Pacific Premier Bancorp (PPBI) 10-K2020 FY Annual report

All references to “we,” “us,” “our,” “Pacific Premier,” or the “Company” mean Pacific Premier Bancorp, Inc. and our consolidated subsidiaries, including Pacific Premier Bank, our primary operating subsidiary. All references to the “Bank” refer to Pacific Premier Bank. All references to the “Corporation” refer to Pacific Premier Bancorp, Inc.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains information and statements that are considered “forward looking statements” within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. These forward-looking statements represent plans, estimates, objectives, goals, guidelines, expectations, intentions, projections, and statements of our beliefs concerning future events, business plans, objectives, expected operating results, and the assumptions upon which those statements are based. Forward-looking statements include, without limitation, any statement that may predict, forecast, indicate, or imply future results, performance or achievements, and are typically identified with words such as “may,” “could,” “should,” “will,” “would,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” or words or phrases of similar meaning. We caution that the forward-looking statements are based largely on our expectations and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks and uncertainties that are subject to change based on factors, which are in many instances, beyond our control. Actual results, performance or achievements could differ materially from those contemplated, expressed, or implied by the forward-looking statements.

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (“COVID-19”) pandemic is adversely affecting us, our customers, counterparties, employees, and third party service providers, and given its ongoing and dynamic nature, the ultimate extent of the impacts on our business, financial position, results of operations, liquidity, and prospects is uncertain. Continued deterioration in general business and economic conditions, including further increases in unemployment rates, or turbulence in domestic or global financial markets, could adversely affect our revenues and the values of our assets and liabilities, reduce the availability of funding, lead to a tightening of credit, and further increase stock price volatility, which could result in impairment to our goodwill in future periods. Changes to statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies or practices as a result of, or in response, to the COVID-19 pandemic could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways, including the potential adverse impact of loan modifications and payment deferrals implemented consistent with recent regulatory guidance. In addition to the foregoing, the following additional factors, among others, could cause our financial performance to differ materially from that expressed in such forward-looking statements:

If one or more of the factors affecting our forward-looking information and statements proves incorrect, then our actual results, performance, or achievements could differ materially from those expressed in, or implied by, forward-looking information and statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and other reports and registration statements filed by us with the SEC. Therefore, we caution you not to place undue reliance on our forward-looking information and statements. We will not update the forward-looking information and statements to reflect actual results or changes in the factors affecting the forward-looking information and statements. For information on the factors that could cause actual results to differ from the expectations stated in the forward-looking statements, see “Risk Factors” under Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Forward-looking information and statements should not be viewed as predictions, and should not be the primary basis upon which investors evaluate us. Any investor in our common stock should consider all risks and uncertainties disclosed in our filings with the SEC, all of which are accessible on the SEC’s website at http://www.sec.gov. 

We are a California-based bank holding company incorporated in 1997 in the State of Delaware and a registered bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHCA”). Our wholly-owned subsidiary, Pacific Premier Bank, is a California state-chartered commercial bank. The Bank was founded in 1983 as a state-chartered thrift and subsequently converted to a federally-chartered thrift in 1991. The Bank converted to a California-chartered commercial bank and became a member of the Federal Reserve System in March 2007. The Bank is a member of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (“FHLB”), which is a member bank of the Federal Home Loan Bank System. The Bank’s deposit accounts are insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) up to the maximum amount currently allowable under federal law. The Bank is currently subject to examination and regulation by the Federal Reserve and the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRB”), the California Department of Financial Protection and Innovation (“DFPI”), the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), and the FDIC. We primarily conduct business throughout the Western Region of the United States from our 65 full-service depository branches located in Arizona, California, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington.

We have a long history of strategic growth through accretive acquisitions. In June 2020, we completed the 11th and largest acquisition in our organization’s history when we acquired Opus. On the date of acquisition, Opus added approximately $8.32 billion in assets, $5.94 billion in loans, and $6.91 billion in deposits to our balance sheet. Within approximately four months after closing the acquisition, we completed the system conversion, branch consolidations, and staffing adjustments that allowed us to begin quickly realizing the synergies from this transaction. The Opus acquisition was transformative to our business, creating what we believe is a premier commercial bank in the Western United States. Among other advantages, the Opus acquisition:

Set forth below is a summary of the other strategic acquisitions we have consummated since January 1, 2016, in addition to the Opus acquisition:

In addition to the strategic transactions described above, other noteworthy acquisitions include the acquisition of our Franchise Lending business from Infinity Franchise Holdings in 2014, the acquisition of our HOA business from First Associations Bank in 2013, and the expansion of our geographic footprint in San Diego County, California in connection with our 2013 acquisition of San Diego Trust Bank.

