UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

 

FORM 10-K

 

☒ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013

 

☐TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the transition period from ________ to ________

 

Commission File Number 0-29030

 

SUSSEX BANCORP

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

 

 

 

 

 

 

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

 

 

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 ☒

 

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 ☒

 

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 such 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 ☒      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 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 the 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 the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

 

Large accelerated filer ☐Accelerated filer ☐           Non-accelerated filer ☐    Smaller reporting company ☒

 (Do not check if a smaller reporting company)   

 

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

 

Based upon the closing price of $6.14 on June 28, 2013, the aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates was  $17,067,297.  The number of shares of the registrant’s common stock, no par value, outstanding as of March 11, 2014 was 4,657,066.

 

---

 

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

 

Portions of the Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Shareholders are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The Proxy Statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2013.

---

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

---

 

FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

 

We may, from time to time, make written or oral “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements contained in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”), our reports to shareholders and in other communications by us. This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains “forward-looking statements,” which may be identified by the use of such words as “believe,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “should,” “planned,” “estimated,” and “potential.”  Examples of forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, estimates with respect to our financial condition, results of operation and business that are subject to various factors which could cause actual results to differ materially from these estimates.  These factors include, but are not limited to:

 

Any or all of our forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, and in any other public statements we make may turn out to be wrong.  They can be affected by inaccurate assumptions we might make or by known or unknown risks and uncertainties.  Consequently, no forward-looking statements can be guaranteed.  We disclaim any obligation to subsequently revise any forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances after the date of such statements, or to reflect the occurrence of anticipated or unanticipated events.

Unless the context indicates otherwise, all references in this prospectus to “Sussex Bancorp,” “we,” “us,” “our company,” “corporation” and “our” refer to Sussex Bancorp and its subsidiaries. References to the “Bank” are to Sussex Bank, our wholly owned bank subsidiary.

 

 

---

 

PART I

 

ITEM 1.  BUSINESS

 

General

 

Sussex Bancorp is a bank holding company incorporated under the laws of the State of New Jersey in January 1996 and the parent company of Sussex Bank (the “Bank”).  Pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”) and the New Jersey Banking Act of 1948, as amended (the “Banking Act”), and pursuant to approval of the Board of Directors of the Bank and shareholders of the Bank, Sussex Bancorp acquired the Bank and became its holding company on November 20, 1996.  The only significant asset of Sussex Bancorp is its investment in the Bank.  At December 31, 2013, the Company had consolidated total assets of $533.9 million, gross loans of $392.4 million, deposits of $430.3 million and stockholders’ equity of $46.4 million.

 

The Bank is a commercial bank formed under the laws of the State of New Jersey in 1975 and is regulated by New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance (the “Department”).  The Bank’s wholly owned subsidiaries are SCB Investment Company, Inc., SCBNY Company, Inc., ClassicLake Enterprises, LLC, Wheatsworth Properties Corp., PPD Holding Company, LLC and Tri-State Insurance Agency, Inc. (“Tri-State”).  SCB Investment Company, Inc. and SCBNY Company, Inc. hold portions of the Bank’s investment portfolio.  ClassicLake Enterprises, LLC, PPD Holding Company, LLC and Wheatsworth Properties Corp. hold certain foreclosed properties. Tri-State provides insurance agency services mostly through the sale of property and casualty insurance policies. 

 

The corporate offices of the Company are located at 399 Route 23, Franklin, New Jersey 07416 and 100 Enterprise Drive, Suite 700, Rockaway, New Jersey, 07866, and the telephone number is (844) 256-7328.

 

Our Business

 

Our primary business is ownership and supervision of the Bank.  Through the Bank, we conduct a traditional commercial banking business, and offer services including personal and business checking accounts and time deposits, money market accounts and savings accounts.  We structure our specific services and charges in a manner designed to attract the business of the small and medium sized business and professional community as well as that of individuals residing, working and shopping in the northern New Jersey and New York markets.  We engage in a wide range of lending activities and offer commercial, consumer, mortgage, home equity and personal loans.

 

Through the Bank’s subsidiary, Tri-State, we operate a full service general insurance agency, offering both commercial and personal lines of insurance. 

 

We have two business segments, banking and financial services and insurance services. For financial data on the segments see Note 2 of our consolidated financial statements located elsewhere in this report.

 

Market Area

 

Our service area primarily consists of Sussex and Bergen Counties in New Jersey and Orange County, New York; although we make loans throughout New Jersey and the New York metropolitan markets.    We operate from our main office at 399 Route 23, Franklin, New Jersey, our nine branch offices located in Andover, Augusta, Franklin, Montague, Newton, Sparta, Vernon, and Wantage, New Jersey, and in Port Jervis, New York and our loan production and insurance agency satellite office in Rochelle Park, New Jersey.  On December 18, 2013 we permanently closed our Warwick, New York branch location and during the first quarter of 2014 we opened a regional office and corporate center in Rockaway, New Jersey.  Our market area is among the most affluent in the nation.

 

Competition

 

We operate in a highly competitive environment competing for deposits and loans with commercial banks, thrifts and other financial institutions, many of which have greater financial resources than us.  Many large financial institutions in New York City and other parts of New Jersey compete for the business of customers located in our service area.  Many of these institutions have significantly higher lending limits than us and provide services to their customers which we do not offer.

---

 

 

Management believes we are able to compete on a substantially equal basis with our competitors because we provide responsive personalized services through management’s knowledge and awareness of our service area, customers and business.

 

Personnel

 

At December 31, 2013, we employed 107 full-time employees and 27 part-time employees.  None of these employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement and we believe that our employee relations are good.

 

Regulation and Supervision

 

The Company and the Bank are subject to extensive regulation under federal and state laws. The regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies and their insured depository institutions subsidiaries is intended to protect depositors, federal deposit insurance funds, consumers and the banking system as a whole, and not necessarily investors in bank holding companies such as the Company.  Insurance agencies licensed in New Jersey are regulated under state law by the New Jersey Department of Banking and Insurance. 

Set forth below is a description of the significant elements of the laws and regulations applicable to the Company and the Bank. To the extent that the following information describes statutory and regulatory provisions, it is qualified in its entirety by reference to the particular statutory and regulatory provisions.  Any change in the applicable law or regulation may have a material effect on the business and prospects of the Company and the Bank.

 

Recent Regulatory Changes

 

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), enacted on July 21, 2010, significantly changed the bank regulatory landscape and has impacted and will continue to impact the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of insured depository institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations.  Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act applicable to the Company and the Bank are discussed herein. 

 

In July 2013, the federal banking agencies approved final rules (the “New Capital Rules”) establishing a new comprehensive capital framework for U.S. banking organizations. The New Capital Rules generally implement the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision’s (the “Basel Committee”) December 2010 final capital framework referred to as “Basel III” for strengthening international capital standards. The New Capital Rules substantially revise the risk-based capital requirements applicable to BHCs and their depository institution subsidiaries, including the Company and the Bank, as compared to the current U.S. general risk-based capital rules. The New Capital Rules revise the definitions and the components of regulatory capital, as well as address other issues affecting the numerator in banking institutions’ regulatory capital ratios. The New Capital Rules also address asset risk weights and other matters affecting the denominator in banking institutions’ regulatory capital ratios and replace the existing general risk-weighting approach, which was derived from the Basel Committee’s 1988 “Basel I” capital accords, with a more risk-sensitive approach based, in part, on the “standardized approach” in the Basel Committee’s 2004 “Basel II” capital accords. In addition, the New Capital Rules implement certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, including the requirements of Section 939A to remove references to credit ratings from the federal Banking agencies’ rules. The New Capital Rules are effective for the Company on January 1, 2015, subject to phase-in periods for certain of their components and other provisions.

 

In December, 2013, the federal banking agencies jointly adopted final rules implementing Section 619 of the Dodd-Frank Act, commonly known as the Volcker Rule.  The Volcker Rule restricts the ability of banking entities, such as the Company, to engage in proprietary trading or to own, sponsor or have certain relationships with hedge funds or private equity funds—so-called “Covered Funds.”  The final rule definition of Covered Fund includes certain investments such as collateralized loan obligation (“CLO”) and collateralized debt obligation (“CDO”) securities. Compliance is generally required by July 21, 2015.

 

The requirements of the Dodd-Frank Act and other regulatory reforms continue to be implemented.  It is difficult to predict at this time what specific impact certain provisions and yet to be finalized implementing rules and regulations will have on the Company, including any regulations promulgated by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). Financial reform legislation and rules could have adverse implications on the financial industry, the competitive environment, and our ability to conduct business. Management will have to apply resources to

---

 

ensure compliance with all applicable provisions of the regulatory reform including the Dodd-Frank Act and any implementing rules, which may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings. 

 

Bank Holding Company Regulation

 

General.  As a bank holding company registered under the BHC Act, we are subject to the regulation and supervision of the Federal Reserve Board.  We are required to file with the Federal Reserve Board annual reports and other information regarding our business operations and those of our subsidiaries.

 

The BHC Act requires, among other things, the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board in any case where a bank holding company proposes to (i) acquire all or substantially all of the assets of any other bank, (ii) acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of any class of voting stock of any bank (unless it owns a majority of such bank’s voting shares) or (iii) merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company.  The Federal Reserve Board will not approve any acquisition, merger, or consolidation that would have a substantially anti-competitive effect, unless the anti-competitive impact of the proposed transaction is clearly outweighed by a greater public interest in meeting the convenience and needs of the community to be served. When reviewing acquisitions or mergers, the Federal Reserve Board also considers, among other factors, capital adequacy and the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the companies and the banks concerned, the convenience and needs of the community to be served and the effectiveness of the companies and the banks in combatting money laundering.

 

The BHC Act also generally prohibits a bank holding company, with certain limited exceptions, from (i) acquiring or retaining direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the outstanding voting stock of any company which is not a bank or bank holding company; or (ii) engaging directly or indirectly in activities other than those of banking, managing or controlling banks, or performing services for its subsidiaries, unless such non‑banking business is determined by the Federal Reserve Board to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be properly incident thereto.  In making such determinations, the Federal Reserve Board is required to weigh the expected benefits to the public, such as, greater convenience, increased competition or gains in efficiency, against the possible adverse effects, such as, undue concentration of resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interest or unsound banking practices.

 

Bank holding companies whose subsidiary banks meet certain capital, management and Community Reinvestment Act standards, and which elect to become “financial holding companies,” are permitted to engage in a substantially broader range of non-banking activities than is otherwise permissible for bank holding companies under the BHC Act.  These activities include certain insurance, securities and merchant banking activities.  In addition, financial holding companies may often give after-the-fact notice for a variety of nonbank activities and acquisitions rather than needing advance regulatory approval.  As our business is currently limited to activities permissible for a bank holding company, we have not elected to become a financial holding company.

