, and could expose us to additional costs (including increased compliance costs). These changes may also require us to invest significant management attention and resources to make any necessary changes, and could therefore also adversely affect our business and operations.

As a result of our participation in the TARP Capital Purchase Program, we are subject to significant restrictions on compensation payable to our executive officers and other key employees.

Our ability to attract and retain key officers and employees may be further impacted by legislation and regulation affecting the financial services industry. As noted above, in early 2009, the ARRA was signed into law. The ARRA, through the implementing regulations of the U.S. Treasury, significantly expanded the executive compensation restrictions originally imposed on TARP participants. Among other things, these restrictions limit our ability to pay bonuses and other incentive compensation and make severance payments. These restrictions will continue to apply to us for as long as the preferred stock we issued pursuant to the TARP Capital Purchase Program remains outstanding. These restrictions may negatively affect our ability to compete with financial institutions that are not subject to the same limitations.

 

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments

Not applicable.

 

17


Table of Contents
Item 2. Properties

PBI Bank has 18 full-service banking offices. The following table shows the location, square footage and ownership of each property. We believe that each of these locations is adequately insured. Data processing and support operations are located in the Main office in Louisville and the Glasgow office building on Columbia Avenue. Trust services and operations are located in the Campbell Lane office in Bowling Green.

 

Markets

   Square Footage    Owned/Leased

Louisville/Jefferson, Bullitt and Henry Counties

     

Main Office: 2500 Eastpoint Parkway, Louisville

   30,000    Owned

Eminence Office: 645 Elm Street, Eminence

   1,500    Owned

Hillview Office: 11998 Preston Highway, Hillview

   3,500    Owned

Pleasureville Office: 5440 Castle Highway, Pleasureville

   10,000    Owned

Shepherdsville Office: 340 South Buckman Street, Shepherdsville

   10,000    Owned

Conestoga Office: 155 Conestoga Parkway, Shepherdsville

   3,900    Owned

Lexington/Fayette County

     

Lexington Office: 2424 Harrodsburg Road, Suite 100, Lexington

   8,500    Leased

South Central Kentucky

     

Brownsville Office: 113 East Main, Brownsville

   8,500    Owned

Greensburg Office: 202-04 North Main Street, Greensburg

   11,000    Owned

Horse Cave Office: 210 East Main Street, Horse Cave

   5,000    Owned

Morgantown Office: 112 West Logan Street, Morgantown

   7,500    Owned

Munfordville Office: 949 South Dixie Highway, Munfordville

   9,000    Owned

Northside Office: 1300 North Main Street, Beaver Dam

   3,200    Owned

Wal-Mart Office: 1701 North Main Street, Beaver Dam

   500    Leased

Owensboro/Davies County

     

Owensboro Office: 1819 Frederica Street, Owensboro

   3,000    Owned

Southern Kentucky

     

Fairview Office: 1042 Fairview Avenue, Bowling Green

   3,300    Leased

Campbell Lane Office: 751 Campbell Lane, Bowling Green

   7,500    Owned

Glasgow Office: 1006 West Main Street, Glasgow

   12,000    Owned

Other Properties

     

Office Building: 701 Columbia Avenue, Glasgow

   19,000    Owned

Canmer Office: 2708 North Jackson Highway, Canmer

   5,000    Owned

 

Item 3. Legal Proceedings

In the normal course of operations, we are defendants in various legal proceedings. In the opinion of management, there is no proceeding pending or, to the knowledge of our management, threatened litigation in which an adverse decision could result in a material adverse change in our business or consolidated financial position.

 

Item 4. Reserved

 

18


Table of Contents

PART II

 

Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities

Market Information

Our common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Market under the ticker symbol “PBIB”. The following table presents the high and low sales prices for our common stock reported on the NASDAQ Global Market for the periods indicated. All per share data has been restated to reflect stock dividends.

 

     2009
     Market Value    Dividend

Quarter Ended

   High    Low     

Fourth Quarter

   $ 16.65    $ 13.61    $ 0.20

Third Quarter

     17.24      13.92      0.20

Second Quarter

     14.91      11.19      0.20

First Quarter

     15.11      9.29      0.20

 

     2008
     Market Value    Dividend

Quarter Ended

   High    Low     

Fourth Quarter

   $ 17.91    $ 13.97    $ 0.20

Third Quarter

     17.84      13.33      0.19

Second Quarter

     16.87      13.62      0.19

First Quarter

     18.12      15.52      0.19

As of December 31, 2009, we had approximately 998 shareholders, including 208 shareholders of record and approximately 790 beneficial owners whose shares are held in “street” name by securities broker-dealers or other nominees.

 

19


Table of Contents

LOGO

Dividends

Shareholders of a Kentucky corporation are entitled to receive such dividends and other distributions when, as and if declared from time to time by the board of directors out of funds legally available for distributions to shareholders. Any future determination relating to the payment of dividends will be made at the discretion of our Board of Directors and will depend on a number of factors, including our future earnings, capital requirements, financial condition, future prospects and other factors that our board of directors may deem relevant. Also, Porter Bancorp is a bank holding company, and its ability to declare and pay dividends depends on certain federal regulatory considerations, including the guidelines of the Federal Reserve regarding capital adequacy and dividends.

As a bank holding company, our principal source of revenue is the dividends that may be declared from time to time by PBI Bank out of funds legally available for payment of dividends. PBI Bank must obtain the prior written consent of its primary regulators prior to declaring or paying any future dividends. In addition to this current restriction, various banking laws applicable to PBI Bank limit its payment of dividends to us. A Kentucky chartered bank may declare a dividend of an amount of the bank’s net profits as the board deems appropriate. The approval of the KDFI is required if the total of all dividends declared by the bank in any calendar year exceeds the total of its net profits for that year combined with its retained net profits for the preceding two years, less any required transfers to surplus or a fund for the retirement of preferred stock or debt. On July 1, 2008, PBI Bank sold a $9 million subordinated capital note to Silverton Bank, N.A., which has been assumed by the FDIC as receiver for Silverton Bank, N.A. The capital note provides that if PBI Bank is in default under the terms of the capital note, PBI Bank would be prohibited from paying dividends on its common stock.

On November 21, 2008, we sold $35 million of senior preferred stock to the U.S. Treasury pursuant to the CPP. The terms of the transaction with the U.S. Treasury limit our ability to pay dividends. For three years after issuance or until the U.S. Treasury no longer holds any preferred shares, we will not be able to increase our dividends above the current quarterly level of $0.20 per common share without the U.S. Treasury’s approval with limited exceptions, most significantly the repurchase of our common stock to offset share dilution from equity-based compensation awards. Also, we will not be able to pay any dividends at all unless we are current on our dividend payments on the preferred shares.

 

20


Table of Contents

In addition, we have issued an aggregate of approximately $25.0 million in our junior subordinated debentures to our subsidiary trusts. We pay interest on the debentures, which is used by the trusts to pay distributions on the trust preferred securities issued by them. The indenture governing the issuance of each of these debentures provides that if we fail to make an interest payment on the debentures, we would be prohibited from paying dividends on our common stock until all debenture interest payments are current. Accordingly, if we are unable to pay interest on these debentures, we will be contractually restricted from paying dividends on our common stock.

Purchases of Equity Securities by Issuer

In December 2006, the Company’s Board of Directors approved the repurchase of shares of Porter Bancorp’s common stock in an amount not to exceed $3 million, exclusive of any fees or commissions. As of December 31, 2009, Porter Bancorp had approximately $2.5 million remaining to purchase shares under the current stock repurchase program. The program authorizes Porter Bancorp to repurchase shares from time to time in open market transactions or privately negotiated transactions at its discretion, subject to market conditions and other factors. The Company did not repurchase any shares in the fourth quarter of 2009. The terms of the $35 million senior preferred stock transaction with the U.S. Treasury limit our ability repurchase shares of common stock until after November 21, 2011, unless the preferred shares sold to the U.S. Treasury have been redeemed in whole or transferred to an unaffiliated third party.

 

21


Table of Contents
Item 6. Selected Financial Data

The following table summarizes our selected historical consolidated financial data from 2005 to 2009. You should read this information in conjunction with Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and Item 8. “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.” Since 2004, we have combined several banks and bank holding companies in which we or our principal shareholders have held a controlling interest. Our company and its surviving bank subsidiary also terminated their elections to be subchapter S corporations as a result of this reorganization, which was completed effective December 31, 2005. Under U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”), entities that are more than 50% owned by another person or entity are generally consolidated for financial reporting purposes. Accordingly, for all periods presented, all of the assets and liabilities of our former subsidiaries, regardless of our previous percentage of ownership in these entities, are included in our consolidated balance sheet. Our consolidated net income, however, includes our subsidiaries’ net income only to the extent of our previous ownership percentage. In addition, financial data as of dates before and for periods ended through December 31, 2005 have been derived from both S corporations and C corporations within our consolidated group. Beginning on December 31, 2005, and for all subsequent periods, our financial data will reflect that our consolidated group consists entirely of C corporations.

Selected Consolidated Financial Data

 

     As of and for the Years Ended December 31,

(Dollars in thousands except per share data)

   2009    2008    2007    2006    2005

Income Statement Data:

              

Interest income

   $ 94,466    $ 100,107    $ 91,800    $ 72,863    $ 62,054

Interest expense

     40,412      52,881      49,404      35,622      25,665
                                  

Net interest income

     54,054      47,226      42,396      37,241      36,389

Provision for loan losses

     14,200      5,400      4,025      1,405      3,645

Non-interest income

     7,094      6,868      5,556      5,196      5,433

Non-interest expense

     30,456      27,757      22,474      19,785      20,047
                                  

Income before minority interest and taxes

     16,492      20,937      21,453      21,247      18,130

Minority interest in net income of consolidated subsidiaries

     —        —        —        —        1,314
                                  

Income before income taxes

     16,492      20,937      21,453      21,247      16,816

Income tax expense

     5,424      6,927      7,224      6,908      2,201
                                  

Net income

     11,068      14,010      14,229      14,339      14,615

Less:

              

Dividends on preferred stock

     1,750      194      —        —        —  

Accretion on preferred stock

     176      20      —        —        —  
                                  

Net income available to common

   $ 9,142    $ 13,796    $ 14,229    $ 14,339    $ 14,615
                                  

Common Share Data (1):

              

Basic and diluted earnings per common share

   $ 1.05    $ 1.59    $ 1.68    $ 1.94    $ 2.26

Cash dividends declared per common share

     0.80      0.77      0.74      0.73      1.52

Book value per common share

     15.34      14.85      14.07      12.89      10.30

Tangible book value per common share

     12.01      11.74      11.61      11.29      8.45

Balance Sheet Data (at period end):

              

Total assets

   $ 1,835,090    $ 1,647,857    $ 1,456,020    $ 1,051,006    $ 991,481

Debt obligations:

              

FHLB advances

     82,980      142,776      121,767      47,562      63,563

Junior subordinated debentures

     25,000      25,000      25,000      25,000      25,000

Subordinated capital note

     9,000      9,000      —        —        —  

Notes payable

     —        —        —        —        9,600

Average Balance Data:

              

Average assets

   $ 1,714,131    $ 1,572,599    $ 1,221,649    $ 995,018    $ 942,733

Average loans

     1,371,034      1,324,658      1,019,628      814,202      776,207

Average deposits

     1,385,572      1,250,614      997,287      810,419      771,677

Average FHLB advances

     106,259      138,954      69,276      57,847      54,342

Average junior subordinated debentures

     25,000      25,000      25,000      25,000      25,000

Average subordinated capital note

     9,000      4,525      —        —        —  

Average notes payable

     —        —        14      7,329      100

Average stockholders’ equity

     168,752      131,706      114,797      83,428      68,922

 

(1) Common share data has been adjusted to reflect a 5% stock dividend effective November 19, 2009 and November 10, 2008.

 

(2) Efficiency ratio is computed by dividing non-interest expense by the sum of net interest income and non-interest income excluding gains (losses) on sales of securities.