Our core lending business continues to focus on meeting the financial needs of small- and medium-sized businesses and corporations. To that end, we offer a full complement of flexible and structured loan products tailored to meet the diverse needs of these customers. A key aspect of our growth initiatives has been the diversification – by product type and geography – of our loan portfolio. Set forth below is a brief summary of our primary lending activities.

The graphics below show the diversification of our loan portfolio as of December 31, 2020 by loan type and geography.

The charts below show our deposit mix as of December 31, 2020 and our average cost of deposits for the fourth quarter in 2019 and each quarter in 2020.

In January 2021, we also announced that our Board of Directors approved a new stock repurchase program, which authorizes us to repurchase up to 4,725,000 shares of our common stock. The stock repurchase program represents approximately 5% of our issued and outstanding shares of common stock and approximately $150 million of common stock as of December 31, 2020, based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on December 31, 2020.

We place significant emphasis on risk management as an integral component of our corporate governance and organizational culture. We believe that our emphasis on risk management is critical to achieving our strategic goals and objectives.

We believe that our commitment to prudent credit risk management and underwriting standards allowed us to navigate the economic volatility experienced in 2020 as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. The graphics below show our non-performing assets, past due loans, classified loans, and net charge-offs, each as a percentage of total loans, for the fourth quarter in 2019 and each quarter in 2020.

As a California state-chartered commercial bank, we are subject to Section 1481 of the California Financial Code (the “Financial Code”), which establishes the rules that limit the aggregate amount of secured and unsecured loans to a single borrower and its related interests to 25% and 15%, respectively, of unimpaired capital and surplus. The eligibility of the personal property or collateral held as security is based on California regulations. Our credit policies establish internal lending limits below our $821.3 million legal lending limit for secured loans and $492.8 million legal lending limit for unsecured loans as of December 31, 2020. At December 31, 2020, our largest aggregate outstanding balance of loans to one borrower was $165.4 million secured by multifamily properties.

Our culture is embodied in our Success Attributes: Achieve, Communicate, Improve, Integrity, and Urgency. These principles have been the drivers of our performance and continued to serve us well in 2020 as we executed our strategic growth strategy and navigated the COVID-19 pandemic. We believe in the value of teamwork and the power of diversity. We expect and encourage participation and collaboration, and understand that we need each other to be successful. We value accountability because it is essential to our success, and we accept our responsibility to hold ourselves and others accountable for meeting shareholder commitments and achieving exceptional standards of performance.

We are a regional bank focused on the commercial banking business, with our primary market encompassing the Western Region of the United States centering on major metropolitan areas within Southern California, the California Central Coast, the Pacific Northwest, Arizona, and Nevada. We also compete in several broader regional and national markets through our HOA Banking, SBA, Franchise Lending, CRE and multi-family lines of business, and our Pacific Premier Trust division.

The banking business is highly competitive. We compete for loans, deposits, 1031 exchange escrow services, self-directed IRA custodial services, and employees. Some of our competitors are larger in total assets and capitalization, with more offices over a wider geographic area and offer a broader range of financial services than our operations. Our most direct competition for loans comes from larger regional and national banks, diversified finance companies, and community banks that target the same customers as we do. In recent years, competition has increased from institutions not subject to the same regulatory restrictions as domestic banks and bank holding companies. Those competitors include non-bank specialty lenders, insurance companies, private investment funds, investment banks, financial technology companies, and other financial and non-financial institutions.

Competition is based on a number of factors, including interest rates charged on loans and paid on deposits, underwriting standards, loan covenants, required guarantees, the scope and type of banking and financial services offered, including online and digital banking, customer service, timely adoption of technological changes, and regulatory compliance. Many of our competitors are larger companies that have substantial capital, technological, and marketing resources. Some of our competitors have substantial market positions and have access to a lower cost of capital or a less expensive source of funds. Because of economies of scale, our larger, nationwide competitors may offer loan pricing that is more attractive than what we are willing to offer.