 

Source of Strength Doctrine.  Federal Reserve Board policy requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary insured depository institutions.  The Dodd-Frank Act codified the requirement that holding companies act as a source of financial strength.  As a result, the Company is expected to commit resources to support the Bank, including at times when the Company may not be in a financial position to provide such resources. Any capital loans by a bank holding company to any of its subsidiary depository institutions are subordinate in right of payment to deposits and to certain other indebtedness of such subsidiary institution. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal banking agency to maintain the capital of a subsidiary insured depository institution will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

 

Capital Adequacy Guidelines for Bank Holding Companies.  The Federal Reserve Board has adopted risk-based and leverage capital guidelines for bank holding companies similar to the capital requirements developed for banks discussed below.  The risk-based capital guidelines are designed to make regulatory capital requirements sensitive to differences in risk profiles among banks and bank holding companies, to account for off-balance sheet exposure and to minimize disincentives for holding liquid, low-risk assets.  The capital guidelines apply on a consolidated basis to bank holding companies with consolidated assets of $500 million or more, and to certain bank holding companies with less than $500 million in assets if they are engaged in substantial non-banking activity or meet certain other criteria.  We did not have a minimum consolidated risk-based or leverage capital requirement at the holding company level in 2013.  Under Federal Reserve reporting requirements, a bank holding company that reaches $500 million or more in total consolidated assets as of June 30 of the preceding year must begin reporting its

---

 

consolidated capital beginning in March of the following year.  As of June 30, 2012, Sussex Bancorp’s total assets exceeded $500 million.  Therefore, the Company began reporting its consolidated capital in March of 2013.  The Dodd-Frank Act also requires depository institution holding companies with assets greater than $500 million to be subject to capital requirements at least as stringent as to those applicable to insured depository institutions, meaning, for instance, that such holding companies will no longer be able to count trust preferred securities issued on or after May 19, 2010 as Tier 1 capital.  However, the Dodd-Frank Act allows for trust preferred securities issued before May 19, 2010, by depository institution holding companies with total consolidated assets of less than $15 billion as of year-end 2009 to continue to count as Tier 1 capital.  Our trust preferred securities were issued prior to May 19, 2010.

The New Capital Rules: (i) introduce a new capital measure called “Common Equity Tier 1” (“CET1”) and related regulatory capital ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets; (ii) specify that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting certain revised requirements; (iii) mandate that most deductions/adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital; and (iv) expand the scope of the deductions from and adjustments to capital as compared to existing regulations. Under the New Capital Rules, for most banking organizations, including the Company, the most common form of Additional Tier 1 capital is non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock and the most common forms of Tier 2 capital are subordinated notes and a portion of the allocation for loan and lease losses, in each case, subject to the New Capital Rules’ specific requirements.

Pursuant to the New Capital Rules, the minimum capital ratios as of January 1, 2015 will be as follows:

The New Capital Rules also introduce a new “capital conservation buffer,” composed entirely of CET1, on top of these minimum risk-weighted asset ratios. The capital conservation buffer is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking institutions with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the capital conservation buffer will face constraints on dividends, equity and other capital instrument repurchases and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall. Thus, when fully phased-in on January 1, 2019, the capital standards applicable to the Company will include an additional capital conservation buffer of 2.5% of CET1, effectively resulting in minimum ratios inclusive of the capital conservation buffer of (i) CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%, (ii) Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.5%, and (iii) Total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 10.5%.

The New Capital Rules provide for a number of deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such items, in the aggregate, exceed 15% of CET1.

In addition, under the current general risk-based capital rules, the effects of accumulated other comprehensive income or loss (“AOCI”) items included in shareholders’ equity (for example, marks-to-market of securities held in the available-for-sale portfolio) under U.S. GAAP are reversed for the purposes of determining regulatory capital ratios. Pursuant to the New Capital Rules, the effects of certain AOCI items are not excluded; however, non-advanced approaches banking organizations, including the Company, may make a one-time permanent election to continue to exclude these items. This election must be made concurrently with the first filing of certain of the Company’s periodic regulatory reports in the beginning of 2015.

Implementation of the deductions and other adjustments to CET1 will begin on January 1, 2015 and will be phased-in over a 4-year period (beginning at 40% on January 1, 2015 and an additional 20% per year thereafter).

---

 

The implementation of the capital conservation buffer will begin on January 1, 2016 at the 0.625% level and increase by 0.625% on each subsequent January 1, until it reaches 2.5% on January 1, 2019.

The New Capital Rules prescribe a new standardized approach for risk weightings that expand the risk-weighting categories from the current four Basel I-derived categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a larger and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the assets, generally ranging from 0% for U.S. government and agency securities, to 600% for certain equity exposures, and resulting in higher risk weights for a variety of asset classes.

We believe that the Company will be able to comply with the targeted capital ratios upon implementation of the finalized requirements.  

Bank Regulation

 

As a New Jersey-chartered commercial bank, the Bank is subject to the regulation, supervision, and enforcement authority of the Department and the FDIC.  The regulations of the FDIC and the Department impact virtually all activities of the Bank, including the minimum level of capital the Bank must maintain, the ability of the Bank to pay dividends, the ability of the Bank to expand through new branches or acquisitions and various other matters, including, but not limited to, those described below.

 

Insurance of Deposits

 

The deposits of the Bank are insured up to the applicable limits by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) of the FDIC and are subject to the deposit insurance premium assessments to maintain the DIF. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, the standard deposit insurance amount has been permanently increased to $250,000.  The FDIC currently maintains a risk-based assessment system under which assessment rates vary based on the level of risk posed by the institution to the DIF.

On February 7, 2011 the FDIC announced the approval of the assessment system mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act.  Dodd-Frank required that the base on which deposit insurance assessments are charged be revised from one based on domestic deposits to one based on assets.  The FDIC’s rule to base the assessment base on average total consolidated assets minus average tangible equity instead of domestic deposits lowered assessments for many community banks with less than $10 billion in assets and reduced the Company’s costs.

The Bank’s FDIC deposit insurance assessment expenses totaled $698 thousand, $681 thousand and $700 thousand, for the years ended December 31, 2013, 2012, and 2011, respectively. FDIC insurance expense includes deposit insurance assessments and Financing Corporation (“FICO”) assessments related to outstanding FICO bonds. The FICO is a mixed-ownership government corporation established by the Competitive Equality Banking Act of 1987, whose sole purpose was to function as a financing vehicle for the now defunct Federal Savings & Loan Insurance Corporation.

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDIA”), the FDIC may terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC. The Company’s management is not aware of any practice, condition or violation that might lead to the termination of deposit insurance.

Depositor Preference

 

The FDIA provides that, in the event of the “liquidation or other resolution” of an insured depository institution, the claims of depositors of the institution, including the claims of the FDIC as subrogee of insured depositors, and certain claims for administrative expenses of the FDIC as a receiver, will have priority over other general unsecured claims against the institution. If an insured depository institution fails, insured and uninsured depositors, along with the FDIC, will have priority in payment ahead of unsecured, non-deposit creditors, including the parent bank holding company, with respect to any extensions of credit they have made to such insured depository institution.

 

Dividend Rights

 

---

 

The principal source of the Company’s liquidity is dividends from the Bank.  As a New Jersey-chartered bank, the Bank may declare and pay dividends only if, after payment of the dividend, the capital stock of the Bank will be unimpaired and either the Bank will have a surplus of not less than 50% of its capital stock or the payment of the dividend will not reduce the Bank’s surplus.

 

Federal Reserve System

Federal Reserve Board regulations require insured depository institutions to maintain non-interest-earning reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily interest-bearing and regular checking accounts). The Bank’s required reserves can be in the form of vault cash and, if vault cash does not fully satisfy the required reserves, in the form of a balance maintained with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. The Federal Reserve Board regulations currently require that reserves be maintained against aggregate transaction accounts except for transaction accounts up to $13.3 million, which are exempt. Transaction accounts greater than $13.3 million up to $89.0 million have a reserve requirement of 3%, and those greater than $89.0 million have a reserve requirement of $2.27 million plus 10% of the amount over $89.0 million. The Federal Reserve Board generally makes annual adjustments to the tiered reserves. The Bank is in compliance with these requirements.

 

Transactions with Affiliates    

 

Under federal law, transactions between insured depository institutions and their affiliates are governed by Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act (“FRA”). In a holding company context, at a minimum, the parent holding company of an insured depository institution, and any companies which are controlled by such parent holding company, are affiliates of the institution. Generally, sections 23A and 23B are intended to protect insured depository institutions from losses arising from transactions with non-insured affiliates, by limiting the extent to which a depository institution or its subsidiaries may engage in covered transactions with any one affiliate and with all affiliates of the depository institution in the aggregate, and by requiring that such transactions be on terms that are consistent with safe and sound banking practices.

 

Loans to Insiders    

 

Section 22(h) of the FRA restricts loans to directors, executive officers, and principal stockholders (“insiders”). Under Section 22(h), loans to insiders and their related interests may not exceed, together with all other outstanding loans to such persons and affiliated entities, the insured depository institution’s total capital and surplus. Loans to insiders above specified amounts must receive the prior approval of the board of directors. Further, under Section 22(h), loans to directors, executive officers and principal stockholders must be made on terms substantially the same as offered in comparable transactions to other persons, except that such insiders may receive preferential loans made under a benefit or compensation program that is widely available to the bank’s employees and does not give preference to the insider over the employees. Section 22(g) of the FRA places additional limitations on loans to executive officers.

 

Capital and Prompt Corrective Action

 

The federal banking agencies have established by regulation, for each capital measure, the levels at which an insured institution is “well-capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” or “critically undercapitalized.”  Regulations require the Bank to meet the following standards in order to be “adequately capitalized”:

 

 

 

 

The federal banking agencies are required to take prompt corrective action with respect to insured institutions that fall below the “adequately capitalized” level. For example, generally, a bank is considered “well-capitalized” if it has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6%, and a leverage

---

 

ratio of 5%, and is not subject to any written agreement, order, capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure.  As of December 31, 2013, Bank’s capital exceeded well-capitalized levels.

 

As with the Company, the Bank will be subject to the New Capital Rules on the same phase-in schedule.  We believe that the Bank similarly will be able to comply with the targeted capital ratios upon implementation of the revised requirements, as finalized

 

The New Capital Rules also revise the “prompt corrective action” (“PCA”) regulations adopted pursuant to Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), by: (i) introducing a CET1 ratio requirement at each PCA category (other than critically undercapitalized), with the required CET1 ratio being 6.5% for well-capitalized status; (ii) increasing the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement for each category, with the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio for well-capitalized status being 8% (as compared to the current 6%); and (iii) eliminating the current provision that provides that a bank with a composite supervisory rating of 1 may have a 3% leverage ratio and still be adequately capitalized. The New Capital Rules do not change the total risk-based capital requirement for any PCA category.