 

22


Table of Contents
Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations analyzes the consolidated financial condition and results of operations of Porter Bancorp Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, PBI Bank. Porter Bancorp, Inc. is a Louisville, Kentucky-based bank holding company which operates 18 full-service banking offices in twelve counties through its wholly-owned subsidiary, PBI Bank. Our markets include metropolitan Louisville in Jefferson County and the surrounding counties of Henry and Bullitt, and extend south along the Interstate 65 corridor to Tennessee. We serve south central Kentucky and southern Kentucky from banking offices in Butler, Green, Hart, Edmonson, Barren, Warren, Ohio, and Daviess Counties. We also have an office in Lexington, Kentucky, the second largest city in Kentucky. Our markets have experienced annual positive deposit growth rates in recent years with the trend expected to continue for the next few years. The Bank is both a traditional community bank with a wide range of commercial and personal banking products and an innovative online bank which delivers competitive deposit products and services through an on-line banking division operating under the name of Ascencia.

We focus on commercial and commercial real estate lending, both in markets where we have banking offices and other growing markets in our region. Commercial, commercial real estate and real estate construction loans accounted for 65.8% of our total loan portfolio as of December 31, 2009, and 67.9% as of December 31, 2008, and contributed significantly to our earnings. Commercial lending generally produces higher yields than residential lending, but requires more rigorous underwriting standards and credit quality monitoring.

Overview

The following discussion should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes and other schedules presented elsewhere in the report.

For the year ended December 31, 2009, we reported net income of $11.1 million compared to net income of $14.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008. Basic and diluted earnings per common share were $1.05 for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared to $1.59 for 2008. While we are pleased to report profitable results for 2009, we remain challenged by the overall economic environment and credit trends in our loan portfolio. Non-performing loans climbed to 6.0% of total loans and nonperforming assets stand at 5.42% of total assets at December 31, 2009. We remain diligent in the management of our portfolio and are striving to improve credit quality by working throughout our markets with our clients to balance selective new customer acquisition, customer service for our existing clients and prudent risk management.

Significant developments for the year ended December 31, 2009 were:

 

   

Loans grew 4.7% to $1.41 billion compared to $1.35 billion at December 31, 2008.

 

   

Total assets increased 11.4% to $1.8 billion since the 2008 year-end.

 

   

Deposits grew 18.7% to $1.5 billion compared with $1.3 billion at December 31, 2008.

 

   

Our efficiency ratio improved to 50.1% for 2009 compared with 50.7% for 2008 and continued to outperform our peer group.

 

   

Net interest margin increased to 3.33% for 2009 compared to 3.20% for 2009 as a result of increased average earning assets and decreased cost of funds.

 

   

Provision for loan losses increased $8.8 million in comparison to 2008 as the result of loan growth, an increase in non-performing loans, and increased net loan charge-offs of $7.5 million, or 0.54% of average loans for 2009, compared with $3.5 million, or 0.27% of average loans for 2008.

 

   

Porter Bancorp’s stock was added to the Russell 2000 and Russell 3000 indexes effective June 29, 2009.

These items are discussed in further detail throughout this “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” Section.

On October 1, 2007, we completed the acquisition of Ohio County Bancshares, and its wholly owned subsidiary Kentucky Trust Bank. The aggregate purchase price was $12 million paid in cash and stock. We acquired $120.1 million in assets and $94.5 million in deposits and recorded $5.3 million in goodwill and $3.0 million in core deposit intangibles. This acquisition established our presence in Ohio and Daviess counties and improved our market position in Warren County.

On February 1, 2008, we completed the acquisition of Paramount Bank in Lexington, Kentucky, in a $5 million all cash transaction. We acquired $75 million in assets and $76 million in deposits and recorded goodwill of $6.0 million and $631,000 in core deposit intangibles. This acquisition established our physical presence in Lexington, Kentucky, Fayette County, the second largest market in the state.

 

23


Table of Contents

Application of Critical Accounting Policies

Our accounting and reporting policies comply with GAAP and conform to general practices within the banking industry. We believe that of our significant accounting policies, the following may involve a higher degree of management assumptions and judgments that could result in materially different amounts to be reported if conditions or underlying circumstances were to change.

Allowance for Loan Losses – PBI Bank maintains an allowance for loan losses believed to be sufficient to absorb probable incurred credit losses existing in the loan portfolio, and the senior loan committee evaluates the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis. We evaluate the adequacy of the allowance using, among other things, historical loan loss experience, known and inherent risks in the portfolio, adverse situations that may affect the borrower’s ability to repay, estimated value of the underlying collateral and current economic conditions. While we evaluate the allowance for loan losses, in part, based on historical losses within each loan category, estimates for losses within the commercial real estate portfolio depend more on credit analysis and recent payment performance. The allowance may be allocated for specific loans or loan categories, but the entire allowance is available for any loan that, in management’s judgment, should be charged off. The allowance consists of specific and general components. The specific component relates to loans that are individually classified as impaired or loans otherwise classified as substandard or doubtful. The general component covers non-classified loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for current factors. The methodology for allocating the allowance for loan and lease losses takes into account our increase in commercial and consumer lending. We increase the amount of the allowance allocated to commercial loans and consumer loans in response to the growth of the commercial and consumer loan portfolios and management’s recognition of the higher risks and loan losses in these lending areas. We develop allowance estimates based on actual loss experience adjusted for current economic conditions. Allowance estimates are a prudent measurement of the risk in the loan portfolio which we apply to individual loans based on loan type. If the mix and amount of future charge-off percentages differ significantly from those assumptions used by management in making its determination, we may be required to materially increase our allowance for loan losses and provision for loan losses, which could adversely affect our results.

Goodwill and Intangible Assets – We test goodwill and intangible assets that have indefinite useful lives for impairment at least annually and more frequently if circumstances indicate their value may not be recoverable. We test goodwill for impairment by comparing the fair value of the reporting unit to the book value of the reporting unit. If the fair value, net of goodwill, exceeds book value, then goodwill is not considered to be impaired. Intangible assets that are not amortized will be tested for impairment at least annually by comparing the fair values of those assets to their carrying values. Other identifiable intangible assets that are subject to amortization are amortized on an accelerated basis over the years expected to be benefited, which we believe is 10 years. We review these amortizable intangible assets for impairment if circumstances indicate their value may not be recoverable based on a comparison of fair value to carrying value. Based on the annual goodwill impairment test as of December 31, 2009, management does not believe any of the goodwill is impaired as of that date. While management believes no impairment existed at December 31, 2009 under accounting standards applicable at that date, different conditions or assumptions, or changes in cash flows or profitability, if significantly negative or unfavorable, could have a material adverse effect on the outcome of the impairment evaluation and financial condition or future results of operations.

Stock-based Compensation – Compensation cost is recognized for stock options and restricted stock awards issued to employees, based on the fair value of these awards at the date of grant. A Black-Scholes model, which requires the input of highly subjective assumptions, such as volatility, risk-free interest rates and dividend pay-out rates, is utilized to estimate the fair value of stock options, while the market price of the Company’s common stock at the date of grant is used for restricted stock awards. Compensation cost is recognized over the required service period, generally defined as the vesting period. For awards with graded vesting, compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire award.

Valuation of Deferred Tax Asset –We evaluate deferred tax assets quarterly. We will realize this asset to the extent it is profitable or carry back tax losses to periods in which we paid income taxes. Our determination of the realization of the deferred tax asset will be based upon management’s judgment of various future events and uncertainties, including the timing and amount of future income we will earn and the implementation of various tax plans to maximize realization of the deferred tax assets. Management believes we will generate sufficient operating earnings to realize the deferred tax benefits. Examinations of our income tax returns or changes in tax law may impact the tax liabilities and resulting provisions for income taxes.

 

24


Table of Contents

Results of Operations

The following table summarizes components of income and expense and the change in those components for 2009 compared with 2008:

 

     For the
Years Ended December 31,
    Change from Prior Period  
     2009    2008     Amount     Percent  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Gross interest income

   $ 94,466    $ 100,107      $ (5,641   (5.6 )% 

Gross interest expense

     40,412      52,881        (12,469   (23.6

Net interest income

     54,054      47,226        6,828      14.5   

Provision for credit losses

     14,200      5,400        8,800      163.0   

Non-interest income

     6,779      7,475        (696   (9.3

Gains (losses) on sale of securities, net

     315      (136     451      331.6   

Other than temporary impairment on securities

     —        (471     471      100.0   

Non-interest expense

     30,456      27,757        2,699      9.7   

Net income before taxes

     16,492      20,937        (4,445   (21.2

Income tax expense

     5,424      6,927        (1,503   (21.7

Net income

     11,068      14,010        (2,942   (21.0

Dividends on preferred stock

     1,750      194        1,556      802.1   

Accretion on preferred stock

     176      20        156      780.0   

Net income available to common

     9,142      13,796        (4,654   (33.7

Net income of $11.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 decreased $2.9 million, or 21.0%, from $14.0 million for 2008. Net income available to common of $9.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 decreased $4.7 million, or 33.7%, from $13.8 million for 2008. This decrease in earnings was primarily attributable to increased provision for loan losses expense. Provision for loan losses expense increased $8.8 million, or 163.0%, in comparison to 2008 as a result of an increase in non-performing loans, increased net loan charge-offs of $7.5 million, or 0.54% of average loans for 2009, compared with $3.5 million, or 0.27% of average loans for 2008, and modest loan growth. Non-interest income decreased $696,000, or 9.3%, in comparison to 2008 primarily as a result of decreased service charges on deposit accounts, and decreased income from fiduciary activities. These decreases were partially offset by increased gains on sales of investment securities and no recurrence of other than temporary impairment write-downs on investment securities during 2009. Non-interest expense increased $2.7 million, or 9.7%, in comparison to 2008 as a result of increased salary and benefits expense, increased occupancy and equipment expense, and increased expense related to other real estate owned. Professional fees increased due to costs associated with our abandoned tender offer to acquire Citizens First Corporation of Bowling Green, Kentucky, that was terminated in December. In addition, FDIC insurance premiums rose significantly due to amendments made by the FDIC in 2007 to its risk-based deposit premium assessment systems and increases in premium rates and a special assessment in 2009. The increased dividends and accretion on preferred stock of $1.6 million and $156,000, respectively, from 2008 was the result of preferred stock being outstanding for 12 months during 2009 versus 41 days during 2008.

The following table summarizes components of income and expense and the change in those components for 2008 compared with 2007:

 

     For the
Years Ended December 31,
   Change from Prior Period  
     2008     2007    Amount     Percent  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Gross interest income

   $ 100,107      $ 91,800    $ 8,307      9.0

Gross interest expense

     52,881        49,404      3,477      7.0   

Net interest income

     47,226        42,396      4,830      11.4   

Provision for credit losses

     5,400        4,025      1,375      34.2   

Non-interest income

     7,475        5,449      2,026      37.2   

Gains (losses) on sale of securities, net

     (136     107      (243   (227.1

Other than temporary impairment on securities

     (471     —        (471   (100.0

Non-interest expense

     27,757        22,474      5,283      23.5   

Net income before taxes

     20,937        21,453      (516   (2.4

Income tax expense

     6,927        7,224      (297   (4.1

Net income

     14,010        14,229      (219   (1.5

Dividends on preferred stock

     194        —        194      100.0   

Accretion on preferred stock

     20        —        20      100.0   

Net income available to common

     13,796        14,229      (433   (3.0

 

25


Table of Contents

Net income of $14.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 decreased $219,000, or 1.5%, from $14.2 million for 2007. Net income available to common of $13.8 million for the year ended December 31, 2008 decreased $433,000, or 3.0%, from $14.2 million for 2007. This decrease in earnings was primarily attributable to increased provision for loan losses expense. Provision for loan losses expense increased $1.4 million, or 34.2%, in comparison to 2007 as a result of our loan growth, an increase in non-performing loans, and increased net loan charge-offs of $3.5 million, or 0.27% of average loans for 2008, compared with $2.1 million, or 0.21% of average loans for 2007. Non-interest income increased $2.0 million, or 37.2%, in comparison to 2007 primarily as a result of increased service charges on deposit accounts, income from fiduciary activities originating from the trust operation acquired with Kentucky Trust Bank, and the gain on sale of our Burkesville branch. These increases were partially offset by reduced gains on sales of investment securities and other than temporary impairment write-downs on investment securities. Non-interest expense increased $5.3 million, or 23.5%, in comparison to 2007 as a result of increased salary and benefits expense and an increase in occupancy and equipment expense primarily related to the Kentucky Trust Bank acquisition. In addition, FDIC insurance premiums rose significantly due to amendments made by the FDIC in 2007 to its risk-based deposit premium assessment systems. Dividends and accretion on preferred stock for 2008 resulted from our issuance of $35 million of preferred stock on November 21, 2008 in accordance with the Capital Purchase Program established under the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008.