Economic factors, along with legislative and technological changes, will have an ongoing impact on the competitive environment within the financial services industry. We work to anticipate and adapt to dynamic competitive conditions whether it is by developing and marketing innovative products and services, adopting or developing new technologies that differentiate our products and services, cross marketing, or providing highly personalized banking services. We strive to distinguish ourselves from other banks and financial services providers in our marketplace by providing an extremely high level of service to enhance customer loyalty and to attract and retain business.

We differentiate ourselves in the marketplace through the quality of service we provide to borrowers while maintaining competitive interest rates, loan fees, and other loan terms. We emphasize personalized relationship banking services and the efficient decision-making of our lending business units. We compete effectively based on our in-depth knowledge of our borrowers' industries and their business needs based upon information received from our borrowers' key decision-makers, analysis by our experienced professionals, and interaction between these two groups; our breadth of loan product offerings and flexible and creative approach to structuring products that meet our borrowers' business and timing needs; and our dedication to superior client service. However, we can provide no assurance as to the effectiveness of these efforts on our future business or results of operations. Overall, our continued ability to anticipate and adapt to changing conditions and sufficiently enhance our services and banking products put us in a position to successfully compete in the marketplace.

The Corporation’s common stock is traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the ticker symbol “PPBI.” There are 150 million authorized shares of the Corporation’s common stock, with approximately 94.5 million shares outstanding as of December 31, 2020. The Corporation has an additional 1.0 million authorized shares of preferred stock, none of which has been issued to date.    

As a bank holding company, the Corporation is subject to regulation and supervision by the Federal Reserve. We are required to file with the Federal Reserve quarterly and annual reports and such additional information as the Federal Reserve may require pursuant to the BHCA. The Federal Reserve may conduct examinations of bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. The Corporation is also a bank holding company within the meaning of the Financial Code. As such, the Corporation and its subsidiaries are subject to examination by, and may be required to file reports with, the DFPI. 

Under changes made by the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), a bank holding company must act as a source of financial and managerial strength to each of its subsidiary banks and to commit resources to support each such subsidiary bank. In order to fulfill its obligations as a source of strength, the Federal Reserve may require a bank holding company to make capital injections into a troubled subsidiary bank. In addition, the Federal Reserve may charge the bank holding company with engaging in unsafe and unsound practices if the bank holding company fails to commit resources to a subsidiary bank or if it undertakes actions that the Federal Reserve believes might jeopardize the bank holding company’s ability to commit resources to such subsidiary bank. The Federal Reserve also has the authority to require a bank holding company to terminate any activity or to relinquish control of a nonbank subsidiary (other than a nonbank subsidiary of a bank) upon the Federal Reserve’s determination that such activity or control constitutes a serious risk to the financial soundness and stability of any bank subsidiary of the bank holding company.

As a California state-chartered commercial bank and member of the Federal Reserve System, the Bank is subject to supervision, periodic examination, and regulation by the DFPI and the Federal Reserve. The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC through the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”). Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, federal deposit insurance coverage was permanently increased to $250,000 per depositor for all insured depository institutions. As a result of this deposit insurance function, the FDIC also has certain supervisory authority and powers over the Bank as well as all other FDIC insured institutions. If, as a result of an examination of the Bank, the regulators should determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings, management, liquidity, or other aspects of the Bank’s operations are unsatisfactory or that the Bank or our management is violating or has violated any law or regulation, various remedies are available to the regulators. Such remedies include the power to enjoin unsafe or unsound practices, to require affirmative action to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in capital, to restrict growth, to assess civil monetary penalties, to remove officers and directors, and ultimately, request the FDIC terminate the Bank’s deposit insurance. As a California-chartered commercial bank, the Bank is also subject to certain provisions of California law.

The BHCA requires a bank holding company to obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve before: (i) taking any action that causes a bank to become a controlled subsidiary of the bank holding company; (ii) acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of voting shares of any bank or bank holding company, if the acquisition results in the acquiring bank holding company having control of more than 5% of the outstanding shares of any class of voting securities of such bank or bank holding company, unless such bank or bank holding company is majority-owned by the acquiring bank holding company before the acquisition; (iii) acquiring all or substantially all the assets of a bank; or (iv) merging or consolidating with another bank holding company.