 

Anti-Money-Laundering

 

Under Title III of the USA PATRIOT Act, all financial institutions are required to take certain measures to identify their customers, prevent money laundering, monitor customer transactions and report suspicious activity to U.S. law enforcement agencies. Financial institutions also are required to respond to requests for information from federal banking agencies and law enforcement agencies. Information sharing among financial institutions for the above purposes is encouraged by an exemption granted to complying financial institutions from the privacy provisions of Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and other privacy laws. Financial institutions that hold correspondent accounts for foreign banks or provide private banking services to foreign individuals are required to take measures to avoid dealing with certain foreign individuals or entities, including foreign banks with profiles that raise money laundering concerns, and are prohibited from dealing with foreign “shell banks” and persons from jurisdictions of particular concern. The primary federal banking agencies and the Secretary of the Treasury have adopted regulations to implement several of these provisions. Financial institutions also are required to establish internal anti-money laundering programs. The effectiveness of institutions in combating money laundering activities is a factor to be considered in any application submitted by an insured depository institution under the Bank Merger Act. The Company and the Bank have in place a Bank Secrecy Act and USA PATRIOT Act compliance program and engage in very few transactions of any kind with foreign financial institutions or foreign persons.

 

Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation

The United States has imposed economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others. These are typically known as the “OFAC” rules based on their administration by the U.S. Treasury Department Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”). The OFAC-administered sanctions targeting countries take many different forms. Generally, the sanctions contain one or more of the following elements: i) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on “U.S. persons” engaging in financial transactions relating to making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and ii) a blocking of assets in which the government or specially designated nationals of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons). Blocked assets (e.g., property and bank deposits) cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious legal and reputational consequences.

 

---

 

Consumer Compliance

 

The Bank is subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect borrowers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, various state law counterparts, and the Consumer Financial Protection Act of 2010, which constitutes part of the Dodd-Frank Act and established the CFPB.

On January 10, 2013, the CFPB issued a final rule implementing the ability-to-repay and qualified mortgage (“QM”) provisions of the Truth in Lending Act, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act (the “QM Rule”).  The ability-to-repay provision requires creditors to make reasonable, good faith determinations that borrowers are able to repay their mortgages before extending the credit based on a number of factors and consideration of financial information about the borrower from reasonably reliable third-party documents. Under the Dodd-Frank Act and the QM Rule, loans meeting the definition of “qualified mortgage” are entitled to a presumption that the lender satisfied the ability-to-repay requirements.  The presumption is a conclusive presumption/safe harbor for prime loans meeting the QM requirements, and a rebuttable presumption for higher-priced/subprime loans meeting the QM requirements.  The definition of a “qualified mortgage” incorporates the statutory requirements, such as not allowing negative amortization or terms longer than 30 years. The QM Rule also adds an explicit maximum 43% debt-to-income ratio for borrowers if the loan is to meet the QM definition, though some mortgages that meet GSE, FHA and VA underwriting guidelines may, for a period not to exceed seven years, meet the QM definition without being subject to the 43% debt-to-income limits.  The QM Rule became effective January 10, 2014. 

 

Community Reinvestment

 

Under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”), the Bank has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with safe and sound banking practices, to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low-and moderate-income neighborhoods.  The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for insured depository institutions, nor does it limit an institution’s discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community, so long as such practices are consistent with the CRA.  The CRA requires that regulators, in connection with their examination of banks, assess each institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community and to take such record into account in evaluating certain applications by those banks. The Bank’s failure to comply with the provisions of the CRA could, at a minimum, result in regulatory restrictions on its activities and the activities of the Company.  

 

The Bank received a “Satisfactory” Community Reinvestment Act rating in its most recent examination.

 

Financial Privacy Laws 

 

Federal law and certain state laws currently contain client privacy protection provisions. These provisions limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to affiliated companies and non-affiliated third parties. These rules require disclosure of privacy policies to clients and, in some circumstance, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to affiliates or non-affiliated third parties by means of “opt out” or “opt in” authorizations. Pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act and certain state laws, companies are required to notify clients of security breaches resulting in unauthorized access to their personal information.

 

Incentive Compensation

 

The Dodd-Frank Act requires publicly traded companies to give shareholders a non-binding vote on executive compensation at least every three years and on so-called “golden parachute” payments in connection with approvals of mergers and acquisitions. The legislation also authorizes the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) to promulgate rules that would allow stockholders to nominate their own candidates using a company’s proxy materials. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act directs the federal banking regulators to promulgate rules requiring the reporting of incentive-based compensation and prohibiting excessive incentive-based compensation paid to executives of depository institutions and their holding companies with assets in excess of $1.0 billion, regardless of whether the company is publicly traded or not. In April 2011, the Federal Reserve Board, along with other federal banking agencies, issued a joint notice of proposed rulemaking implementing those requirements. The Dodd-Frank Act gives the SEC authority to prohibit broker discretionary voting on elections of directors, executive compensation matters and any other significant matter. 

---

 

 

Available Information

 

We file annual reports, quarterly reports, proxy statements and other documents with the SEC under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”).  The public may read and copy any materials that we file with the SEC at the SEC’s Public Reference Room at 100 F. Street, N.E., Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549.  The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.  Also, the SEC maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC.  The public can obtain any documents that we file with the SEC at www.sec.gov.

 

We maintain a website at www.sussexbank.com. Through a link to our Investor Relations section of our website, we make available, free of charge, copies of each of our filings with the SEC, including our Annual Report on Form 10-K, our Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, our Current Reports on Form 8-K, and, if applicable, any amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to the Exchange Act as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC.

 

ITEM 1A.  RISK FACTORS

 

Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual losses.    

Like all financial institutions, we maintain an allowance for loan losses to provide for loan defaults and nonperformance.  Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual losses, and future provisions for loan losses could materially and adversely affect the results of our operations.  In addition to periodic reviews by an independent loan review function, risks within the loan portfolio are analyzed on a continuous basis by management and by the Board of Directors.  A risk system, consisting of multiple-grading categories, is utilized as an analytical tool to assess risk and the appropriate level of loss reserves.  Along with the risk system, management further evaluates risk characteristics of the loan portfolio under current economic conditions and considers such factors as the financial condition of the borrowers, past and expected loan loss experience and other factors management feels deserve recognition in establishing an adequate reserve.  This risk assessment process is performed at least quarterly and any necessary adjustments are realized in the periods in which they become known.  The amount of future losses is susceptible to changes in economic, operating and other conditions, including changes in interest rates that may be beyond our control, and these losses may exceed current estimates.  State and federal regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, review our loans and allowance for loan losses and have in the past required an increase in our allowance for loan losses.  Although we believe that our allowance for loan losses is adequate to cover probable and reasonably estimated losses, we cannot assure you that we will not further increase the allowance for loan losses or that our regulators will not require us to increase this allowance.  Either of these occurrences could adversely affect our earnings.

 

If our nonperforming assets increase, our earnings will be negatively impacted.

At December 31, 2013, our non-performing assets (which consist of non-accrual loans, loans 90 days or more delinquent, non-performing troubled debt restructurings and foreclosed real estate assets) totaled $16.6 million, which was a decrease of $7.2 million or 30.2% from December 31, 2012.  However, we can give no assurance that our non-performing assets will continue to decrease and we may experience increases in non-performing assets in the future.  Our non-performing assets adversely affect our net income in various ways.  We do not record interest income on non-accrual loans or real estate owned.  We must reserve for estimated credit losses, which are established through a current period charge to the provision for loan losses, and from time to time, if appropriate, we must write down the value of properties in our other real estate owned portfolio to reflect changing market values.  Additionally, there are legal fees associated with the resolution of problem assets as well as carrying costs, including taxes, insurance and maintenance related to our other real estate owned.  Further, the resolution of non-performing assets requires the active involvement of management, potentially distracting them from the overall supervision of our operations and other income-producing activities.

Our earnings may not grow if we are unable to successfully attract core deposits and lending opportunities and exploit opportunities to generate fee-based income. 

---

 

We have experienced growth, and our future business strategy is to continue to expand.  Historically, the growth of our loans and deposits has been the principal factor in our increase in net-interest income.  In the event that we are unable to execute our business strategy of continued growth in loans and deposits, our earnings could be adversely impacted.  Our ability to continue to grow depends, in part, upon our ability to expand our market share, to successfully attract core deposits and identify loan and investment opportunities, as well as opportunities to generate fee-based income.  Our ability to manage growth successfully will also depend on whether we can continue to efficiently fund asset growth and maintain asset quality and cost controls, as well as on factors beyond our control, such as economic conditions and interest-rate trends. 

We do not have any control over the commissions our insurance business expects to earn on the sale of insurance products, which are based on premiums and commission rates set by insurers and the conditions prevalent in the insurance market.

The revenues of our fee-based insurance business are derived primarily from commissions from the sale of insurance policies, which commissions are generally calculated as a percentage of the policy premium.  Commission rates and premiums can change based on the prevailing economic and competitive factors that affect insurance underwriters.  In addition, the insurance industry has been characterized by periods of intense price competition due to excessive underwriting capacity and periods of favorable premium levels due to shortages of capacity. We cannot predict the timing or extent of future changes in commission rates or premiums or the effect any of these changes will have on the operations of our insurance business.

Changes in interest rates could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.    

Our profitability, like that of most financial institutions, depends substantially on our net interest income, which is the difference between the interest income earned on our interest-earning assets and the interest expense paid on our interest-bearing liabilities.  Increases in interest rates may decrease loan demand and make it more difficult for borrowers to repay adjustable rate loans.  In addition, as market interest rates rise, we will have competitive pressures to increase the rates we pay on deposits, which will result in a decrease of our net interest income.

 

We also are subject to reinvestment risk associated with changes in interest rates.  Changes in interest rates may affect the average life of loans and mortgage-related securities.  Decreases in interest rates can result in increased prepayments of loans and mortgage-related securities as borrowers refinance to reduce borrowing costs.  Under these circumstances, we are subject to reinvestment risk to the extent that we are unable to reinvest the cash received from such prepayments at rates that are comparable to the rates on existing loans and securities.

 

Certain of our intangible assets may become impaired in the future.

 

Intangible assets are tested for impairment on a periodic basis. Impairment testing incorporates the current market price of our common stock, the estimated fair value of our assets and liabilities, and certain information of similar companies. It is possible that future impairment testing could result in a decline in value of our intangibles, which may be less than the carrying value, which may adversely affect our financial condition.  If we determine that impairment exists at a given point in time, our earnings and the book value of the related intangibles will be reduced by the amount of the impairment. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the results of impairment testing on our intangible assets have no impact on our tangible book value or regulatory capital levels.

We are subject to extensive government regulation and supervision.