Net Interest Income – Our net interest income was $54.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, an increase of $6.8 million, or 14.5%, compared with $47.2 million for the same period in 2008. Net interest spread and margin were 2.99% and 3.33%, respectively, for 2009, compared with 2.79% and 3.20%, respectively, for 2008. The increase in net interest income was primarily the result of higher loan and investment securities volume, but was partially offset by higher volume of certificates of deposit. In addition, our cost of interest bearing liabilities decreased 114 basis points for 2009 while our yield on average earning assets decreased 94 basis points.

Our average interest-earning assets were $1.6 billion for 2009, compared with $1.5 billion for 2008, a 9.8% increase, primarily attributable to loan growth and growth in our investment securities portfolio. Average loans were $1.4 billion for 2009, compared with $1.3 billion for 2008, a 3.5% increase. Average investment securities were $172 million for 2009, compared with $117 million for 2008, a 46.7% increase. Our total interest income decreased 5.6% to $94.5 million for 2009, compared with $100.1 million for 2008. The change was due primarily to lower interest rates on loan volume.

Our average interest-bearing liabilities also increased by 7.3% to $1.4 billion for 2009, compared with $1.3 billion for 2008. Our total interest expense decreased by 23.6% to $40.4 million for 2009, compared with $52.9 million during 2008, due primarily to lower interest rates paid on certificates of deposit, interest-bearing transaction accounts, and FHLB advances. Our average volume of certificates of deposit increased 15.1% to $1.1 billion for 2009, compared with $946.5 million for 2008. The average interest rate paid on certificates of deposits decreased to 3.01% for 2009, compared with 4.31% for 2008.

Our average volume of NOW and money market deposit accounts decreased 8.3% to $162 million for 2009, compared with $177 million for 2008. The average interest paid on these deposits decreased to 1.21% for 2009, compared with 2.16% for 2008. Our average volume of FHLB advances decreased 23.5% to $106.3 million for 2009, compared with $139.0 million for 2008. The average interest rate paid on FHLB advances decreased to 3.47% for 2009, compared with 4.02% for 2008. The decrease in cost of funds was the result of the continued re-pricing of certificates of deposit at maturity at lower interest rates, and decreased rates on interest-bearing transaction accounts and FHLB advances.

Our net interest income was $47.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2008, an increase of $4.8 million, or 11.4%, compared with $42.4 million for the same period in 2007. Net interest spread and margin were 2.79% and 3.20%, respectively, for 2008, compared with 3.11% and 3.67%, respectively, for 2007. The increase in net interest income was primarily the result of higher loan volume, but was partially offset by the reduction in net interest margin due to short-term pressure from the Federal Reserve’s actions to reduce short-term interest rates during 2008. The increase of $305.0 million in average loans for 2008, compared to the same period in 2007, was due to the acquisitions of Kentucky Trust Bank and Paramount Bank, and organic growth in our loan portfolio.

Our average interest-earning assets were $1.5 billion for 2008, compared with $1.2 billion for 2007, a 28.1% increase primarily attributable to loan growth and the Kentucky Trust Bank and Paramount Bank acquisitions. Average loans were $1.3 billion for 2008, compared with $1.0 billion for 2007, a 30% increase. Our total interest income increased 9.0% to $100.1 million for 2008, compared with $91.8 million for 2007. The change was due primarily to higher loan volume.

Our average interest-bearing liabilities also increased by 30.6% to $1.3 billion for 2008, compared with $1.0 billion for 2007. Our total interest expense increased by 7.0% to $52.9 million for 2008, compared with $49.4 million during 2007, due primarily to increases in the volume of certificates of deposit and FHLB advances. Our average volume of certificates of deposit increased 27.8% to $946.5 million for 2008, compared with $740.7 million for 2007. The average interest rate paid on certificates of deposits decreased to 4.31% for 2008, compared with 5.09% for 2007. Our average volume of FHLB advances increased 100.6% to $139.0 million for 2008, compared with $69.3 million for 2007. The average interest rate paid on FHLB advances decreased to 4.02% for 2008, compared with 4.71% for 2007. The decrease in cost of funds was the result of the continued re-pricing of certificates of deposit at maturity at lower interest rates, and decreased rates on FHLB advances.

 

26


Table of Contents

Average Balance Sheets

The following table sets forth the average daily balances, the interest earned or paid on such amounts, and the weighted average yield on interest-earning assets and weighted average cost of interest-bearing liabilities for the periods indicated. Dividing income or expense by the average daily balance of assets or liabilities, respectively, derives such yields and costs for the periods presented.

 

     For the Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2008  
     Average
Balance
    Interest
Earned/Paid
   Average
Yield/Cost
    Average
Balance
    Interest
Earned/Paid
   Average
Yield/Cost
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

ASSETS

              

Interest-earning assets:

              

Loans receivables (1)(2)

              

Real estate

   $ 1,226,403      $ 73,843    6.02   $ 1,164,892      $ 81,125    6.96

Commercial

     89,010        5,705    6.41        102,726        7,238    7.05   

Consumer

     36,848        3,209    8.71        38,786        3,637    9.38   

Agriculture

     16,559        1,117    6.75        15,555        1,181    7.59   

Other

     2,214        96    4.34        2,699        36    1.33   

U.S. Treasury and agencies

     1,279        57    4.46        11,000        482    4.38   

Mortgage-backed securities

     134,779        7,978    5.92        76,227        3,828    5.02   

State and political subdivision securities (3)

     21,813        878    6.19        20,272        818    6.21   

State and political subdivision securities

     2,826        154    5.45        2,455        133    5.42   

Corporate bonds

     10,423        681    6.53        6,499        382    5.88   

FHLB stock

     10,072        466    4.63        9,876        518    5.25   

Other debt securities

     704        46    6.53        704        46    6.53   

Other equity securities

     1,901        55    2.89        3,474        112    3.22   

Federal funds sold

     21,591        18    0.08        21,138        405    1.92   

Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions

     60,681        163    0.27        14,853        166    1.12   
                                  

Total interest-earning assets

     1,637,103        94,466    5.80     1,491,156        100,107    6.74

Less: Allowance for loan losses

     (21,130          (18,087     

Non-interest-earning assets

     98,158             99,530        
                          

Total assets

   $ 1,714,131           $ 1,572,599        
                          

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

              

Interest-bearing liabilities

              

Certificates of deposit and other time deposits

   $ 1,089,798      $ 32,816    3.01   $ 946,477      $ 40,811    4.31

NOW and money market deposits

     162,221        1,962    1.21        176,812        3,822    2.16   

Savings accounts

     34,386        310    0.90        33,969        440    1.30   

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

     11,042        476    4.31        14,045        555    3.95   

FHLB advances

     106,259        3,691    3.47        138,954        5,589    4.02   

Junior subordinated debentures

     34,000        1,157    3.40        29,525        1,664    5.64   
                                  

Total interest-bearing liabilities

     1,437,706        40,412    2.81     1,339,782        52,881    3.95

Non-interest-bearing liabilities

              

Non-interest-bearing deposits

     99,167             93,356        

Other liabilities

     8,506             7,755        
                          

Total liabilities

     1,545,379             1,440,893        

Stockholders’ equity

     168,752             131,706        
                          

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

   $ 1,714,131           $ 1,572,599        
                          

Net interest income

     $ 54,054        $ 47,226   
                      

Net interest spread

        2.99        2.79
                      

Net interest margin

        3.33        3.20
                      

Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities

        113.87        111.30
                      

 

(1) Includes loan fees in both interest income and the calculation of yield on loans.

 

(2) Calculations include non-accruing loans in average loan amounts outstanding.

 

(3) Taxable equivalent yields are calculated assuming a 35% federal income tax rate.

 

27


Table of Contents
     For the Years Ended December 31,  
     2008     2007  
     Average
Balance
    Interest
Earned/Paid
   Average
Yield/Cost
    Average
Balance
    Interest
Earned/Paid
   Average
Yield/Cost
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

ASSETS

              

Interest-earning assets:

              

Loans receivables (1)(2)

              

Real estate

   $ 1,164,892      $ 81,125    6.96   $ 892,104      $ 73,667    8.26

Commercial

     102,726        7,238    7.05        80,795        6,727    8.33   

Consumer

     38,786        3,637    9.38        31,453        2,969    9.44   

Agriculture

     15,555        1,181    7.59        14,187        1,262    8.90   

Other

     2,699        36    1.33        1,089        56    5.14   

U.S. Treasury and agencies

     11,000        482    4.38        21,529        927    4.31   

Mortgage-backed securities

     76,227        3,828    5.02        59,507        3,016    5.07   

State and political subdivision securities (3)

     20,272        818    6.21        16,578        684    6.35   

State and political subdivision securities

     2,455        133    5.42        2,458        133    5.41   

Corporate bonds

     6,499        382    5.88        2,259        143    6.33   

FHLB stock

     9,876        518    5.25        9,155        604    6.60   

Other debt securities

     704        46    6.53        217        23    10.60   

Other equity securities

     3,474        112    3.22        3,911        163    4.17   

Federal funds sold

     21,138        405    1.92        26,575        1,331    5.01   

Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions

     14,853        166    1.12        2,031        95    4.68   
                                  

Total interest-earning assets

     1,491,156        100,107    6.74     1,163,848        91,800    7.92

Less: Allowance for loan losses

     (18,087          (14,130     

Non-interest-earning assets

     99,530             71,931        
                          

Total assets

   $ 1,572,599           $ 1,221,649        
                          

LIABILITIES AND STOCKHOLDERS’ EQUITY

              

Interest-bearing liabilities

              

Certificates of deposit and other time deposits

   $ 946,477      $ 40,811    4.31   $ 740,693      $ 37,711    5.09

NOW and money market deposits

     176,812        3,822    2.16        157,645        5,800    3.68   

Savings accounts

     33,969        440    1.30        25,766        371    1.44   

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

     14,045        555    3.95        7,858        337    4.29   

FHLB advances

     138,954        5,589    4.02        69,276        3,260    4.71   

Junior subordinated debentures

     29,525        1,664    5.64        25,000        1,924    7.70   

Other borrowing

     —          —      —          14        1    7.14   
                                  

Total interest-bearing liabilities

     1,339,782        52,881    3.95     1,026,252        49,404    4.81

Non-interest-bearing liabilities

              

Non-interest-bearing deposits

     93,356             73,183        

Other liabilities

     7,755             7,417        
                          

Total liabilities

     1,440,893             1,106,852        

Stockholders’ equity

     131,706             114,797        
                          

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

   $ 1,572,599           $ 1,221,649        
                          

Net interest income

     $ 47,226        $ 42,396   
                      

Net interest spread

        2.79        3.11
                      

Net interest margin

        3.20        3.67
                      

Ratio of average interest-earning assets to average interest-bearing liabilities

        111.30        113.41
                      

 

(1) Includes loan fees in both interest income and the calculation of yield on loans.

 

(2) Calculations include non-accruing loans in average loan amounts outstanding.

 

(3) Taxable equivalent yields are calculated assuming a 35% federal income tax rate.

 

28


Table of Contents

Rate/Volume Analysis

The table below sets forth information regarding changes in interest income and interest expense for the periods indicated. For each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, information is provided on changes attributable to (1) changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by old volume); (2) changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by old rate); and (3) changes in rate-volume (change in rate multiplied by change in volume). Changes in rate-volume are proportionately allocated between rate and volume variance.