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of banking organizations, such as the Company, that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews will be tailored to each organization based on the scope and complexity of the organization’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements. The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination. Deficiencies will be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the organization’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

The scope and content of the U.S. banking regulators’ policies on executive compensation may continue to evolve in the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect the Company’s ability to hire, retain and motivate its key employees.

Under federal regulations, bank holding companies and banks must meet certain risk-based capital requirements. Effective as of January 1, 2015, the Basel III final capital framework, among other things, (i) introduces as a new capital measure “Common Equity Tier 1” (“CET1”), (ii) specifies that Tier 1 capital consists of CET1 and “Additional Tier 1 capital” instruments meeting specified requirements, (iii) defines CET1 narrowly by requiring that most adjustments to regulatory capital measures be made to CET1 and not to the other components of capital, and (iv) expands the scope of the adjustments as compared to existing regulations. Beginning January 1, 2016, financial institutions are required to maintain a minimum “capital conservation buffer” to avoid restrictions on capital distributions such as dividends and equity repurchases and other payments such as discretionary bonuses to executive officers. The minimum capital conservation buffer has been phased-in over a four year transition period with minimum buffers of 0.625%, 1.25%, 1.875%, and 2.50% during 2016, 2017, 2018, and 2019, respectively.

As fully phased-in on January 1, 2019, Basel III subjects banks to the following risk-based capital requirements:

The Basel III final framework provides for a number of deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets dependent upon future taxable income 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 categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1. Basel III also includes, as part of the definition of CET1 capital, a requirement that banking institutions include the amount of Additional Other Comprehensive Income (“AOCI”), which primarily consists of unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, which are not required to be treated as other-than-temporary impairment, net of tax) in calculating regulatory capital. Banking institutions had the option to opt out of including AOCI in CET1 capital if they elected to do so in their first regulatory report following January 1, 2015. As permitted by Basel III, the Company and the Bank have elected to exclude AOCI from CET1.

The Dodd-Frank Act excludes trust preferred securities issued after May 19, 2010, from being included in Tier 1 capital, unless the issuing company is a bank holding company with less than $500 million in total assets. Trust preferred securities issued prior to that date will continue to count as Tier 1 capital for bank holding companies with less than $15 billion in total assets. During the second quarter of 2020, the Corporation’s acquisition of Opus resulted in total consolidated assets exceeding $15 billion. Accordingly, the trust preferred securities issued by our unconsolidated subsidiary capital trusts are now included in Tier 2 capital.

In addition, goodwill and most intangible assets are deducted from Tier 1 capital. For purposes of applicable total risk-based capital regulatory guidelines, Tier 2 capital (sometimes referred to as “supplementary capital”) is defined to include, subject to limitations: perpetual preferred stock not included in Tier 1 capital, intermediate-term preferred stock and any related surplus, certain hybrid capital instruments, perpetual debt and mandatory convertible debt securities, allowances for loan and lease losses, and intermediate-term subordinated debt instruments. The maximum amount of qualifying Tier 2 capital is 100% of qualifying Tier 1 capital. For purposes of determining total capital under federal guidelines, total capital equals Tier 1 capital, plus qualifying Tier 2 capital, minus investments in unconsolidated subsidiaries, reciprocal holdings of bank holding company capital securities, and deferred tax assets and other deductions.

We had outstanding subordinated debentures in the aggregate principal amount of $501.5 million, as of December 31, 2020. Of this amount, $8.1 million is attributable to subordinated debentures issued to statutory trusts in connection with prior issuances of trust preferred securities, $7.7 million of which qualifies as Tier 2 capital, and outstanding subordinated notes, $138.4 million and $326.0 million of which qualifies as Tier 2 capital for the Bank and the Company, respectively.

Basel III changed the manner of calculating risk-weighted assets. New methodologies for determining risk-weighted assets in the general capital rules are included, including revisions to recognition of credit risk mitigation, including a greater recognition of financial collateral and a wider range of eligible guarantors. They also include risk weighting of equity exposures and past due loans; and higher (greater than 100%) risk weighting for certain commercial real estate exposures that have higher credit risk profiles, including higher loan to value and equity components. In particular, loans categorized as “high-volatility commercial real estate” loans (“HVCRE loans”), as defined pursuant to applicable federal regulations, are required to be assigned a 150% risk weighting, and require additional capital support.