We are subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision.  Banking regulations are primarily intended to protect depositors’ funds, federal deposit insurance funds, consumers and the banking system as a whole, not shareholders.  These regulations affect our lending practices, capital structure, investment practices, dividend policy and growth, among other things. Congress, the State of New Jersey and federal regulatory agencies continually review banking and insurance laws, regulations and policies for areas warranting changes.  Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations or policies, could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways.  Such changes could subject us to additional costs, limit the types of financial services and products we may offer and/or increase the ability of non-banks to offer competing financial services and products, among other things.  Failure to comply with laws, regulations or policies could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties, private lawsuits, and/or reputation damage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and

---

 

results of operations.  While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent any such violations, there can be no assurance that such violations will not occur. See the section captioned “Regulation and Supervision” in Item 1. Business, which is located elsewhere in this report.

Compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act will alter the regulatory regime to which we are subject, and may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our business.

On July 21, 2010, President Obama signed the Dodd-Frank Act into law. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a significant overhaul of many aspects of the regulation of the financial-services industry. Among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act created a new federal CFPB, tightened capital standards, imposed clearing and margining requirements on many derivatives activities, and generally increased oversight and regulation of financial institutions and financial activities.

The CFPB began operations on July 21, 2011. It has broad authority to write regulations regarding consumer financial products and services. These regulations will apply to numerous types of entities, including insured depository institutions, such as the Bank, and mortgage servicing providers. It is impossible to predict at this time the content or number of such regulations.

The Dodd-Frank Act also requires depository institution holding companies with assets greater than $500 million to be subject to capital requirements at least as stringent as to those applicable to insured depository institutions, meaning, for instance, that such holding companies will no longer be able to count trust preferred securities issued on or after May 19, 2010 as Tier 1 capital.  However, the Dodd-Frank Act allows for trust preferred securities issued before May 19, 2010, by depository institution holding companies with total consolidated assets of less than $15 billion as of year-end 2009 to continue to count as Tier 1 capital if the securities qualified as Tier 1 capital on that date for the remaining life of the security.  Our trust preferred securities were issued prior to May 19, 2010. 

In addition to the self-implementing provisions of the statute, the Dodd-Frank Act calls for over 200 administrative rulemakings by various federal agencies to implement various parts of the legislation.  While some rules have been finalized and/or issued in proposed form, many have yet to be proposed.  It is impossible to predict when all such additional rules will be issued or finalized, and what the content of such rules will be. We will have to apply resources to ensure that we are in compliance with all applicable provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and any implementing rules, which may increase our costs of operations and adversely impact our earnings.

The Dodd-Frank Act and any implementing rules that are ultimately issued could have adverse implications on the financial industry, the competitive environment, and our ability to conduct business.

We cannot predict the effect on our operations of any future legislative or regulatory initiatives. 

We cannot predict what, if any, additional legislative or regulatory initiatives any governmental entity may undertake in the future, and what, if any, effects such initiatives may have on our operations.  The U.S. federal, state and foreign governments have taken or are considering extraordinary actions in an attempt to ameliorate the worldwide financial crisis and the severe decline in the global economy, and to make further reforms to the U.S. financial services system. Further, there can be no assurance that any initiative enacted or adopted in response to the ongoing economic crisis will be effective at dealing with the ongoing economic crisis and improving economic conditions globally, nationally or in our markets, or that any such initiative will not have adverse consequences to us.

There is a risk that we may not be repaid in a timely manner, or at all, for loans we make.    

The risk of non-payment (or deferred or delayed payment) of loans is inherent in commercial banking.  Such non-payment, or delayed or deferred payment of loans to us, if they occur, may have a material adverse effect on our earnings and overall financial condition.  Additionally, in compliance with applicable banking laws and regulations, we maintain an allowance for loan losses created through charges against earnings.  As of December 31, 2013, our allowance for loan losses was $5.4 million.  Our marketing focus on small to medium-size businesses may result in the assumption by us of certain lending risks that are different from or greater than those which would apply to loans made to larger companies.  We seek to minimize our credit risk exposure through credit controls,

---

 

which include evaluation of potential borrowers’ available collateral, liquidity and cash flow.  However, there can be no assurance that such procedures will actually reduce loan losses.

We are in competition with many other financial service providers, including larger commercial banks which have greater resources than us.    

The banking industry within our trade area is highly competitive.  Our principal market area is also served by branch offices of large commercial banks and thrift institutions.  In addition, in 1999, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Financial Modernization Act of 1999 was passed into law.  The Modernization Act permits other financial entities, such as insurance companies and securities firms, to acquire or form financial institutions, thereby further increasing competition.  A number of our competitors have substantially greater resources than we do to expend upon advertising and marketing, and their substantially greater capitalization enables them to make much larger loans.  Our success depends upon our ability to serve small business clients in a more responsive manner than the large and mid-size financial institutions against whom we compete in our principal market area. In addition to competition from larger institutions, we also face competition for individuals and small businesses from recently formed banks seeking to compete as “home town” institutions.  Most of these new institutions have focused their marketing efforts on the smaller end of the small business market we serve.

The laws that regulate our operations are designed for the protection of depositors and the public, but not our shareholders.    

The federal and state laws and regulations applicable to our operations give regulatory authorities extensive discretion in connection with their supervisory and enforcement responsibilities and generally have been promulgated to protect depositors and the deposit insurance funds and to foster economic growth and not for the purpose of protecting stockholders.  These laws and regulations can materially affect our future business.  Laws and regulations now affecting us may be changed at any time, and the interpretation of such laws and regulations by bank regulatory authorities is also subject to change.  We can give no assurance that future changes in laws and regulations or changes in their interpretation will not adversely affect our business.

We depend on our executive officers and key personnel to continue the implementation of our long-term business strategy and could be harmed by the loss of their services.    

 

We believe that our continued growth and future success will depend in large part upon the skills of our management team.  The competition for qualified personnel in the financial services industry is intense, and the loss of our key personnel or an inability to continue to attract, retain and motivate key personnel could adversely affect our business.  We cannot assure you that we will be able to retain our existing key personnel or attract additional qualified personnel.  We have employment agreements with our Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Lending Officer, Chief Retail Officer and Chief Executive Officer of Tri-State Insurance Agency, and the loss of the services of one or more of our executive officers and key personnel could impair our ability to continue to develop our business strategy. 

Changes in local economic conditions could adversely affect our loan portfolio.    

Our success depends to a great extent upon the general economic conditions of the local markets that we serve.  Unlike larger banks that are more geographically diversified, we provide banking and financial services primarily to customers in the New Jersey and New York markets in which we have branches, so any decline in the economy of this specific region could have an adverse impact on us.

The ability of our borrowers to repay their loans, our financial results, the credit quality of our existing loan portfolio, and the ability to generate new loans with acceptable yield and credit characteristics may be adversely affected by changes in prevailing economic conditions, including declines in real estate values, changes in interest rates, adverse employment conditions and the monetary and fiscal policies of the federal government.  We cannot assure you that negative trends or developments would not have a significant adverse effect on us.

The nationwide recession may adversely affect our business by reducing real estate values in our trade area and stressing the ability of our customers to repay their loans. 

---

 

Our trade area, like the rest of the United States, is currently experiencing economic contraction. As a result, many companies have experienced reduced revenues and have laid off employees. These factors have stressed the ability on both commercial and consumer customers to repay their loans, and have, and may in the future continue to, result in higher levels of non-accrual loans.  In addition, real estate values have declined in our trade area. Since the majority of our loans are secured by real estate, declines in the market value of real estate impact the value of the collateral securing our loans, and could lead to greater losses in the event of defaults on loans secured by real estate.

We cannot predict how changes in technology will impact our business.    

The financial services market, including banking services, is increasingly affected by advances in technology, including developments in: telecommunications; data processing; automation; internet-based banking; telephone banking; and debit cards and so-called “smart cards.”

 

Our ability to compete successfully in the future will depend on whether we can anticipate and respond to technological changes.  To develop these and other new technologies, we will likely have to make additional capital investments.  Although we continually invest in new technology, we cannot assure you that we will have sufficient resources or access to the necessary proprietary technology to remain competitive in the future.

Our information systems may experience an interruption or breach in security. 

We rely heavily on communications and information systems to conduct our business.  Any failure, interruption or breach in security of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in our customer-relationship management, general ledger, deposit, loan and other systems.  While we have policies and procedures designed to prevent or limit the effect of the failure, interruption or security breach of our information systems, there can be no assurance that any such failures, interruptions or security breaches will not occur; or, if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed.  The occurrence of any failures, interruptions or security breaches of our information systems could damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business, subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny or expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability; any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

ITEM 1B.  UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS

 

Not applicable.

 

---

 

ITEM 2.  PROPERTIES

We conduct our business through our main office located at 399 Route 23, Franklin, New Jersey, our regional office and corporate center in Rockaway, New Jersey, our loan production and insurance agency satellite office in Rochelle Park, New Jersey and our nine branch offices.  The following table sets forth certain information regarding our properties as of December 31, 2013.  We believe that our existing facilities are sufficient for our current needs. All properties are adequately covered by insurance.

 

 

ITEM 3.  LEGAL PROCEEDINGS

 

We are periodically involved in various legal proceedings as a normal incident to our business.  In the opinion of management no material loss is expected from any such pending lawsuit. 

 

ITEM 4.  MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES

 

Not applicable. 

---

 

PART II

 

ITEM 5.  MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES

Market Information

Our common stock trades on the NASDAQ Global Market, under the symbol “SBBX.”  As of December 31, 2013, we had approximately  611 holders of record.

The following table shows the high and low sales price during the periods indicated, as well as dividends declared:

 

Dividend Policy

The payment of dividends depends upon our debt and equity structure, earnings, financial condition, need for capital in connection with possible future acquisitions and other factors, including economic conditions, regulatory restrictions and tax considerations. We cannot guarantee the payment of dividends.

The only funds available for the payment of dividends on our capital stock will be cash and cash equivalents held by us, dividends paid to us by the Bank, and borrowings.  The Bank is prohibited from paying cash dividends to us to the extent that any such payment would reduce the Bank’s capital below required capital levels.  See “Bank Holding Company Regulation – Capital Adequacy Guidelines for Bank Holding Companies” and “Bank Regulation” for a discussion of these restrictions. For additional information see Note 19 in our consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this report.

Recent Sales of Unregistered Securities

There were no sales by us of unregistered securities during the year ended December 31, 2013. 

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

 

There were no purchases made by or on behalf of us of our common stock during the fourth quarter of 2013.

---

 

ITEM 6.  SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA

 

The following selected financial data as of December 31 for each of the five years should be read in conjunction with our audited consolidated financial statements and the accompanying notes.