 

     Year Ended December 31, 2009 vs. 2008     Year Ended December 31, 2008 vs. 2007  
     Increase (decrease)
due to change in
    Increase (decrease)
due to change in
 
     Rate     Volume     Net
Change
    Rate     Volume     Net
Change
 
     (in thousands)  

Interest-earning assets:

            

Loan receivables

   $ (12,421   $ 3,174      $ (9,247   $ (14,236   $ 22,772      $ 8,536   

U.S. Treasury and agencies

     8        (433     (425     16        (461     (445

Mortgage-backed securities

     525        3,625        4,150        (28     840        812   

State and political subdivision securities

     1        80        81        (20     154        134   

Corporate bonds

     37        262        299        (11     250        239   

FHLB stock

     (62     10        (52     (131     45        (86

Other debt securities

     —          —          —          (12     35        23   

Other equity securities

     (10     (47     (57     (34     (17     (51

Federal funds sold

     (396     9        (387     (696     (230     (926

Interest-bearing deposits in other financial institutions

     (203     200        (3     (121     192        71   
                                                

Total increase (decrease) in interest income

     (12,521     6,880        (5,641     (15,273     23,580        8,307   
                                                

Interest-bearing liabilities:

            

Certificates of deposit and other time deposits

     (13,552     5,557        (7,995     (6,343     9,443        3,100   

NOW and money market accounts

     (1,513     (347     (1,860     (2,617     639        (1,978

Savings accounts

     (135     5        (130     (40     109        69   

Federal funds purchased and repurchase agreements

     47        (126     (79     (28     246        218   

FHLB advances

     (1,009     (889     (1,898     (534     2,863        2,329   

Junior subordinated debentures

     (731     224       (507     (570     310        (260

Other borrowings

     —          —          —          —          (1     (1
                                                

Total increase (decrease) in interest expense

     (16,893     4,424        (12,469     (10,132     13,609        3,477   
                                                

Increase (decrease) in net interest income

   $ 4,372      $ 2,456      $ 6,828      $ (5,141   $ 9,971      $ 4,830   
                                                

Non-Interest Income – The following table presents for the periods indicated the major categories of non-interest income:

 

     For the Years Ended
December 31,
     2009    2008     2007
     (in thousands)

Service charges on deposit accounts

   $ 3,112    $ 3,424      $ 2,760

Income from fiduciary activities

     875      1,079        206

Secondary market brokerage fees

     235      365        296

Title insurance commissions

     130      157        186

Gains on sales of loans originated for sale

     411      —          —  

Gains (losses) on sales of investment securities, net

     315      (136     107

Other than temporary impairment on securities

     —        (471     —  

Gain on sale of branch

     —        410        —  

Other

     2,016      2,040        2,001
                     

Total non-interest income

   $ 7,094    $ 6,868      $ 5,556
                     

Non-interest income increased by $226,000 to $7.1 million for 2009 compared with $6.9 million for 2008. Our non-interest income increased due to increased gains on sales of loans originated for sale of $411,000, or 100%, and increased gains on sales of investment securities, net, of $451,000, or 331.6%. PBI Bank began originating residential real estate loans for sale in the secondary market late in the first quarter of 2009. These increases were partially offset by decreased service charges on deposit accounts of $312,000, or 9.1%, and decreased income from fiduciary activities of $204,000, or 18.9%. Fewer service charges on deposit account fees were the result of lower transaction volume. Trust account fees are based on account assets values which declined during 2009 due to the lower stock market. In addition, 2008 non-interest income included a one-time gain of $410,000 on the sale of a branch and a one-time other-than-temporary impairment charge of $471,000 related to equity securities that were not repeated in 2009.

 

29


Table of Contents

Non-interest income increased by $1.3 million to $6.9 million for 2008 compared with $5.6 million for 2007. Our non-interest income increased due to increased service charges on deposit accounts of $664,000, or 24.1%, attributable to the acquisitions of Paramount Bank in 2008 and Kentucky Trust Bank in 2007, increased income from fiduciary activities of $873,000 arising from the trust operation acquired with Kentucky Trust Bank, and gain of $410,000 on the sale of our Burkesville branch. These increases were partially offset by decreased gains on sales of investment securities and the $471,000 write-down of other than temporary impairment of financial market sector equity securities with an original cost of $832,000. Gains on sales of investment securities decreased $243,000, or 227.1%, to a net loss of $136,000 for 2008 compared with a net gain of $107,000 for 2007.

Non-interest Expense – The following table presents the major categories of non-interest expense:

 

     For the Years Ended
December 31,
     2009    2008    2007
     (in thousands)

Salary and employee benefits

   $ 15,009    $ 14,792    $ 12,470

Occupancy and equipment

     3,918      3,587      2,727

FDIC insurance

     2,984      1,051      298

State franchise tax

     1,800      1,740      1,336

Other real estate owned expense

     1,155      881      833

Professional fees

     901      787      829

Postage and delivery

     752      748      546

Communications

     729      711      466

Advertising

     492      463      544

Office supplies

     429      569      474

Other

     2,287      2,428      1,951
                    

Total non-interest expense

   $ 30,456    $ 27,757    $ 22,474
                    

Non-interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2009 of $30.5 million represented a 9.7% increase from $27.8 million for the same period last year. Salaries and employee benefits are the largest component of non-interest expense. This expense increased $217,000, or 1.5%, in comparison with the same period of 2008 as a result of staff additions and increased stock-based compensation expense.

Occupancy expense increased $331,000, or 9.2%, to $3.9 million in 2009 from $3.6 million in 2008 to support a new branch built to replace a leased facility in Beaver Dam, increased real estate taxes, and increased maintenance and repairs costs related to buildings and equipment. FDIC insurance premiums rose significantly in 2009 due to amendments made by the FDIC in 2007 to its risk-based deposit premium assessment system and due to a one-time special assessment. FDIC insurance increased $1.9 million to $3.0 million in 2009 from $1.1 million in 2008. The one-time special assessment was 40.4% of this increase, or $781,000. Other real estate owned expense increased $274,000, or 31.1%, to $1.2 million in 2009 from $881,000 in 2008 due to higher costs related to foreclosing on nonperforming credits, repossessing collateral, and collecting amounts due. Professional fees increased $114,000, or 14.5%, to $901,000 in 2009 from $787,000 in 2008 due to costs associated with our abandoned tender offer to acquire Citizens First Corporation of Bowling Green, Kentucky, that was terminated in December.

Non-interest expense increases were partially offset by a decrease in office supplies expense. Office supplies decreased $140,000, or 24.6%, to $429,000 in 2009 from $569,000 in 2008 due to cost control measures.

Non-interest expense for the year ended December 31, 2008 of $27.8 million represented a 23.5% increase from $22.5 million in 2007. Salaries and employee benefits are the largest component of non-interest expense. This expense increased $2.3 million, or 18.6%, in comparison with 2007 as a result of cost of living wage increases, and the addition of staff from the Paramount and Kentucky Trust Bank acquisitions.

Occupancy expense increased $860,000, or 31.5%, to $3.6 million in 2008 from $2.7 million in 2007 to support the addition of a new office opened in 2008 and the acquisitions of Paramount and Kentucky Trust Bank. State franchise taxes are based primarily on average capital levels. These taxes increased 30.2% from 2007 to 2008 as our capital grew. State franchise tax increased $404,000 to $1.7 million in 2008 from $1.3 million in 2007. FDIC insurance premiums rose significantly in 2008 due to amendments made by the FDIC in 2007 to its risk-based deposit premium assessment system and because we no longer had the deposit insurance credits which were used during the first nine months of 2007 thereby reducing deposit insurance payments in fiscal year 2007. FDIC insurance increased $753,000 to $1.1 million in 2008 from $298,000 in 2007.

 

30


Table of Contents

Other real estate owned expense increased $48,000, or 5.8%, to $881,000 in 2008 from $833,000 in 2007 due to higher costs related to foreclosing on nonperforming credits, repossessing collateral, and collecting amounts due. Postage and delivery expense increased $202,000, or 37.0%, to $748,000 in 2008 from $546,000 in 2007 as account statement mailings increased due to the Paramount and Kentucky Trust Bank acquisitions. Expenses also increased for communications from $466,000 in 2007 to $711,000 in 2008 due to additional costs related to communication lines with new and acquired branches. Office supplies increased $95,000 to $569,000 in 2008 from $474,000 in 2007 due to higher costs related to increased staff from the Paramount and Kentucky Trust Bank acquisitions.

Non-interest expense increases were partially offset by decreases in professional fees and advertising expense. Professional fees decreased $42,000, or 5.1%, to $787,000 in 2008 from $829,000 in 2007 due to lower data processing fees as the data processing operations of Kentucky Trust Bank were merged with our data center in the first quarter of 2008. Advertising expenses decreased $81,000, or 14.9%, to $463,000 in 2008 from $544,000 in 2007. We decreased spending on media advertising in 2008 to focus more on internal programs designed to grow accounts through increased customer service and in-house marketing efforts.

Income Tax Expense – Income tax expense was $5.4 million for 2009 compared with $6.9 million for 2008. Our statutory federal tax rate was 35% in both 2009 and 2008. Our effective federal tax rate decreased to 32.9% in 2009 from 33.1% in 2008, as the percentage of our tax exempt income to total income increased.

Income tax expense was $6.9 million for 2008 compared with $7.2 million for 2007. Our statutory federal tax rate was 35% in both 2008 and 2007. Our effective federal tax rate decreased to 33.1% in 2008 from 33.7% in 2007, as the percentage of our tax exempt income to total income increased.

Analysis of Financial Condition

Total assets at December 31, 2009 were $1.8 billion compared with $1.6 billion at December 31, 2008, an increase of $187.2 million or 11.4%. This increase was primarily attributable to an increase of $56.1 million in net loans from organic growth and an increase of $118.9 million in federal funds sold and interest bearing deposits.

Total assets at December 31, 2008 increased to $1.65 billion compared with $1.46 billion at December 31, 2007, an increase of $191.8 million or 13.2%. This increase was primarily attributable to an increase of $129.1 million in net loans from organic loan growth and the acquisition of Paramount Bank. We also had an increase of $45.0 million in securities available for sale.

Loans Receivable – Loans receivable increased $62.8 million or 4.7% during the year ended December 31, 2009 to $1.4 billion. Our commercial, commercial real estate, and real estate construction portfolios increased by an aggregate of $13.1 million or 1.4% during 2009 and comprised 65.8% of the total loan portfolio at December 31, 2009.

Loans receivable increased $132.4 million or 10.9% to $1.4 billion at December 31, 2008 compared with $1.2 billion at December 31, 2007. Our commercial, commercial real estate, and real estate construction portfolios increased $67.4 million, or 7.9%, to $916.9 million at December 31, 2008. At December 31, 2008, these loans comprised 67.9% of the total loan portfolio compared with 69.8% of the loan portfolio at December 31, 2007.

Loan Portfolio Composition – The following table presents a summary of the loan portfolio at the dates indicated, net of deferred loan fees, by type. There are no foreign loans in our portfolio and other than the categories noted, there is no concentration of loans in any industry exceeding 10% of total loans.

 

     As of December 31,  
     2009     2008  
     Amount    Percent     Amount    Percent  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Type of Loan:

          

Real estate:

          

Commercial

   $ 535,843    37.93   $ 454,634    33.68

Construction

     304,230    21.53        371,301    27.50   

Residential

     387,017    27.39        342,835    25.39   

Home equity

     32,384    2.29        33,249    2.46   

Commercial

     89,903    6.36        90,978    6.74   

Consumer

     36,989    2.62        37,783    2.80   

Agriculture

     25,064    1.77        16,181    1.20   

Other

     1,488    0.11        3,145    0.23   
                          

Total loans

   $ 1,412,918    100.00   $ 1,350,106    100.00
                          

 

31


Table of Contents
     As of December 31,  
     2007     2006     2005  
     Amount    Percent     Amount    Percent     Amount    Percent  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Type of Loan:

               

Real estate:

               

Commercial

   $ 422,405    34.69   $ 324,354    37.96   $ 305,099    38.52

Construction

     318,462    26.15        211,973    24.81        190,080    24.00   

Residential

     288,703    23.71        195,591    22.89        177,683    22.44   

Home equity

     25,382    2.08        19,099    2.24        22,707    2.87   

Commercial

     108,619    8.92        59,113    6.92        50,626    6.39   

Consumer

     38,061    3.13        29,709    3.48        30,808    3.89   

Agriculture

     14,855    1.22        13,436    1.57        13,625    1.72   

Other

     1,211    0.10        1,092    0.13        1,323    0.17   
                                       

Total loans

   $ 1,217,698    100.00   $ 854,367    100.00   $ 791,951    100.00
                                       

Our lending activities are subject to a variety of lending limits imposed by state and federal law. PBI Bank’s secured legal lending limit to a single borrower was approximately $31.1 million at December 31, 2009.

At December 31, 2009, we had seventeen loan relationships with aggregate extensions of credit in excess of $10 million. Eight of the seventeen relationships include loans that have been classified as substandard by the Bank’s internal loan review process. For further discussion of classified loans refer to the asset quality discussion in our “Allowance for Loan Losses” section.

Our real estate construction portfolio declined approximately $67 million from 2008 to 2009 as construction projects were completed and sold to end users or refinanced under permanent financing arrangements. We also had loans in this category that were transferred to OREO through the normal progression of collection, workout, and ultimate disposition.

As of December 31, 2009, we had $17.7 million of participations in real estate loans purchased from, and $108.9 million of participations in real estate loans sold to, other banks. As of December 31, 2008, we had $21.4 million of participations in real estate loans purchased from, and $108.3 million of participations in real estate loans sold to, other banks.

Our loan participation totals include participations in real estate loans purchased from and sold to two affiliate banks, The Peoples Bank, Mt. Washington and The Peoples Bank, Taylorsville. Our chairman, J. Chester Porter and his brother, William G. Porter, each own a 50% interest in Lake Valley Bancorp, Inc., the parent holding company of The Peoples Bank, Taylorsville, Kentucky. J. Chester Porter, William G. Porter and our president and chief executive officer, Maria L. Bouvette, serve as directors of The Peoples Bank, Taylorsville. Our chairman, J. Chester Porter owns an interest of approximately 36.0% and his brother, William G. Porter, owns an interest of approximately 3.0% in Crossroads Bancorp, Inc., the parent holding company of The Peoples Bank, Mount Washington, Kentucky. J. Chester Porter and Maria L. Bouvette, serve as directors of The Peoples Bank, Mount Washington. We have entered into management services agreements with each of these banks. Each agreement provides that our executives and employees provide management and accounting services to the subject bank, including overall responsibility for establishing and implementing policy and strategic planning. These entities are not consolidated in the financial statements of the Company. Maria Bouvette also serves as chief financial officer of each of the banks. We receive a $4,000 monthly fee from The Peoples Bank, Taylorsville and a $2,000 monthly fee from The Peoples Bank, Mount Washington for these services.

As of December 31, 2009, we had $4.9 million of participations in real estate loans purchased from, and $23.8 million of participations in real estate loans sold, to these affiliate banks. As of December 31, 2008, we had $6.0 million of participations in real estate loans purchased from, and $23.7 million of participations in real estate loans sold to, these affiliate banks.

We have analyzed our relationship with these affiliates and determined that we do not have the power to direct the activities of the affiliates that significantly impact their economic performance nor do we govern their absorption of losses or use of their economic resources. As such, these entities are not consolidated in our financial statements.

 

32


Table of Contents

Loan Maturity Schedule – The following table sets forth information at December 31, 2009, regarding the dollar amount of loans, net of deferred loan fees, maturing in the loan portfolio based on their contractual terms to maturity:

 

     As of December 31, 2009
     Maturing
Within
One Year
   Maturing
1 through
5 Years
   Maturing
Over 5
Years
   Total
Loans
     (dollars in thousands)

Loans with fixed rates:

           

Real estate:

           

Commercial

   $ 104,951    $ 194,593    $ 28,677    $ 328,221

Construction

     45,872      37,978      9,584      93,434

Residential

     58,954      193,437      62,641      315,032

Home equity

     59      149      138      346

Commercial

     21,939      28,376      1,187      51,502

Consumer

     9,762      21,612      2,478      33,852

Agriculture

     7,608      4,067      209      11,884

Other

     1,006      8      —        1,014
                           

Total fixed rate loans

   $ 250,151    $ 480,220    $ 104,914    $ 835,285
                           

Loans with floating rates:

           

Real estate:

           

Commercial

   $ 72,206    $ 94,667    $ 40,749    $ 207,622

Construction

     130,547      79,903      346      210,796

Residential

     33,836      14,573      23,576      71,985

Home equity

     1,286      7,361      23,391      32,038

Commercial

     24,397      6,229      7,775      38,401

Consumer

     1,794      795      548      3,137

Agriculture

     11,793      919      468      13,180

Other

     —        427      47      474
                           

Total floating rate loans

   $ 275,859    $ 204,874    $ 96,900    $ 577,633
                           

Non-Performing Assets – Non-performing assets consist of certain restructured loans for which interest rate or other terms have been renegotiated, loans past due 90 days or more still on accrual, loans on which interest is no longer accrued, real estate acquired through foreclosure and repossessed assets. Loans, including impaired loans, are placed on non-accrual status when they become past due 90 days or more as to principal or interest, unless they are adequately secured and in the process of collection. Loans are considered impaired if full principal or interest payments are not anticipated in accordance with the contractual loan terms. Impaired loans are carried at the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate or at the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Loans are reviewed on a regular basis and normal collection procedures are implemented when a borrower fails to make a required payment on a loan. If the delinquency on a mortgage loan exceeds 90 days and is not cured through normal collection procedures or an acceptable arrangement is not worked out with the borrower, we institute measures to remedy the default, including commencing a foreclosure action. Consumer loans generally are charged off when a loan is deemed uncollectible by management and any available collateral has been disposed of. Commercial business and real estate loan delinquencies are handled on an individual basis by management with the advice of legal counsel.

Interest income on loans is recognized on the accrual basis except for those loans placed on non-accrual status. The accrual of interest on impaired loans is discontinued when management believes, after consideration of economic and business conditions and collection efforts, that the borrowers’ financial condition is such that collection of interest is doubtful, which typically occurs after the loan becomes 90 days delinquent. When interest accrual is discontinued, existing accrued interest is reversed and interest income is subsequently recognized only to the extent cash payments are received.

Real estate acquired as a result of foreclosure or by deed in lieu of foreclosure is classified as real estate owned until such time as it is sold. New and used automobile, motorcycle and all terrain vehicles acquired as a result of foreclosure are classified as repossessed assets until they are sold. When such property is acquired it is recorded at its fair market value less costs to sell. Any write-down of the property at the time of acquisition is charged to the allowance for loan losses. Subsequent gains and losses are included in non-interest expense.

 

33


Table of Contents

The following table sets forth information with respect to non-performing assets as of the dates indicated:

 

     As of December 31,  
     2009     2008     2007     2006     2005  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Past due 90 days or more still on accrual

   $ 5,968      $ 11,598      $ 2,145      $ 2,010      $ 1,969   

Loans on non-accrual status

     78,888        9,725        10,524        6,930        5,045   
                                        

Total non-performing loans

     84,856        21,323        12,669        8,940        7,014   

Real estate acquired through foreclosure

     14,548        7,839        4,309        2,415        1,781   

Other repossessed assets

     80        96        30        9        1   
                                        

Total non-performing assets

   $ 99,484      $ 29,258      $ 17,008      $ 11,364      $ 8,796   
                                        

Non-performing loans to total loans

     6.00     1.58     1.04     1.05     0.89

Non-performing assets to total assets

     5.42     1.78     1.17     1.08     0.89

Interest income that would have been earned on non-performing loans was $1.0 million, $601,000 and $586,000 for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008 and 2007 respectively. Interest income recognized on accruing non-performing loans was $225,000, $181,000, and $140,000 for the years ended December 31, 2009, 2008, and 2007, respectively.

At December 31, 2009 we had restructured loans totaling $25.2 million with borrowers who experienced deterioration in financial condition. These loans are secured by 1 to 4 family residential or commercial real estate properties. Concessions generally take the form of a reduction in interest rate or temporary curtailment of contractual principal payments on amortizing loans for periods ranging from three to six months. Management believes these loans are well secured and the borrowers have the ability to repay the loans in accordance with the renegotiated terms.

Loans more than 90 days past due decreased $5.6 million from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009, and non-accrual loans increased $69.2 million from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009. The $84.9 million in nonperforming loans at December 31, 2009, and $21.3 million at December 31, 2008, were primarily construction, land development, other land, and commercial real estate loans. The protracted slowdown in housing unit sales and loss of tenants or inability to lease vacant office and retail space has placed inordinate stress on these customers and their ability to repay according to the contractual terms of the loans. As such, we have placed these credits on non-accrual and have begun the appropriate collection actions to resolve them. Management believes it has established adequate loan loss reserves for these credits.

Allowance for Loan Losses – The allowance for loan losses is based on management’s continuing review and evaluation of individual loans, loss experience, current economic conditions, risk characteristics of various categories of loans and such other factors that, in management’s judgment, require current recognition in estimating loan losses.

 

34


Table of Contents

The following table sets forth an analysis of loan loss experience as of and for the periods indicated:

 

     As of December 31,  
     2009     2008     2007     2006     2005  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Balances at beginning of period

   $ 19,652      $ 16,342      $ 12,832      $ 12,197      $ 10,261   
                                        

Loans charged-off:

          

Real estate

     6,519        2,711        1,777        467        1,411   

Commercial

     301        347        299        132        1,117   

Consumer

     875        749        267        436        519   

Agriculture

     36        27        31        1        —     

Other

     —          —          —          —          37   
                                        

Total charge-offs

     7,731        3,834        2,374        1,036        3,084   
                                        

Recoveries:

          

Real estate

     133        145        84        59        246   

Commercial

     55        85        54        121        222   

Consumer

     76        85        88        83        100   

Agriculture

     7        8        8        3        —     

Other

     —          —          —          —          —     
                                        

Total recoveries

     271        323        234        266        568   
                                        

Net charge-offs

     7,460        3,511        2,140        770        2,516   
                                        

Provision for loan losses

     14,200        5,400        4,025        1,405        3,645   

Balance acquired in bank acquisition

     —          1,421        1,625        —          807   
                                        

Balance at end of period

   $ 26,392      $ 19,652      $ 16,342      $ 12,832      $ 12,197   
                                        

Allowance for loan losses to total loans

     1.87     1.46     1.34     1.50     1.54

Net charge-offs to average loans outstanding

     0.56     0.27     0.21     0.09     0.32

Allowance for loan losses to total non-performing loans

     31.10     92.16     128.99     143.53     173.90

Our allowance for loan losses is a reserve established through charges to earnings in the form of a provision for loan losses. The allowance for loan losses is comprised of three components: specific reserves, general reserves and unallocated reserves. Generally, all loans that have been identified as impaired are reviewed on a quarterly basis in order to determine whether a specific allowance is required. A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information, it is probable that we will not receive all amounts due in accordance with the contractual terms of the loan agreement. Once a loan has been identified as impaired, management measures impairment in accordance with ASC 310.10. When management’s measured value of the impaired loan is less than the recorded investment in the loan, the amount of the impairment is recorded as a specific reserve. These specific reserves are determined on an individual loan basis based on management’s current evaluation of our loss exposure for each credit, given the payment status, financial condition of the borrower and value of any underlying collateral. Loans for which specific reserves are provided are excluded from the general reserve and unallocated allowance calculations described below. Changes in specific reserves from period to period are the result of changes in the circumstances of individual loans such as charge-offs, pay-offs, changes in collateral values or other factors.

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of the amount necessary to provide for known and inherent losses in the loan portfolio in the normal course of business. Due to the uncertainty of risks in the loan portfolio, management’s judgment of the amount of the allowance necessary to absorb loan losses is approximate. The allowance for loan losses is also subject to regulatory examinations and determination by the regulatory agencies as to its adequacy in comparison with peer institutions.