 

 

 

---

 

ITEM 7.  MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS

 

Overview

 

We are a bank holding company of a community bank primarily operating in northern New Jersey and New York that provides diversified financial services to both consumer and business customers.  Our primary source of revenues, approximately 70%, is derived from net interest income which represents the difference between the interest we earn on our assets, principally loans and investment securities, and interest we pay on our deposits and borrowings.  Net interest income expressed as a percentage of average interest-earning assets is referred to as net interest margin.  Our net interest margin is directly impacted by the market interest rate environment. Our net interest margin was adversely impacted during the year ended December 31, 2013, as interest rates remained at historically low levels.  The impact resulted in interest earning asset yields declining faster than interest bearing deposits rates, which reduced our net interest margin by 11 basis points to 3.41% for the year ended 2013 compared to 3.52% for the year ended 2012.

 

We augment our primary revenue source through non-interest income sources that include insurance commissions from our wholly owned subsidiary, Tri-State Insurance Agency, Inc. (“Tri-State”), service charges on deposits, bank-owned life insurance (“BOLI”) income and commissions on mutual funds and annuities.  In addition, we from time to time may recognize income on gains on sales of securities; however, we do not consider this a primary source of income.

 

For 2013, the United States economy remained relatively weak as unemployment levels were still elevated and real estate markets continued to be adversely impacted.  Real estate is typically the main form of collateral for community bank lending.  We have also been affected by the weakened economy and the deterioration in the real estate market, which is reflected in the credit quality of our loan portfolio. We also experienced a significant increase in credit related costs in prior years.   

 

We made significant progress in 2013 towards reducing our problem assets, which was one of our primary goals.  For 2013, we had a 30.2% improvement in non-performing assets (“NPAs”) and our total problem assets, which consists of foreclosed real estate and criticized and classified loans, declined by 22.3% as compared to 2012.  In addition, the ratio of NPAs to total assets improved to 3.1% at December 31, 2013 from 4.6% at December 31, 2012. 

 

For 2013, our net income increased to $1.4 million, or $0.37 per diluted share as compared to $735 thousand, or $0.22 per diluted share, for the year ended December 31, 2012.  Our operating results for 2013 were positively impacted by decreasing levels of credit quality costs (loan collection costs, expenses and write-downs related to foreclosed real estate and provision for loan losses), which decreased $2.5 million compared to 2012. 

 

Total loans receivable, net of unearned income, increased $44.7 million, or 12.8%, to $392.4 million at December 31, 2013, from $347.7 million at year-end 2012.  This increase was primarily attributed to growth  in the commercial loan portfolio.  Our total deposits decreased $2.1 million, or 0.5%, to $430.3 million at December 31, 2013, from $432.4 million at December 31, 2012.  The decrease in deposits was due to a decline in interest bearing deposits of $12.0 million, or 3.1%, partially offset by an increase in non-interest bearing deposits of $9.8 million, or 20.3%, for December 31, 2013, as compared to December 31, 2012.    

 

At December 31, 2013, our total stockholders’ equity was $46.4 million, an increase of $6.1 million when compared to December 31, 2012.  The increase was largely due to an increase in capital due to the successful completion of a rights offering in the third quarter, which was partially offset by a decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income relating to net unrealized losses on available for sale securities.  At December 31, 2013, the leverage, Tier I risk-based capital and total risk-based capital ratios for the Bank were 10.38%, 14.21% and 15.47%, respectively, all in excess of the ratios required to be deemed “well-capitalized.”

---

 

Management Strategy

 

Our goal is to serve as a community-oriented financial institution serving northern New Jersey and the Orange County, New York marketplace.  While offering traditional community bank loan and deposit products and services, we obtain significant non-interest income through Tri-State’s insurance brokerage operations.  We report the operations of Tri-State as a separate segment from our commercial banking operations. See Note 2 to our consolidated financial statements contained elsewhere in this report for additional information regarding our two segments.

 

Critical Accounting Policies

 

Our accounting policies are fundamental to understanding Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.  Our accounting policies are more fully described in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report.  The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) requires management to make estimates and assumptions about future events that affect the amounts reported in our consolidated financial statements and accompanying notes.  Since future events and their effect cannot be determined with absolute certainty, actual results may differ from those estimates.  Management makes adjustments to its assumptions and judgments when facts and circumstances dictate.  The amounts currently estimated by us are subject to change if different assumptions as to the outcome of future events are subsequently made.  We evaluate our estimates and judgments on historical experience and on various other factors that are believed to be reasonable under the circumstances.  Management believes the following critical accounting policies encompass the more significant judgments and estimates used in preparation of our consolidated financial statements.

 

Allowance for Loan Losses.  The allowance for loan losses reflects the amount deemed appropriate by management to provide for known and inherent losses in the existing loan portfolio.  Management’s judgment is based on the evaluation of the past loss experience of individual loans, the assessment of current economic conditions, and other relevant factors.  Loan losses are charged directly against the allowance for loan losses and recoveries on previously charged-off loans are added to the allowance.  Management uses significant estimates to determine the allowance for loan losses.  Consideration is given to a variety of factors in establishing these estimates; including current economic conditions, diversification of the loan portfolio, delinquency statistics, borrowers’ perceived financial and managerial strengths, the adequacy of underlying collateral, if collateral dependent, or present value of future cash flows, and other relevant factors.  Since the sufficiency of the allowance for loan losses is dependent to a great extent on conditions that may be beyond our control, it is possible that management’s estimates of the allowance for loan losses and actual results could differ in the near term.  Although we believe that we use the best information available to establish the allowance for loan losses, future additions to the allowance may be necessary if certain future events occur that cause actual results to differ from the assumptions used in making the evaluation.  For example, a downturn in the local economy could cause increases in non-performing loans.  Additionally, a decline in real estate values could cause some of our loans to become inadequately collateralized.  In either case, this may require us to increase our provisions for loan losses, which would negatively impact earnings.  Additionally, a large loss could deplete the allowance and require increased provisions to replenish the allowance, which would negatively impact earnings.  Finally, regulatory authorities, as an integral part of their examination, periodically review the allowance for loan losses.  They may require additions to the allowance for loan losses based upon their judgments about information available to them at the time of examination.  Future increases to our allowance for loan losses, whether due to unexpected changes in economic conditions or otherwise, could adversely affect our future results of operations.

 

Appraisal Policy.    We have a detailed policy covering the real estate appraisal process, including the selection of qualified appraisers, review of appraisal reports upon receipt, and complying with the federal regulatory standards that govern the minimum requirements for obtaining appraisals or evaluations to support the determination of the allowance for loan losses. Appraisals and evaluations are considered to be current when the valuation date is within 12 months of a new loan or 24 months of any renewal of an existing loan, provided that certain conditions are met.  The appraisal is not considered to be current if there has been a substantial change in value, demand, supply or competitive factors.

 

The following types of transactions require a real estate appraisal:

---

 

The need for real estate appraisals applies to initial loan underwriting and subsequently when the value of the real estate collateral might be materially affected by changing market conditions, changes in the occupancy of the property, changes in cash flow generated by the property, changes in the physical conditions of the property, or other factors.  These factors include changes in the sales prices of comparable properties, absorption rates, capitalization rates, effective rental rates and current construction costs.

 

Real estate appraisals are not required for the following transactions: 

While real estate appraisals are not required for transactions of $250,000 or less, we will consider obtaining one if the orderly liquidation of the collateral is the primary source of repayment.  To the extent that an appraisal is not required for a real estate collateralized transaction, we will obtain for its credit files another acceptable form of valuation, i.e. equalized value with a reasonable market relevance or evaluation.

 

Additionally, real estate appraisals are not required on transactions over $250,000 when taking a lien on real property as collateral solely through an “abundance of caution,” and where the terms of the transaction have not been made more favorable than would have been in the absence of the mortgage lien.  In determining whether an appraisal can be waived due to this reason, approval must be obtained from our Chief Credit Officer.

 

Generally, we obtain updated appraisals for real estate loan renewals and modifications or certain classified loans depending on the age of the last appraisal, volatility of the local market, and other factors. In certain circumstances, if we can support an appraisal that is greater than one year old with an evaluation, utilizing current information, including, but not limited to, current comparable sales, independent appraisal, consultant data or tax assessment values, then we may continue to use the existing appraisal. For classified/criticized loans, when it is determined that a deficiency exists utilizing the above evaluation methods, a new appraisal will be ordered. 

 

Stock Compensation Plans.    We currently have a stock plan in place for our employees and directors.  We account for stock-based compensation under the accounting guidance of Financial Accounting Standards Board (“FASB”) Accounting Standards Codification (“ASC”) 718, Compensation-Stock Compensation, which requires that the compensation cost relating to share-based payment transactions be recognized in financial statements.  Several critical estimates are required to be made to determine the stock compensation.  The stock compensation accounting guidance requires that compensation cost for all stock awards be calculated and recognized over predefined vesting periods.

 

Income Taxes.  Management considers accounting for income taxes as a critical accounting policy due to the subjective nature of certain estimates that are involved in the calculation and evaluation of the timing and

---

 

recognition of resulting tax assets and liabilities.  Management uses the asset liability method of accounting for income taxes in which deferred tax assets and liabilities are established for the temporary differences between the financial reporting basis and the tax basis of our assets and liabilities.  Deferred tax expense is the result of changes between deferred tax assets and liabilities.  The principal types of differences between assets and liabilities for financial statement and tax return purposes are allowance for loan losses, deferred compensation and securities available for sale. Significant estimation is required to determine if a valuation allowance for deferred tax assets is required.

 

Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.    We have recorded goodwill of $2.8 million at December 31, 2013, primarily related to the acquisition of Tri-State in October of 2001.  FASB ASC 350, Intangibles-Goodwill and Others, requires that goodwill is not amortized to expense, but rather be tested for impairment at least annually.  We periodically assess whether events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amounts of goodwill require additional impairment testing.  We perform our annual impairment test on the goodwill of Tri-State in the fourth quarter of each calendar year.  If the fair value of the reporting unit exceeds the book value, no write-downs of goodwill are necessary.  If the fair value is less than the book value, an additional test is necessary to assess the proper carrying value of goodwill.  We determined that no impairment write-offs were necessary during 2013 and 2012.

 

Reporting unit valuation is inherently subjective, with a number of factors based on assumptions and management judgments.  Among these are future growth rates, discount rates and earnings capitalization rates.  Changes in assumptions and results due to economic conditions, industry factors and reporting unit performance could result in different assessments of the fair value and could result in impairment charges in the future.