We make specific allowances for each impaired loan based on its type and classification as discussed above. At year-end 2009, our allowance for loan losses to total non-performing loans decreased to 31.10% from 92.16% at year-end 2008. We have assessed these loans for collectability and considered, among other things, the borrower’s ability to repay, the value of the underlying collateral, and other market conditions to ensure that the allowance for loan losses is adequate to absorb probable incurred losses. We also maintain a general reserve for each loan type in the loan portfolio. In determining the amount of the general reserve portion of our allowance for loan losses, management considers factors such as our historical loan loss experience, the growth, composition and diversification of our loan portfolio, current delinquency levels, the results of recent regulatory examinations and general economic conditions. Based on these factors we apply estimated percentages to the various categories of loans, not including any loan that has a specific allowance allocated to it, based on our historical experience, portfolio trends and economic and industry trends. This information is used by management to set the general reserve portion of the allowance for loan losses at a level it deems prudent.

 

35


Table of Contents

Our portfolio is comprised primarily of loans secured by real estate. A decline in the value of the real estate serving as collateral for our loans may impact our ability to collect those loans. In general, we obtain updated appraisals on property securing our loans when circumstances are warranted such as at the time of renewal or when market conditions have significantly changed. We use qualified licensed appraisers approved by our Board of Directors. These appraisers possess prerequisite certifications and knowledge of the local and regional marketplace.

Because there are additional risks of losses that cannot be quantified precisely or attributed to particular loans or types of loans, including general economic and business conditions and credit quality trends, we have established an unallocated portion of the allowance for loan losses based on our evaluation of these risks. The unallocated portion of our allowance is determined based on various factors including, but not limited to, general economic conditions of our market area, the growth, composition and diversification of our loan portfolio, types of collateral securing our loans, the experience level of our lending officers and staff, the quality of our credit risk management and the results of independent third party reviews of our classification of credits. As of December 31, 2009 and 2008, the unallocated portions of the allowance for loan losses were $282,000, or 1.1% of the total allowance, and $742,000, or 3.8% of the total allowance, respectively.

Based on an evaluation of the loan portfolio, management presents a quarterly review of the allowance for loan losses to our board of directors, indicating any change in the allowance for loan losses since the last review and any recommendations as to adjustments in the allowance for loan losses.

This evaluation is inherently subjective as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revision as more information becomes available or as events change. We used the same methodology and generally similar assumptions in assessing the allowance for both comparison periods. We increased the allowance for loan losses as a percentage of loans outstanding to 1.87% at December 31, 2009 from 1.46% at December 31, 2008. The level of the allowance is based on estimates and the ultimate losses may vary from these estimates.

We follow a loan review program designed to evaluate the credit risk in our loan portfolio. Through this loan review process, we maintain an internally classified watch list which helps management assess the overall quality of the loan portfolio and the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses. Loans categorized as watch list loans show warning elements where the present status exhibits one or more deficiencies that require attention in the short term or where pertinent ratios of the loan account have weakened to a point where more frequent monitoring is warranted. These loans do not have all of the characteristics of a classified loan (substandard or doubtful) but do show weakened elements as compared with those of a satisfactory credit. We review these loans to assist in assessing the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses.

In establishing the appropriate classification for specific assets, management considers, among other factors, the estimated value of the underlying collateral, the borrower’s ability to repay, the borrower’s repayment history and the current delinquent status. As a result of this process, loans are categorized as special mention, substandard or doubtful.

Loans classified as “special mention” do not have all of the characteristics of substandard or doubtful loans. They have one or more deficiencies which warrant special attention and which corrective action, such as accelerated collection practices, may remedy.

Loans classified as “substandard” are those loans with clear and defined weaknesses such as a highly leveraged position, unfavorable financial ratios, uncertain repayment sources or poor financial condition which may jeopardize the repayment of the debt as contractually agreed. They are characterized by the distinct possibility that we will sustain some losses if the deficiencies are not corrected.

Loans classified as “doubtful” are those loans which have characteristics similar to substandard loans but with an increased risk that collection or liquidation in full is highly questionable and improbable.

Once a loan is deemed impaired or uncollectible as contractually agreed, the loan is charged-off either partially or in-full against the allowance for loan losses, based upon the expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, or the fair value of collateral with respect to collateral-based loans.

As of December 31, 2009, we had $208.3 million of loans classified as substandard, $7,000 classified as doubtful, $15.5 million classified as special mention and none classified as loss. This compares with $84.1 million of loans classified as substandard, $10,000 classified as doubtful, $49.4 million classified as special mention and none classified as loss as of December 31, 2008. The $124.3 million increase in loans classified as substandard is primarily attributable to the downgrade of credits displaying financial weakness indicated by inconsistent payments. Factors affecting each credit are specific to the borrowers business or related to macro economic events and we continue to monitor these credits regularly. In particular, these credits are primarily construction, land development, and commercial real estate loans for projects in or adjacent to our market areas. While these credits have been properly managed through the construction phase and secured by collateral in accordance with our policies, the protracted slowdown in housing unit sales and loss of tenants or inability to lease up vacant office and retail space has placed inordinate stress on these customers and their ability to repay according to the contractual

 

36


Table of Contents

terms of the loans. As of December 31, 2009 we had allocations of $15.9 million in the allowance for loan losses related to these classified loans. This compares to allocations of $7.6 million in the allowance for loan losses related to classified loans at December 31, 2008.

We recorded a provision for loan losses of $14.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2009, compared with $5.4 million for 2008 and $4.0 million for 2007. The total allowance for loan losses was $26.4 million or 1.87% of total loans at December 31, 2009, compared with $19.7 million or 1.46% of total loans at December 31, 2008, and $16.3 million or 1.34% of total loans at December 31, 2007. The increased allowance is consistent with the increase in our loan portfolio of $62.8 million from December 31, 2008 to December 31, 2009, the increase of $63.5 million in non-performing loans to $84.9 million at December 31, 2009 from $21.3 million at December 31, 2008, and increased loan charge-offs. Net charge-offs were $7.5 million for the year ended December 31, 2009 compared with $3.5 million for 2008 and $2.1 million for 2007. We acquired a banking office in 2008 and a financial institution in 2007, and applied generally accepted accounting principles in connection with these acquisitions. More specifically, we applied the provisions of the guidance issued by the FASB with respect to accounting for certain loans or debt securities acquired in a transfer to the 2008 and 2007 transactions. We identified no substantial loan or homogenous group of loans having evidence of deterioration of credit quality as defined by the statement. As a result, the existing allowance for loan loss in the amount of $1.4 million and $1.6 million, respectively, were recorded as of the dates of acquisition.

The following table depicts management’s allocation of the allowance for loan losses by loan type. Allowance funding and allocation is based on management’s current evaluation of risk in each category, economic conditions, past loss experience, loan volume, past due history and other factors. Since these factors and management’s assumptions are subject to change, the allocation is not necessarily predictive of future portfolio performance. The allocation is made by analytical purposes and is not necessarily indicative of the categories in which future losses may occur. The total allowance is available to absorb losses from any segment of loans.

 

     As of December 31,  
     2009     2008  
     Amount of
Allowance
   Percent
of
Loans
to Total
Loans
    Amount of
Allowance
   Percent
of
Loans
to Total
Loans
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

Real estate:

          

Commercial

   $ 9,266    37.93   $ 6,770    33.68

Residential

     4,662    29.68        2,271    27.85   

Construction

     8,215    21.53        5,907    27.50   

Commercial

     2,040    6.36        1,623    6.74   

Consumer

     539    2.62        603    2.80   

Other

     1,388    1.88        1,736    1.43   

Unallocated

     282    —          742    —     
                          

Total

   $ 26,392    100.00   $ 19,652    100.00
                          

 

     As of December 31,  
     2007     2006     2005  
     Amount of
Allowance
   Percent
of
Loans
to Total
Loans
    Amount of
Allowance
   Percent
of
Loans
to Total
Loans
    Amount of
Allowance
   Percent
of
Loans
to Total
Loans
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

Real estate:

               

Commercial

   $ 6,606    34.69   $ 6,519    37.96   $ 5,529    38.52

Residential

     1,580    25.79        1,103    25.13        1,194    25.31   

Construction

     3,653    26.15        2,000    24.81        1,950    24.00   

Commercial

     1,655    8.92        896    6.92        1,020    6.39   

Consumer

     574    3.13        460    3.48        563    3.89   

Other

     1,731    1.32        1,245    1.70        1,373    1.89   

Unallocated

     543    —          609    —          568    —     
                                       

Total

   $ 16,342    100.00   $ 12,832    100.00   $ 12,197    100.00
                                       

 

37


Table of Contents

Investment Securities – The securities portfolio serves as a source of liquidity and earnings and contributes to the management of interest rate risk. We have the authority to invest in various types of liquid assets, including short-term United States Treasury obligations and securities of various federal agencies, obligations of states and political subdivisions, corporate bonds, certificates of deposit at insured savings and loans and banks, bankers’ acceptances and federal funds. We may also invest a portion of our assets in certain commercial paper and corporate debt securities. We are also authorized to invest in mutual funds and stocks whose assets conform to the investments that we are authorized to make directly. The investment portfolio decreased by $4.4 million, or 2.5%, to $168.7 million at December 31, 2009 compared with $173.1 million at December 31, 2008. We focused new investments in 2009 primarily in the mortgage-backed securities category.

The following table sets forth the carrying value of our securities portfolio at the dates indicated. There were no securities classified as held-to-maturity at either period end.

 

     December 31, 2009    December 31, 2008
     Amortized
Cost
   Gross
Unrealized
Gains
   Gross
Unrealized
Losses
    Fair
Value
   Amortized
Cost
   Gross
Unrealized
Gains
   Gross
Unrealized
Losses
    Fair Value
     (dollars in thousands)

Securities available-for-sale

                     

U.S. Treasury and agencies

   $ 586    $ 33    $ —        $ 619    $ 2,938    $ 22    $ —        $ 2,960

Agency mortgage-backed: residential

     91,127      4,028      —          95,155      119,807      1,293      (118     120,982

Private label mortgage-backed: residential

     33,516      279      (2,156     31,639      17,139      —        (494     16,645

State and municipal

     24,537      955      (37     25,455      24,493      330      (415     24,408

Corporate

     13,054      760      (49     13,765      6,489      39      (451     6,077

Other debt

     704      —        (175     529      704      —        —          704

Equity

     1,885      75      (401     1,559      1,900      28      (627     1,301
                                                         

Total

   $ 165,409    $ 6,130    $ (2,818   $ 168,721    $ 173,470    $ 1,712    $ (2,105   $ 173,077
                                                         

The following table sets forth the contractual maturities, fair values and weighted-average yields for our securities held at December 31, 2009:

 

     Due Within
One Year
    After One Year
But Within
Five Years
    After Five Years
But Within
Ten Years
    After Ten Years     Total  
     Amount    Yield     Amount    Yield     Amount    Yield     Amount    Yield     Amount    Yield  

U.S. Treasury and agencies

   $ —      —     $ —      —     $ 619    5.17   $ —      —     $ 619    5.17

Agency mortgage-backed

     370    4.54        2,003    4.76        17,858    4.76        74,924    4.82        95,155    4.81   

Private label mortgage-backed

     —      —          —      —          6,645    5.38        24,994    13.35        31,639    11.73   

State and municipal

     86    4.95        3,575    5.84        12,184    5.55        9,610    6.39        25,455    5.91   

Corporate bonds

     —      —          2,875    7.50        10,890    6.59        —      —          13,765    6.78   

Other debt

     —      —          —      —          —      —          529    6.50        529    6.50   
                                             

Total

   $ 456    4.62   $ 8,453    6.16   $ 48,196    5.46   $ 110,057    7.07   $ 167,162    6.56
                                             

Equity

                         1,559   
                             

Total

                       $ 168,721   
                             

 

Average yields in the table above were calculated on a tax equivalent basis using a federal income tax rate of 35%. Mortgage-backed securities are securities that have been developed by pooling a number of real estate mortgages. These securities are issued by federal agencies such as Government National Mortgage Association (“Ginnie Mae”), Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac as well as non-agency or private company issuers. These securities are deemed to have high credit ratings, and minimum regular monthly cash flows of principal and interest. Cash flows from agency backed mortgage-backed securities are guaranteed by the issuing agencies.

 

38


Table of Contents

Unlike U.S. Treasury and U.S. government agency securities, which have a lump sum payment at maturity, mortgage-backed securities provide cash flows from regular principal and interest payments and principal prepayments throughout the lives of the securities. Mortgage-backed securities that are purchased at a premium will generally suffer decreasing net yields as interest rates drop because home owners tend to refinance their mortgages. Thus, the premium paid must be amortized over a shorter period. Therefore, those securities purchased at a discount will obtain higher net yields in a decreasing interest rate environment. As interest rates rise, the opposite will generally be true. During a period of increasing interest rates, fixed rate mortgage-backed securities do not tend to experience heavy prepayments of principal and consequently, the average life of this security will not be shortened. If interest rates begin to fall, prepayments will increase. Non-agency and private issuer mortgage-backed securities do not carry a government guarantee. We limit our purchases of these securities to bank qualified issues with high credit ratings. We regularly monitor the performance and credit ratings of these securities and evaluate these securities, as we do all of our securities, for other than temporary impairment on a quarterly basis. At December 31, 2009, 78.7% of the agency mortgage-backed securities we held had contractual final maturities of more than ten years with a weighted average life of 19.11 years, and 79.0% of the private label mortgage-backed securities we held had contractual final maturities of more than ten years with a weighted average life of 26.4 years.

The Company held 44 equity securities at December 31, 2009. Of these securities, 10 had an unrealized loss of $12,000 and had been in an unrealized loss position for less than twelve months and 19 had an unrealized loss of $389,000 and had been in an unrealized loss position for more than 12 months. Management monitors the underlying financial condition of the issuers and current market pricing for these equity securities monthly. Management currently intends to hold all securities with unrealized losses until recovery, which for fixed income securities may be at maturity. During the 2008 fourth quarter, we recorded an other than temporary impairment charge totaling $471,000 for equity securities held in our portfolio with an original cost of $832,000. The market prices of the stocks had been below our initial investment for more than twelve months and after consideration of the companies financial conditions and the likelihood the market value would recover to our cost basis in a reasonable period of time, the investment was written down to fair value. As of December 31, 2009, management does not believe any of the remaining equity securities in our portfolio with unrealized losses should be classified as other than temporarily impaired.

Deposits – We attract both short-term and long-term deposits from the general public by offering a wide range of deposit accounts and interest rates. In recent years we have been required by market conditions to rely increasingly on short to mid-term certificate accounts and other deposit alternatives, including brokered and wholesale deposits, that are more responsive to market interest rates. We use forecasts based on interest rate risk simulations to assist management in monitoring our use of certificates of deposit and other deposit products as funding sources and the impact of their use on interest income and net interest margin in various rate environments.

We primarily rely on our banking office network to attract and retain deposits in our local markets and leverage our online Ascencia division to attract out-of-market deposits. Market interest rates and rates on deposit products offered by competing financial institutions can significantly affect our ability to attract and retain deposits. During 2009, total deposits increased $241.5 million compared with 2008. During 2008, total deposits increased by $122.0 million compared with 2007. The increase in deposits for 2009 was primarily in certificates of deposit balances and money market accounts. The 2008 increase was primarily in certificates of deposit balances and non-interest bearing demand accounts.

To evaluate our funding needs in light of deposit trends resulting from continually changing conditions, management and board committees evaluate simulated performance reports that forecast changes in margins along with other pertinent economic data. We continue to offer attractively priced deposit products along our product line to allow us to retain deposit customers and reduce interest rate risk during various rising and falling rate cycles.

We offer savings accounts, NOW accounts, money market accounts and fixed rate certificates with varying maturities. The flow of deposits is influenced significantly by general economic conditions, changes in interest rates and competition. Our management adjusts interest rates, maturity terms, service fees and withdrawal penalties on our deposit products periodically. The variety of deposit products allows us to compete more effectively in obtaining funds and to respond with more flexibility to the flow of funds away from depository institutions into outside investment alternatives. However, our ability to attract and maintain deposits and the costs of these funds has been, and will continue to be, significantly affected by market conditions.

 

39


Table of Contents

The following table sets forth the average daily balances and weighted average rates paid for our deposits for the periods indicated:

 

     For the Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2008     2007  
     Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
    Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
    Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

Demand

   $ 99,167      $ 93,356      $ 73,183   

Interest Checking

     75,602    0.84     92,496    1.71     60,600    2.05

Money Market

     86,619    1.53        84,316    2.66        97,045    4.69   

Savings

     34,386    0.90        33,969    1.30        25,766    1.44   

Certificates of Deposit

     1,089,798    3.01        946,477    4.31        740,693    5.09   
                           

Total Deposits

   $ 1,385,572      $ 1,250,614      $ 997,287   
                           

Weighted Average Rate

      2.53      3.60      4.40

The following table sets forth the average daily balances and weighted average rates paid for our certificates of deposit for the periods indicated:

 

     For the Years Ended December 31,  
     2009     2008     2007  
     Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
    Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
    Average
Balance
   Average
Rate
 
     (dollars in thousands)  

Certificates of Deposit

               

Less than $100,000

   $ 611,011    3.03   $ 607,420    4.28   $ 529,114    5.04

$100,000 or more

     478,787    2.98        339,057    4.36        211,579    5.22   
                           

Total

   $ 1,089,798    3.01   $ 946,477    4.31   $ 740,693    5.09
                           

The following table shows at December 31, 2009 the amount of our time deposits of $100,000 or more by time remaining until maturity:

 

Maturity Period

   Amount
     (dollars in thousands)

Three months or less

   $ 154,365

Three months through six months

     162,828

Six months through twelve months

     131,861

Over twelve months

     167,236
      

Total

   $ 616,290
      

We strive to maintain competitive pricing on our deposit products which we believe allows us to retain a substantial percentage of our customers when their time deposits mature.

Borrowing – Deposits are the primary source of funds for our lending and investment activities and for our general business purposes. We can also use advances (borrowings) from the FHLB of Cincinnati to supplement our pool of lendable funds, meet deposit withdrawal requirements and manage the terms of our liabilities. Advances from the FHLB are secured by our stock in the FHLB, certain commercial real estate loans and substantially all of our first mortgage residential loans. At December 31, 2009 we had $83.0 million in advances outstanding from the FHLB and the capacity to increase our borrowings an additional $138.3 million. The FHLB of Cincinnati functions as a central reserve bank providing credit for savings banks and other member financial institutions. As a member, we are required to own capital stock in the FHLB and are authorized to apply for advances on the security of such stock and certain of our home mortgages and other assets (principally, securities which are obligations of, or guaranteed by, the United States) provided that we meet certain standards related to creditworthiness.

 

40


Table of Contents

The following table sets forth information about our FHLB advances as of and for the periods indicated:

 

     December 31,  
     2009     2008     2007  
     (dollars in thousands)  

Average balance outstanding

   $ 106,259      $ 138,954      $ 69,276   

Maximum amount outstanding at any month-end during the period

     142,583        146,021        121,767   

End of period balance

     82,980        142,776        121,767   

Weighted average interest rate:

      

At end of period

     3.46     3.31     4.58

During the period

     3.47     4.02     4.71

Subordinated Capital Note – At December 31, 2009 our bank subsidiary, PBI Bank, had a subordinated capital note outstanding in the amount of $9 million. The note is unsecured, bears interest at the BBA three-month LIBOR floating rate plus 300 basis points, and qualifies as Tier 2 capital. Interest only is due quarterly through September 30, 2010, at which time quarterly principal payments of $225,000 plus interest will commence. The note is due July 1, 2020. At December 31, 2009, the interest rate on this note was 3.29%.

Junior Subordinated Debentures – At December 31, 2009, we had four issues of junior subordinated debentures outstanding totaling $25.0 million as shown in the table below.

 

Description

   Liquidation
Amount
Trust
Preferred
Securities
   Issuance
Date
   Optional
Prepayment
Date (2)
   Interest
Rate (1)
   Junior
Subordinated
Debt and
Investment
in Trust
   Maturity
Date
    

(dollars in

thousands)

                 

(dollars in

thousands)

    

Porter Statutory Trust II

   $ 5,000    2/13/2004    3/17/2009    3-month LIBOR + 2.85%    $ 5,155    2/13/2034

Porter Statutory Trust III

     3,000    4/15/2004    6/17/2009    3-month LIBOR + 2.79%      3,093    4/15/2034

Porter Statutory Trust IV

     14,000    12/14/2006    3/1/2012    3-month LIBOR + 1.67%      14,434    3/1/2037

Asencia Statutory Trust I

     3,000    2/13/2004    3/17/2009    3-month LIBOR + 2.85%      3,093    2/13/2034
                         
   $ 25,000             $ 25,775   
                         

 

(1) As of December 31, 2009 the 3-month LIBOR was 0.25%.

 

(2) The debentures are callable on or after the optional prepayment date at their principal amount plus accrued interest.

The trust preferred securities are subject to mandatory redemption, in whole or in part, upon repayment of the subordinated debentures at maturity or their earlier redemption at the liquidation preference. The subordinated debentures, which mature February 13, 2034, April 15, 2034, and March 1, 2037, are redeemable before the maturity date at our option on or after March 17, 2009, June 17, 2009, and March 1, 2012, respectively, at their principal amount plus accrued interest. We have the option to defer interest payments on the subordinated debentures from time to time for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarters. If we defer these interest payments, we would be prohibited from paying dividends on our common stock.

The trust preferred securities issued by our subsidiary trusts are currently included in our Tier 1 capital for regulatory purposes. On March 1, 2005, the Federal Reserve Board adopted final rules that continue to allow trust preferred securities to be included in Tier 1 capital, subject to stricter quantitative and qualitative limits. Currently, no more than 25% of our Tier I capital can consist of trust preferred securities and qualifying perpetual preferred stock. To the extent the amount of our trust preferred securities exceeds the 25% limit, the excess is includable in Tier 2 capital. The new quantitative limits will be fully effective March 31, 2011. As of December 31, 2009, Porter Bancorp’s trust preferred securities totaled 15.1% of its Tier 1 capital.

Each of the trusts issuing the trust preferred securities holds junior subordinated debentures we issued with a 30 year maturity. The final rules provide that in the last five years before the junior subordinated debentures mature, the associated trust preferred securities will be excluded from Tier 1 capital and included in Tier 2 capital. In addition, the trust preferred securities during this five-year period would be amortized out of Tier 2 capital by one-fifth each year and excluded from Tier 2 capital completely during the year before maturity.

 

41


Table of Contents

Liquidity

Liquidity risk arises from the possibility we may not be able to satisfy current or future financial commitments, or may become unduly reliant on alternative funding sources. The objective of liquidity risk management is to ensure that we meet the cash flow requirements of depositors and borrowers, as well as our operating cash needs, taking into account all on- and off-balance sheet funding demands. Liquidity risk management also involves ensuring that we meet our cash flow needs at a reasonable cost. We maintain an investment and funds management policy, which identifies the primary sources of liquidity, establishes procedures for monitoring and measuring liquidity, and establishes minimum liquidity requirements in compliance with regulatory guidance. Our Asset Liability Committee continually monitors and reviews our liquidity position.

Funds are available from a number of sources, including the sale of securities in the available-for-sale portion of the investment portfolio, principal pay-downs on loans and mortgage-backed securities, brokered deposits and other wholesale funding. During 2009 and 2008 we utilized brokered and wholesale deposits to supplement our funding strategy. At December 31, 2009, these deposits totaled $114.6 million. We also secured federal funds borrowing lines from major correspondent banks totaling $44 million on an unsecured basis and an additional $25.0 million on a secured basis.

Traditionally, we have borrowed from the FHLB to supplement our funding requirements. At December 31, 2009, we had an unused borrowing capacity with the FHLB of $138.3 million. Management believes our sources of liquidity are adequate to meet expected cash needs for the foreseeable future.