 

Investment Securities Impairment Evaluation.    The Company periodically evaluates the security portfolio to determine if a decline in the fair value of any security below its cost basis is other-than-temporary.  The Company’s evaluation of other-than-temporary impairment considers the duration and severity of the impairment, the company’s intent and ability to hold the securities and our assessments of the reason for the decline in value and the likelihood of a near-term recovery.  If a determination is made that a debt security is other-than-temporarily impaired, the Company will estimate the amount of the unrealized loss that is attributable to credit and all other non-credit related factors.  The credit related component will be recognized as an other-than-temporary impairment charge in non-interest income.  The non-credit related component will be recorded as an adjustment to accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax. For held to maturity securities, the amount of an other-than-temporary impairment recorded in other comprehensive income for the noncredit portion of a previous other-than-temporary impairment should be amortized prospectively over the remaining life of the security on the basis of the timing of future estimated cash flows of the security.  No available for sale and held to maturity securities at December 31, 2013 or December 31, 2012 were deemed to be impaired. 

 

COMPARISON OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AT YEAR-END DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012

 

General.  At December 31, 2013, we had total assets of $533.9 million compared to total assets of $514.7 million at December 31, 2012, an increase of $19.2 million, or 3.7%. Gross loans increased $44.7 million, or 12.8%, to $392.4 million at December 31, 2013, from $347.7  million at December 31, 2012.  Total deposits decreased 0.5% to $430.3 million at December 31, 2013, from $432.4 million at December 31, 2012.

 

Cash and Cash Equivalents.    Our cash and cash equivalents increased $1.6 million, or 13.5%, at December 31, 2013 to $13.2 million from $11.7 million at December 31, 2012.  This increase was predominantly due to sales and maturities in our available for sale securities portfolio.

 

Securities Portfolio.  Our securities portfolio is designed to provide interest income, including tax-exempt income, and also provide a source of liquidity, diversify the earning assets portfolio, allow for management of interest rate risk, and provide collateral for public fund deposits and borrowings.  Securities are classified as either, available for sale or held to maturity.  The portfolio is composed primarily of obligations of U.S. government agencies and government sponsored entities, including collateralized mortgage obligations issued by such agencies and entities, and tax-exempt municipal bonds.

 

We periodically conduct reviews to evaluate whether unrealized losses on our investment securities portfolio are deemed temporary or whether an other-than-temporary impairment has occurred.  Various inputs to economic models are used to determine if an unrealized loss is other-than-temporary.  All of our debt and equity securities in an unrealized loss position have been evaluated as of December 31, 2013, and we do not consider any security to be other-than-temporarily impaired.  We evaluated the prospects of the issuers in relation to the severity

---

 

and the duration of the unrealized losses.  Our securities in unrealized loss positions are mostly driven by wider credit spreads and changes in interest rates.  Based on that evaluation we do not intend to sell any security in an unrealized loss position, and it is more likely than not that we will not have to sell any of our securities before recovery of its cost basis. 

 

Our available for sale securities are carried at fair value while securities held to maturity are carried at cost, adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts.  Unrealized gains and losses on securities available for sale are excluded from results of operations, and are reported as a separate component of stockholders’ equity net of taxes.  Securities classified as available for sale include securities that may be sold in response to changes in interest rates, changes in prepayment risk, the need to increase regulatory capital or other similar requirements. Management determines the appropriate classification of securities at the time of purchase. 

 

The following table shows the carrying value of our available for sale security portfolio as of December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. 

 

 

Our securities, available for sale, decreased by $28.2 million, or 23.7%, to $90.7 million at December 31, 2013 from $118.9 million at December 31, 2012.  During 2013 we purchased $32.4 million in new securities, $15.1 million in securities were sold and $38.7 million in securities matured, were called or were repaid.  There was a $4.2 million decrease in the fair value of the available for sale portfolio resulting in a net unrealized loss position at December 31, 2013 and a $393 thousand net realized gain on the sale of available for sale securities. 

 

We had $6.1 million of our security portfolio classified as held to maturity at December 31, 2013, an increase of $853 thousand from December 31, 2012.  Held to maturity securities, carried at amortized cost, consist of the following at December 31, 2013, 2012 and 2011. 

 

 

The securities portfolio contained no high-risk securities or derivatives as of December 31, 2013.

 

---

 

The contractual maturity distribution and weighted average yield of our available for sale securities, except our equity securities, at December 31, 2013, are summarized in the following table.  Securities available for sale are carried at amortized cost in the table for purposes of calculating the weighted average yield received on such securities.  Weighted average yield is calculated by dividing income within each maturity range by the outstanding amount of the related investment and has not been tax-effected on the tax-exempt obligations.

 

 

The contractual maturity distribution and weighted average yield of our securities held to maturity, at cost, at December 31, 2013, are summarized in the following table.  Weighted average yield is calculated by dividing income within each maturity range by the outstanding amount of the related investment and has not been tax-effected on the tax-exempt obligations.

 

 

 

We held $2.7 million in Federal Home Loan Bank of New York (FHLBNY) stock at December 31, 2013 that we do not consider an investment security.  Ownership of this restricted stock is required for membership in the FHLBNY. 

 

Loans.    The loan portfolio comprises the largest component of our earning assets.  Total loans receivable, net of unearned income, at December 31, 2013, increased $44.7 million, or 12.8%, to $392.4 million from $347.7 million at December 31, 2012.  During the year ended December 31, 2013, new originations have exceeded payoffs both through scheduled maturities and prepayments. Loan growth for 2013 occurred in commercial real estate loans (an increase of $35.3 million, or 15.7%) and residential real estate loans (an increase of $9.7 million, or 9.9%).  These increases were partially offset by a decline in commercial and industrial loans (a decrease of $1.0 million, or 5.9%).   

 

The following table summarizes the composition of our loan portfolio by type as of December 31, 2009 through 2013:

 

 

The increase in loans was funded during 2013 by an increase in our borrowings and securities repayments.

---

 

The maturity ranges of the loan portfolio and the amounts of loans with predetermined interest rates and floating rates in each maturity range, as of December 31, 2013, are presented in the following table.

Loan and Asset Quality.    Non-performing assets consist of non-accrual loans, loans over ninety days delinquent and still accruing interest, troubled debt restructured loans still accruing and foreclosed real estate.  Total non-performing assets decreased by $7.2 million, or 30.2%, to $16.6 million at year-end 2013 from $23.8 million at year-end 2012. The ratio of non-performing assets to total assets for December 31, 2013 and December 31, 2012 were 3.1% and 4.6%, respectively.

Our non-accrual loan balance decreased $6.0 million, or 33.4%, to $11.9 million at December 31, 2013, from $17.9 million at December 31, 2012.  Troubled debt restructured loans still accruing increased $1.0 million to $1.6 million at December 31, 2013, from $608 thousand at December 31, 2012.  Foreclosed assets decreased $2.1 million to $2.9 million at December 31, 2013, from $5.1 million at December 31, 2012.

Management continues to monitor our asset quality and believes that the non-accrual loans are adequately collateralized and anticipated material losses have been adequately reserved for in the allowance for loan losses.

The following table provides information regarding risk elements in the loan and securities portfolio as of December 31, 2009 through 2013.

 

In addition to monitoring non-performing loans we continue to monitor our portfolio for potential problem loans. Potential problem loans are defined as loans which cause management to have serious concerns as to the

---

 

ability of such borrowers to comply with the present loan repayment terms and which may cause the loan to be placed on non-accrual status. As of December 31, 2013,  we had  six loans totaling $2.0 million that we deemed potential problem loans. Management is actively monitoring these loans.

 

Future increases in the allowance for loan losses may be necessary based on the growth of the loan portfolio, the change in composition of the loan portfolio, possible future increases in non-performing loans and charge-offs, and the impact of deterioration of the real estate and economic environments in our lending region. Although we use the best information available, the level of allowance for loan losses remains an estimate that is subject to significant judgment and short-term change. For additional information, see Critical Accounting Policies above and as more fully described in Note 1 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this report.

 

Allowance for Loan Losses.    The allowance for loan losses consists of general and specific components.  The specific component relates to loans that are classified as impaired.  For those loans that are classified as impaired, an allowance is established when the discounted cash flows, collateral value or observable market price of the impaired loan is lower than the carrying value of that loan. The general component covers all other loans and is based on historical loss experience adjusted for qualitative factors.  Other adjustments may be made to the allowance for pools of loans after an assessment of internal or external influences on credit quality that are not fully reflected in the historical loss or risk rating data. 

Management regularly assesses the appropriateness and adequacy of the loan loss reserve in relation to credit exposure associated with individual borrowers, overall trends in the loan portfolio and other relevant factors, and believes the reserve is reasonable and adequate for each of the periods presented.

At December 31, 2013, the allowance for loan losses was $5.4 million, an increase of $445 thousand, or 8.9%, from $5.0 million at December 31, 2012.  The provision for loan losses was $2.7 million and there were $3.0 million in charge-offs and $696 thousand in recoveries during 2013.  The allowance for loan losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.38% at December 31, 2013 compared to 1.43% on December 31, 2012. 

The table below presents information regarding our provision and allowance for loan losses for each of the periods presented.

 

The table below presents details concerning the allocation of the allowance for loan losses to the various categories for each of the periods presented.  The allocation is made for analytical purposes and it is not necessarily

---

 

indicative of the categories in which future credit losses may occur.  The total allowance is available to absorb losses from any category of loans.

 

 

 

 

Premises and Equipment.    Net premises and equipment increased by $416 thousand, or 6.4%, from $6.5 million at December 31, 2012 to $6.9 million at December 31, 2013 primarily from the effect of depreciation. 

 

Bank-owned Life Insurance (BOLI).    Our BOLI carrying value increased to $11.9 million at December 31, 2013 from $11.5 million at December 31, 2012.  The increase was principally the result of $353 thousand in net earnings on bank owned life insurance policies in 2013.  

 

Deposits.    Total deposits decreased $2.1 million, or 0.5%, to $430.3 million at December 31, 2013, from $432.4 million at December 31, 2012.  The decrease in deposits was due to a decline in interest bearing deposits of $7.3 million, or 2.6% and a decrease in time deposits of $4.6 million, or 4.5%, which was partially offset by an increase non-interest bearing deposits of $9.8 million, or 20.3%, for December 31, 2013, as compared to December 31, 2012.  Our funding mix continued to improve as non-interest deposits increased.

 

Total average deposits increased $8.5 million from $428.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2012, to $436.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, a 2.0% increase.  Average NOW accounts increased $17.1 million, or 17.7%, from $96.4 million for 2012 to $113.5 million for 2013.  Average demand accounts increased $9.2 million, or 19.5% from $47.2 million for 2012 to $56.4 million for 2013.  Average savings accounts decreased $8.7 million or 5.4%, from $162.1 million for 2012 to $153.3 million for 2013.  Average time deposits decreased

---

 

$7.3 million, or 6.9%, from $106.4 million for 2012 to $99.0 million for 2013.  Average money market balances decreased $1.7 million, or 10.6% from $16.1 million for 2012 to $14.4 million for 2013.  Increases to average NOW accounts and demand deposits were partly offset by the aforementioned decreases in other deposit categories.

 

The average balances and weighted average rates paid on deposits for 2013,  2012 and 2011 are presented below.

 

 

 

The remaining maturity for certificates of deposit accounts of $100,000 or more as of December 31, 2013 is presented in the following table.

 

 

 

Borrowings.    Borrowings may consist of short and long-term advances from the FHLBNY and a line of credit at Atlantic Central Bankers Bank.  The FHLBNY advances are secured under terms of a blanket collateral agreement by a pledge of qualifying residential and commercial mortgage loans.  At December 31, 2013, we had $41.0 million in long term advances outstanding at a weighted average interest rate of 3.22%.

 

The following table summarizes short-term borrowings and weighted average interest rates paid during the past three years.

 

 

 

Junior Subordinated Debentures.    On June 28, 2007, we raised $12.9 million in capital through the issuance of junior subordinated debentures to a non-consolidated statutory trust subsidiary.  The subsidiary in turn issued $12.5 million in variable rate capital trust pass through securities to investors in a private placement.  The interest rate is based on the three-month LIBOR plus 144 basis points and adjusts quarterly.  The rate at December 31, 2013 was 1.68%.  The capital securities are currently redeemable by us at par in whole or in part.  These trust preferred securities must be redeemed upon final maturity on September 15, 2037.  The proceeds of these trust preferred securities, which have been contributed to the Bank, are included in the Bank’s capital ratio calculations and treated as Tier I capital.

 

---

 

In accordance with FASB ASC 810, Consolidation, our wholly owned subsidiary, Sussex Capital Trust II, is not included in our consolidated financial statements.  For regulatory reporting purposes, the Federal Reserve allows trust preferred securities to continue to qualify as Tier I capital subject to specified limitations.

 

Equity.  Stockholders’ equity inclusive of accumulated other comprehensive income, net of income taxes, was $46.4 million at December 31, 2013, an increase of $6.1 million, from the $40.4 million at year-end 2012. The increase in stockholders’ equity was largely due to the successful completion of a rights offering totaling $6.9 million in net proceeds and $1.4 million in net income in 2013, which was partially offset by a $2.5 million decrease in unrealized gains on securities available for sale, net of tax resulting in a net loss position at December 31, 2013.  

 

COMPARISON OF OPERATING RESULTS FOR YEAR-END DECEMBER 31, 2013 AND 2012

 

Results of Operations. Our net income is impacted by five major components and each of them is reviewed in more detail in the following discussion:

 

For the year ended December 31, 2013, the Company reported net income of $1.4 million, or $0.38 per basic share and $0.37 per diluted share, as compared to net income of $735 thousand, or $0.23 per basic and $0.22 per diluted share, for the same period last year.  The increase in net income for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily attributed to a decrease in credit quality costs of $2.5 million or 35.0%, which was partially offset by a decrease in gain on securities transactions of $1.4 million.    

 

Net Interest Income.  Net interest income is the most significant component of our income from operations. Net interest income is the difference between interest earned on total interest-earning assets (primarily loans and investment securities), on a fully taxable equivalent basis, where appropriate, and interest paid on total interest-bearing liabilities (primarily deposits and borrowed funds). Fully taxable equivalent basis represents income on total interest-earning assets that is either tax-exempt or taxed at a reduced rate, adjusted to give effect to the prevailing incremental federal tax rate, and adjusted for nondeductible carrying costs and state income taxes, where applicable. Yield calculations, where appropriate, include these adjustments. Net interest income depends on the volume and interest rate earned on interest-earning assets and the volume and interest rate paid on interest-bearing liabilities.

---

 

Comparative Average Balance and Average Interest Rates.    The following table presents, on a fully taxable equivalent basis, a summary of our interest-earning assets and their average yields, and interest-bearing liabilities and their average costs for each of the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012.  The average balances of loans include non-accrual loans, and associated yields include loan fees, which are considered adjustment to yields.

 

 

 

Net interest income on a fully tax equivalent basis increased $207 thousand, or 1.2%, to $17.0 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to $16.8 million for same period in 2012.  The increase in net interest income was largely due to an increase in average interest earning assets of $21.4 million or 4.5%, offset by the net interest margin declining 11 basis points to 3.41% for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period last year.  The increase in average interest earning assets was driven by growth in average total loans receivable of $33.0 million, offset by a decrease in average other interest earning assets of $11.7 million.  The decline in the net interest margin was mostly due to a 27 basis point decline in the average rate earned on interest earning assets.  This decline was partially offset by a decrease in the average rate paid on total interest bearing

---

 

liabilities, which decreased 15 basis points to 0.75% for the year ended December 31, 2013 from 0.90% for the same period in 2012.

 

Interest Income.    Total interest income, on a fully taxable equivalent basis, decreased $392 thousand, or 1.9%, to $20.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to $20.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2012.  The decline in interest income was largely due to decreases in average rates earned on total earning assets, which decreased 27 basis points to 4.05% in 2013 from 4.32% for 2012.  The average rates for the securities and loan portfolios declined by 63 basis points and 36 basis points, respectively, for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to the same period in 2012. 

Interest income from securities, on a fully taxable equivalent basis, decreased $734 thousand, or 25.6%, for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012.  The average rate decreased 63 basis points to 1.81% for 2013 from 2.44% for 2012.  The decline was largely attributed to 41.2% of the security portfolio either maturing, being called or principal repayments, which were mostly reinvested during a lower interest rate environment. 

Interest income from the loan portfolio increased by $361 thousand,  or 2.0%, to $18.0 million for 2013 from $17.6 million for 2012.  The increase was due to an increase in the average balance on loans, which increased $33.0 million or 9.7% for the year ended December 31, 2013 compared to the same period in 2012.

Interest Expense.    Total interest expense decreased $599 thousand, or 15.8%, to $3.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013 from $3.8 million for the same period in 2012.  The decrease was principally due to a decline in the average rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities of 15 basis points to 0.75% in 2013 compared to 0.90% in 2012.  The decline in average rates paid on interest-bearing liabilities was largely due to a decrease in rates paid on time and savings deposits of 26 and 14 basis points, respectively, for 2013 compared to 2012.   

The following table reflects the impact on net interest income from changes in the volume of earning assets and interest bearing liabilities and changes in rates earned and paid by us on such assets and liabilities.  For purposes of this table, nonaccrual loans have been included in the average loan balance.  Changes due to both volume and rate have been allocated in proportion to the relationship of the dollar amount change in each. 

 

---

 

Provision for Loan Losses.    Provision for loan losses decreased $1.6 million to $2.7 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to $4.3 million for the same period in 2012.  The decrease in the provision for loan losses for the year-ended December 31, 2013 was largely attributed to a decrease in charge-offs related to the resolution of problem loans.  The provision for loan losses reflects management review, analysis and judgment of the credit quality of the loan portfolio for 2013 and the effects of current economic environment and changes in real estate collateral values from the time the loans were originated.  Our non-accrual loans decreased $6.0 million, or 33.4%, to $11.9 million at December 31, 2013 from $17.9 million at December 31, 2012.  We believe these loans are adequately provided for in our loan loss provision or are sufficiently collateralized at December 31, 2013.  The provision for loan losses reflects management’s judgment concerning the risks inherent in our existing loan portfolio and the size of the allowance necessary to absorb the risks, as well as the activity in the allowance during the periods.  Management reviews the adequacy of its allowance on an ongoing basis and will provide additional provisions, as deemed necessary. Also see Note 6 to our consolidated financial statements and “Allowance for Loan Losses and Credit Quality of Financing Receivables” herein for further discussion.

 

Non-Interest Income.    Non-interest income consists of all income other than interest and dividend income and is principally derived from: service charges on deposits; insurance commission income; commissions on sales of annuities and mutual funds; ATM and debit card income; BOLI income; and net gains on sale of securities and loans.  We recognize the importance of supplementing net interest income with other sources of income as we continue to explore new opportunities to generate non-interest income.

 

Non-interest income decreased $908 thousand, or 13.0%, to $6.1 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to the same period last year.  The decrease in non-interest income was primarily due to a decrease in gains on securities transactions of $1.4 million, which was partially offset by an increase in insurance commissions and fees of $418 thousand, or 16.8%.

 

Non-Interest Expense.    Total non-interest expense decreased $204 thousand, or 1.1%, to $18.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2013, as compared to the same period last year.  The decrease for the year ended December 31, 2013 as compared to the same period in 2012 was largely due to decreases in expenses and write-downs related to foreclosed real estate and loan collection costs of $547 thousand and $366 thousand, respectively, and were partly offset by increases in salaries and employee benefits expense of $337 thousand, director fees of $134 thousand and other expense of $136 thousand.  The increase in director expense was principally related to a deferred compensation plan that is tied to the price of our common stock.  The price of our common stock increased 45.2% at December 31, 2013 when compared to December 31, 2012.

 

Income Taxes.  The provision and (benefit) for income taxes was $133 thousand and $(329) thousand for 2013 and 2012, respectively. Our effective tax rate was 8.5% and (81.0)% for 2013 and 2012, respectively.  The increase in income tax expense for the year ended December 31, 2013 was primarily attributable to growth in pre-tax income from taxable sources.    See Notes 1 and 16 to our consolidated financial statements for further discussion on income taxes.

 

Operational Risk

 

We are exposed to a variety of operational risks that can affect each of our business activities, particularly those involving processing and servicing of loans.  Operational risk is defined as the risk of loss resulting from inadequate or failed internal processes, people or systems from external events.  The risk of loss also includes losses that may arise from potential legal actions that could result from operational deficiencies or noncompliance with contracts, laws or regulations.  We monitor and evaluate operational risk on an ongoing basis through systems of internal control, formal corporate-wide policies and procedures, and an internal audit function.

 

Liquidity, Capital Resources and Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements

 

Liquidity.  A fundamental component of our business strategy is to manage liquidity to ensure the availability of sufficient resources to meet all financial obligations and to finance prospective business opportunities. Liquidity management is critical to our stability. Our liquidity position over any given period of time is a product of our operating, financing and investing activities. The extent of such activities is often shaped by such external factors as competition for deposits and loan demand.

 

On August 5, 2013, we completed a rights offering resulting in the issuance of 1,198,300 shares of common stock to existing shareholders. Each shareholder was granted one subscription right to purchase 0.35 share of our common stock at a subscription price of $6.00 per whole share for every share owned on the record date. The

---

 

rights offering was fully subscribed and resulted in net proceeds totaling $6.9  million, which represented gross proceeds of $7.2 million offset by offering costs of $294 thousand.

 

Traditionally, financing for our loans and investments is derived primarily from deposits, along with interest and principal payments on loans and investments.  At December 31, 2013, total deposits amounted to $430.3 million, a decrease of $2.1 million, or 0.5%, over the prior comparable year.  At December 31, 2013, advances from the FHLBNY and subordinated debentures totaled $53.9 million and represented 10.1% of total assets as compared to $38.9 million and 7.6% of total assets, at December 31, 2012. 