We use cash to pay dividends on common stock, if and when declared by the board of directors, and to service debt. The main sources of funding include dividends paid by PBI Bank, management fees received from PBI Bank and affiliated banks and financing obtained in the capital markets. See the “Supervision-Porter Bancorp-Dividends” section of Item 1. “Business” and the “Dividends” section of Item 5. “Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Capital

Stockholders’ equity increased $5.1 million to $169.3 million at December 31, 2009 compared with $164.2 million at December 31, 2008. The increase was primarily due to net income earned during 2009 reduced by dividends declared on preferred and common stock. Both our company and PBI Bank qualified as well capitalized under regulatory guidelines at December 31, 2009.

On November 21, 2008 we issued to the U.S. Treasury, in exchange for aggregate consideration of $35.0 million, (i) 35,000 shares of the Company’s Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series A, no par value per share and liquidation preference $1,000 per share (the “Series A Preferred Stock”), and (ii) a warrant (the “Warrant”) to purchase up to 314,820 shares (the “Warrant Common Stock”) of the Company’s common stock, no par value per share, at an exercise price of $16.68 per share.

The Series A Preferred Stock qualifies as Tier 1 capital and pays cumulative cash dividends quarterly at a rate of 5% per annum for the first five years, and 9% per annum thereafter. The Series A Preferred Stock is non-voting, other than class voting rights on certain matters that could adversely affect the Series A Preferred Stock. The Series A Preferred Stock may be redeemed by the Company at par on or after February 15, 2012. Prior to this date, the Series A Preferred Stock may not be redeemed unless the Company has received aggregate gross proceeds from one or more qualified equity offerings of any Tier 1 perpetual preferred or common stock of the Company (a “Qualified Equity Offering”) of not less than $8.75 million. Subject to certain limited exceptions, until November 21, 2011, or such earlier time as all Series A Preferred Stock has been redeemed or transferred by U.S. Treasury, the Company will not, without U.S. Treasury’s consent, be able to increase its dividend rate per share of common stock or repurchase its common stock.

The Warrant is immediately exercisable and has a 10-year term. The U.S. Treasury may not exercise voting power with respect to any shares of Warrant Common Stock until the Warrant has been exercised. If the Company receives aggregate gross cash proceeds of not less than $35,000,000 from one or more Qualified Equity Offerings on or prior to December 31, 2009, the number of shares of Warrant Common Stock underlying the Warrant then held by the U.S. Treasury will be reduced by one half of the original number of shares underlying the Warrant.

Kentucky banking laws limit the amount of dividends that may be paid to a holding company by its subsidiary banks without prior approval. These laws limit the amount of dividends that may be paid in any calendar year to current year’s net income, as defined in the laws, combined with the retained net income of the preceding two years, less any dividends declared during those periods. At December 31, 2009, without prior approval, PBI Bank had approximately $37.6 million of retained earnings that could be used to pay dividends.

 

42


Table of Contents

Each of the federal bank regulatory agencies has established minimum leverage capital requirements for banking organizations. Banking organizations must maintain a minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to adjusted average quarterly assets equal to 3% to 5% subject to federal bank regulatory evaluation of an organization’s overall safety and soundness. At December 31, 2009, Porter Bancorp’s and PBI Bank’s ratios of Tier 1 capital and total capital to risk-adjusted assets, and leverage ratios exceeded the minimum regulatory requirements and the minimum requirements for well capitalized institutions.

The following table shows the ratios of Tier 1 capital and total capital to risk-adjusted assets and the leverage ratios for Porter Bancorp and PBI Bank at December 31, 2009:

 

     Regulatory
Minimums
    Well-Capitalized
Minimums
    Porter
Bancorp
    PBI
Bank
 

Tier 1 capital

   4.0   6.0   11.93   10.65

Total risk-based capital

   8.0      10.0      13.83      12.56   

Tier 1 leverage ratio

   4.0      5.0      9.59      8.57   

Off Balance Sheet Arrangements

In the normal course of business, we enter into various transactions, which, in accordance with GAAP, are not included in our consolidated balance sheets. We enter into these transactions to meet the financing needs of our customers. These transactions include commitments to extend credit and standby letters of credit, which involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit risk and interest rate risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the consolidated balance sheets.

Our commitments associated with outstanding standby letters of credit and commitments to extend credit as of December 31, 2009 are summarized below. Since commitments associated with letters of credit and commitments to extend credit may expire unused, the amounts shown do not necessarily reflect our actual future cash funding requirements:

 

     One year
or less
   More than 1
year but less
than 3 years
   3 years or
more but less
than 5 years
   5 years
or more
   Total
     (dollars in thousands)

Commitments to extend credit

   $ 74,326    $ 24,775    $ 14,452    $ 23,904    $ 137,457

Standby letters of credit

     4,801      —        —        —        4,801
                                  

Total

   $ 79,127    $ 24,775    $ 14,452    $ 23,904    $ 142,258
                                  

Standby Letters of Credit – Standby letters of credit are written conditional commitments we issue to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. If the customer does not perform in accordance with the terms of the agreement with the third party, we would be required to fund the commitment. The maximum potential amount of future payments we could be required to make is represented by the contractual amount of the commitment. If the commitment is funded, we would be entitled to seek recovery from the customer. Our policies generally require that standby letter of credit arrangements contain security and debt covenants similar to those contained in loan agreements.

Commitments to Extend Credit – We enter into contractual commitments to extend credit, normally with fixed expiration dates or termination clauses, at specified rates and for specific purposes. Substantially all of our commitments to extend credit are contingent upon customers maintaining specific credit standards at the time of loan funding. We minimize our exposure to loss under these commitments by subjecting them to credit approval and monitoring procedures.

Contractual Obligations

The following table summarizes our contractual obligations and other commitments to make future payments as of December 31, 2009:

 

     One year
or less
   More than 1
year but less
than 3 years
   3 years or
more but less
than 5 years
   5 years or
more
   Total
     (dollars in thousands)

Time deposits

   $ 947,704    $ 108,836    $ 181,444    $ 205    $ 1,238,189

FHLB advances (1)

     65,000      5,000      —        —        70,000

FHLB borrowing (2)

     2,684      3,896      2,045      4,355      12,980

Subordinated capital note

     450      1,800      1,800      4,950      9,000

Junior subordinated debentures

     —        —        —        25,000      25,000
                                  

Total

   $ 1,015,838    $ 119,532    $ 185,289    $ 34,510    $ 1,355,169
                                  

 

(1) Includes single maturity fixed rate advances with rates ranging from 0.38% to 4.96%, averaging 3.41%.

 

(2) Fixed rate mortgage-matched borrowing with rates ranging from 0% to 9.10%, and maturities ranging from 2010 through 2035, averaging 3.71%.

 

43


Table of Contents

Impact of Inflation and Changing Prices

The financial statements and related data presented herein have been prepared in accordance with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles, which require the measurement of financial position and operating results in historical dollars without considering changes in the relative purchasing power of money over time due to inflation.

We have an asset and liability structure that is essentially monetary in nature. As a result, interest rates have a more significant impact on our performance than the effects of general levels of inflation. Periods of high inflation are often accompanied by relatively higher interest rates, and periods of low inflation are accompanied by relatively lower interest rates. As market interest rates rise or fall in relation to the rates earned on our loans and investments, the value of these assets decreases or increases respectively.

 

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk

To minimize the volatility of net interest income and exposure to economic loss that may result from fluctuating interest rates, we manage our exposure to adverse changes in interest rates through asset and liability management activities within guidelines established by our Asset Liability Committee (“ALCO”). The ALCO, which is comprised of senior management representatives, has the responsibility for approving and ensuring compliance with asset/liability management policies. Interest rate risk is the exposure to adverse changes in the net interest income as a result of market fluctuations in interest rates. The ALCO, on an ongoing basis, monitors interest rate and liquidity risk in order to implement appropriate funding and balance sheet strategies. Management considers interest rate risk to be our most significant market risk.

We utilize an earnings simulation model to analyze net interest income sensitivity. We then evaluate potential changes in market interest rates and their subsequent effects on net interest income. The model projects the effect of instantaneous movements in interest rates of both 100 and 200 basis points. While short-term interest rates are very low at present, we believe our 100 and 200 basis points scenarios remain appropriate in both rates up and rates down scenarios given that prime rate was 3.25% at year-end 2009. Assumptions based on the historical behavior of our deposit rates and balances in relation to changes in interest rates are also incorporated into the model. These assumptions are inherently uncertain and, as a result, the model cannot precisely measure future net interest income or precisely predict the impact of fluctuations in market interest rates on net interest income. Actual results will differ from the model’s simulated results due to timing, magnitude and frequency of interest rate changes as well as changes in market conditions and the application and timing of various management strategies.

Our interest sensitivity profile was asset sensitive at December 31, 2009 and December 31, 2008. Given an instantaneous 100 basis point decrease in rates that was sustained for 12 months, our base net interest income would decrease by an estimated 4.5% at December 31, 2009 compared with a decrease of 7.6% at December 31, 2008. Given a 100 basis point increase in interest rates our base net interest income would increase by an estimated 4.9% at December 31, 2009 compared with an increase of 5.1% at December 31, 2008.

The following table indicates the estimated impact on net interest income under various interest rate scenarios for the year ended December 31, 2009, as calculated using the static shock model approach:

 

     Change in Future
Net Interest Income
 

Change in Interest Rates

   Dollar Change    Percentage Change  
     (dollars in thousands)  

+ 200 basis points

   $ 5,706    9.50

+ 100 basis points

     2,934    4.88   

We did not run a model simulation for declining interest rates as of December 31, 2009, because the Federal Reserve effectively lowered the federal funds target rate between 0.00% to 0.25% in December 2008. Therefore, no further short-term rate reductions can occur. As we implements strategies to mitigate the risk of rising interest rates in the future, these strategies will lessen our forecasted “base case” net interest income in the event of no interest rate changes.

Our interest sensitivity at any point in time will be affected by a number of factors. These factors include the mix of interest sensitive assets and liabilities as well as their relative pricing schedules. It is also influenced by market interest rates, deposit growth, loan growth, decay rates and prepayment speed assumptions.

The following table sets forth the amounts of our interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities outstanding at December 31, 2009 which we anticipate, based upon certain assumptions, to reprice or mature in each of the future time periods shown. The projected repricing of assets and liabilities anticipates prepayments and scheduled rate adjustments, as well as contractual maturities under an interest rate unchanged scenario within the selected time intervals. While we believe such assumptions are reasonable, we cannot assure you that assumed repricing rates will approximate our actual future activity.

 

44


Table of Contents
     Volume Subject to Repricing Within
     0 – 90
Days
    91 – 181
Days
    182 – 365
Days
    1 – 5
Years
    Over 5
Years
    Non-
Interest
Sensitive
    Total
     (dollars in thousands)

Assets:

  

Federal funds sold and short-term investments

   $ 157,091      $ —        $ —        $ —        $ —          —        $ 157,091

Investment securities

     21,469        6,847        13,123        83,644        41,550        2,088        168,721

FHLB stock

     10,072        —          —          —          —          —          10,072

Loans held for sale

     334        —          —          —          —          —          334

Loans, net of allowance

     835,304        112,129        154,597        290,933        19,955        (26,392     1,386,526

Fixed and other assets

     —          —          —          —          —          112,346        112,346
                                                      

Total assets

   $ 1,024,270      $ 118,976      $ 167,720      $ 374,577      $ 61,505      $ 88,042      $ 1,835,090
                                                      

Liabilities and Stockholders’ Equity

              

Interest-bearing checking, savings, and money market accounts

   $ 194,644      $ —        $ —        $ —        $ —        $ —        $ 194,644

Certificates of deposit

     308,346        345,130        291,418        291,586        1,709        —          1,238,189

Borrowed funds

     50,993        20,479        30,972        21,256        4,797        —          128,497

Other liabilities

     —          —          —          —          —          104,426        104,426

Stockholders’ equity

     —          —          —          —          —          169,334        169,334
                                                      

Total liabilities and stockholders’ equity

   $ 553,983      $ 365,609      $ 322,390      $ 312,842      $ 6,506      $