 

Loan production continued to be our principal investing activity. Net loans at December 31, 2013 amounted to $387.0 million, an increase of $44.2 million, or 12.9%, compared to the same period in 2012.

 

Our most liquid assets are cash and cash equivalents.  At December 31, 2013, the total of such assets amounted to $13.2 million, or 2.5%, of total assets, compared to $11.7 million, or 2.3%, of total assets at year-end 2012.  Another significant liquidity source is our available for sale securities.  At December 31, 2013, available for sale securities amounted to $90.7 million compared to $118.9 million at year-end 2012.

 

In addition to the aforementioned sources, we have available various other sources of liquidity, including federal funds purchased from other banks and the Federal Reserve discount window.  The Bank also has the capacity to borrow an additional $12.9 million through its membership in the FHLBNY and $7 million at Atlantic Central Bankers Bank at December 31, 2013.  Management believes that our sources of funds are sufficient to meet our present funding requirements.

 

Capital Resources.  The Bank’s regulators have classified and defined bank capital as consisting of Tier I capital, which includes tangible stockholders’ equity for common stock and certain preferred stock and other hybrid instruments, and Tier II capital, which includes a portion of the allowance for loan losses, certain qualifying long-term debt and preferred stock which does not qualify for Tier I capital.

 

The Bank’s regulators have implemented risk-based guidelines which require banks to maintain certain minimum capital as a percent of such assets and certain off-balance sheet items adjusted for predefined credit risk factors (risk-adjusted assets).  Banks are required to maintain Tier I capital as a percent of risk-adjusted assets of 4.0% and Tier II capital as of risk-adjusted assets of 8.0% at a minimum.  At December 31, 2013, the Bank’s Tier I and Tier II capital ratios were 14.21% and 15.47%, respectively. We also maintained $1.1 million in cash and cash equivalents, which could be contributed to the Bank as capital.

 

In addition to the risk-based guidelines discussed above, the Bank’s regulators require that banks, which meet the regulators’ highest performance and operational standards, maintain a minimum leverage ratio (Tier I capital as a percent of tangible assets) of 4.0%.  For those banks with higher levels of risk or that are experiencing or anticipating growth, the minimum will be proportionately increased.  Minimum leverage ratios for each bank and bank holding company are established and updated through the ongoing regulatory examination process.  As of December 31, 2013, the Bank had a leverage ratio of 10.38%.

 

Off-Balance Sheet Arrangements.    Our consolidated financial statements do not reflect off-balance sheet arrangements that are made in the normal course of business.  These off-balance sheet arrangements consist of unfunded loans and letters of credit made under the same standards as on-balance sheet instruments.  These unused commitments at December 31, 2013 totaled $68.9 million, which consisted of $24.1 million in commitments to grant commercial and residential loans, $43.4 million in unfunded commitments under lines of credit and $1.5 million in outstanding letters of credit.  These instruments have fixed maturity dates, and because many of them will expire without being drawn upon, they do not generally present any significant liquidity risk to us.  Management believes that any amounts actually drawn upon can be funded in the normal course of operations.

 

Market Risk

 

 Market risk is generally described as the sensitivity of income to adverse changes in interest rates, foreign currency exchange rates, commodity prices, and other relevant market rates or prices.  Market rate sensitive instruments include: financial instruments such as investments, loans, mortgage-backed securities, deposits, borrowings and other debt obligations; derivative financial instruments, such as futures, forwards, swaps and options; and derivative commodity instruments, such as commodity futures, forwards, swaps and options that are permitted to be settled in cash or another financial instrument.

 

---

 

We do not have any material exposure to foreign currency exchange rate risk or commodity price risk.  We did not enter into any market rate sensitive instruments for trading purposes nor did we engage in any trading or hedging transactions utilizing derivative financial instruments during 2013. Our real estate loan portfolio, concentrated largely in northern New Jersey, is subject to risks associated with the local and regional economies.  Our primary source of market risk exposure arises from changes in market interest rates (“interest rate risk”).

 

Interest Rate Risk

 

Interest rate risk is generally described as the exposure to potentially adverse changes in current and future net interest income resulting from: fluctuations in interest rates, product spreads, and imbalances in the repricing opportunities of interest-rate-sensitive assets and liabilities.  Therefore, managing our interest rate sensitivity is a primary objective of our senior management. Our Asset/Liability Committee (“ALCO”) is responsible for managing the exposure to changes in market interest rates.  We review a variety of strategies that project changes in asset or liability mix and the impact of those changes on projected net interest income and net income.

 

Current and future sensitivity to changes in interest rates are measured through the use of balance sheet and income simulation models. The analyses capture changes in net interest income using flat rates as a base, a most likely rate forecast and rising and declining interest rate forecasts. Changes in net interest income and net income for the forecast period, generally twelve to twenty-four months, are measured and compared to policy limits for acceptable change. There are a variety of reasons that may cause actual results to vary considerably from the predictions presented below which include, but are not limited to, the timing, magnitude, and frequency of changes in interest rates, interest rate spreads, prepayments, and actions taken in response to such changes. Specific assumptions used in the simulation model include instantaneous and permanent yield curve shifts for market rates and current asset and liability spreads to market interest rates are fixed.

 

The following table sets forth our interest rate risk profile at December 31, 2013 and 2012. The interest rate sensitivity of our assets and liabilities and the impact on net interest income illustrated in the following table would vary substantially if different assumptions were used or if actual experience differs from that indicated by the assumptions.

 

 

 

Certain shortcomings are inherent in the methodologies used in the above interest rate risk measurements. Modeling changes in net interest income requires the making of certain assumptions regarding prepayment and deposit decay rates, which may or may not reflect the manner in which actual yields and costs respond to changes in market interest rates. While management believes such assumptions are reasonable, there can be no assurance that assumed prepayment rates and decay rates will approximate actual future loan prepayment and deposit withdrawal activity. Moreover, the net interest income table presented assumes that the composition of interest sensitive assets and liabilities existing at the beginning of a period remains constant over the period being measured and also assumes that a particular change in interest rates is reflected uniformly across the yield curve regardless of the duration to maturity or repricing of specific assets and liabilities. Accordingly, although the net interest income table provides an indication of our interest rate risk exposure at a particular point in time, such measurement is not

---

 

intended to and does not provide a precise forecast of the effect of changes in market interest rates on net interest income and will differ from actual results.  Furthermore, the simulation does not reflect actions that ALCO might take in response to anticipated changes in interest rates or competitive conditions in the market place.

 

Impact of Inflation and Changing Prices

 

Unlike most industrial companies, virtually all of the assets and liabilities of a financial institution are monetary in nature.  As a result, the level of interest rates has a more significant impact on a financial institution’s performance than general levels of inflation.  Interest rates do not necessarily move in the same direction or change with the same magnitude as the price of goods and services, which are affected by inflation.  Accordingly, the liquidity, interest rate sensitivity and maturity characteristics of our assets and liabilities are more indicative of our ability to maintain acceptable performance levels.  Management monitors and seeks to mitigate the impact of interest rate changes by attempting to match the maturities of assets and liabilities, thus seeking to minimize the potential effect of inflation.

 

ITEM 7A.  QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK

 

Not Applicable.

 

 

ITEM 8.FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA

 

Our consolidated financial statements and related notes thereto may be found on pages F-1 through F-35 of this report.

 

 

ITEM 9.  CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE

 

None.

 

 

ITEM  9A.  CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES

 

Evaluation of Disclosure Controls and Procedures

 

Management, including our President and Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, has evaluated the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) as of the end of the period covered by this report.  Based upon that evaluation, our Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the disclosure controls and procedures were effective to ensure that information required to be disclosed in the reports we file and submit under the Exchange Act (i) is recorded, processed, summarized and reported as and when required and (ii) accumulated and communicated to our management including the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, as appropriate to allow timely discussion regarding required disclosure.

 

There have been no changes in our internal control over financial reporting identified in connection with the evaluation that occurred during our last fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or that is reasonably likely to materially affect, our internal control over financial reporting.

 

 

---

 

Report on Internal Control over Financial Reporting

 

Management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting as defined in Rule 13A-15 (f) and 15d-15 (f) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934. Our internal control system was designed to provide reasonable assurance to our management and Board of Directors as to the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with GAAP. Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements, errors or fraud. Also, projections of any evaluations of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.

 

Management assessed the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting as of December 31, 2013. In making this assessment, management used criteria set forth in 1992 by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (COSO) in Internal Control-Integrated Framework. Based on this assessment, management concluded that as of December 31, 2013, our internal control over financial reporting is operating as designed and is effective based on the COSO criteria.  Currently, our independent public accounting firm is not required to audit our internal control over financial reporting and therefore do not offer an opinion on its effectiveness.

 

ITEM  9B.  OTHER INFORMATION

 

None.

 

 

---

 

PART III

 

ITEM 10.  DIRECTORS AND EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE

 

The information included in our Definitive Proxy Statement for the 2014 Annual Meeting of Shareholders (the “Proxy Statement”) under the following captions is incorporated herein by reference: “Proposal 1: Election of Directors,” “Information About Our Board of Directors,”  “Information About Our Executive Officers,” “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance,” “Corporate Governance – Code of Ethics and Corporate Governance Guidelines,” “Corporate Governance – Committees of the Board of Directors – Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee” and “Committees of the Board of Directors – Audit Committee.”

 

 

ITEM 11.  EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION

 

The information included in the Proxy Statement under the following captions is incorporated herein by reference: “Executive Compensation” and “Director Compensation.”

 

 

 

ITEM 12.  SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT AND RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS

 

The information included in the Proxy Statement under the following captions is incorporated herein by reference: “Securities Authorized For Issuance Under Equity Compensation Plans” and “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management.”

 

 

ITEM 13.  CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS, AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE

 

The information included in the Proxy Statement under the following captions is incorporated herein by reference: “Transactions with Related Persons” and “Corporate Governance – Board of Directors Independence.”

 

 

ITEM 14.  PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES

 

The information included in the Proxy Statement under the following caption is incorporated herein by reference: “Proposal 2: Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm Fees and Services.”

 

 

---

 

PART IV

 

ITEM 15.  EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES 

 

(a)(1)Financial Statements

 

Reference is made to the consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto included in Item 8 of Part II hereof.

 

(a)(2) Financial Statement Schedules

 

Consolidated financial statement schedules have been omitted because the required information is not present, or not present in amounts sufficient to require submission of the schedules, or because the required information is provided in the consolidated financial statements or notes thereto.

 

(a)(3)Exhibits

 

The exhibits required to be filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K are listed in the Exhibit Index attached hereto and are incorporated herein by reference.