In addition to the uniform risk-based capital guidelines and regulatory capital ratios that apply across the industry, the regulators have the discretion to set individual minimum capital requirements for specific institutions at rates significantly above the minimum guidelines and ratios. Future changes in regulations or practices could further reduce the amount of capital recognized for purposes of capital adequacy. Such a change could affect our ability to grow and could restrict the amount of profits, if any, available for the payment of dividends.

In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act requires the federal banking agencies to adopt capital requirements that address the risks that the activities of an institution poses to the institution and the public and private stakeholders, including risks arising from certain enumerated activities.

Basel III became applicable to the Corporation and the Bank on January 1, 2015. Overall, the Corporation believes that implementation of the Basel III Rule has not had and will not have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s or the Bank’s capital ratios, earnings, shareholder’s equity, or its ability to pay dividends, effect stock repurchases or pay discretionary bonuses to executive officers.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee published standards that it described as the finalization of the Basel III post-crisis regulatory reforms (the standards are commonly referred to as “Basel IV”). Among other things, these standards revise the Basel Committee’s standardized approach for credit risk (including recalibrating risk weights and introducing new capital requirements for certain “unconditionally cancellable commitments,” such as unused credit card lines of credit) and provides a new standardized approach for operational risk capital. Under the Basel framework, these standards will generally be effective on January 1, 2022, with an aggregate output floor phasing in through January 1, 2027. Under the current U.S. capital rules, operational risk capital requirements and a capital floor apply only to advanced approaches institutions, and not to the Corporation or the Bank. The impact of Basel IV on us will depend on the manner in which it is implemented by the federal bank regulators.

In 2018, the federal bank regulatory agencies issued a variety of proposals and made statements concerning regulatory capital standards. These proposals touched on such areas as commercial real estate exposure, credit loss allowances under generally accepted accounting principles and capital requirements for covered swap entities, among others. Public statements by key agency officials have also suggested a revisiting of capital policy and supervisory approaches on a going-forward basis. In July 2019, the federal bank regulators adopted a final rule that simplifies the capital treatment for certain deferred tax assets, mortgage servicing assets, investments in non-consolidated financial entities and minority interests for banking organizations, such as the Corporation and the Bank, that are not subject to the advanced approaches requirements. We will be assessing the impact on us of these new regulations and supervisory approaches as they are proposed and implemented.

As noted above, Basel III integrates the capital requirements into the prompt corrective action category definitions. The following capital requirements have applied to the Bank since January 1, 2015.

An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters. An institution’s capital category is determined solely for the purpose of applying prompt corrective action regulations, and the capital category may not constitute an accurate representation of the institution’s overall financial condition or prospects for other purposes.

In the event an institution becomes “undercapitalized,” it must submit a capital restoration plan. The capital restoration plan will not be accepted by the regulators unless each company having control of the undercapitalized institution guarantees the subsidiary’s compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institution’s holding company is entitled to a priority of payment in bankruptcy. The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5% of the institution’s assets at the time it became undercapitalized or the amount necessary to cause the institution to be “adequately capitalized.” The bank regulators have greater power in situations where an institution becomes “significantly” or “critically” undercapitalized or fails to submit a capital restoration plan. In addition to requiring undercapitalized institutions to submit a capital restoration plan, bank regulations contain broad restrictions on certain activities of undercapitalized institutions including asset growth, acquisitions, branch establishment and expansion into new lines of business. With certain exceptions, an insured depository institution is prohibited from making capital distributions, including dividends, and is prohibited from paying management fees to control persons if the institution would be undercapitalized after any such distribution or payment.

As an institution’s capital decreases, the regulators’ enforcement powers become more severe. A significantly undercapitalized institution is subject to mandated capital raising activities, restrictions on interest rates paid and transactions with affiliates, removal of management, and other restrictions. A regulator has limited discretion in dealing with a critically undercapitalized institution and is virtually required to appoint a receiver or conservator.

Banks with risk-based capital and leverage ratios below the required minimums may also be subject to certain administrative actions, including the termination of deposit insurance upon notice and hearing, or a temporary suspension of insurance without a hearing in the event the institution has no tangible capital.

In addition to the federal regulatory capital requirements described above, the DFPI has authority to take possession of the business and properties of a bank in the event that the tangible stockholders’ equity of a bank is less than the greater of (i) 4% of the bank’s total assets or (ii) $1.0 million.

The Bank’s ability to pay dividends to the Corporation is subject to restrictions set forth in the Financial Code. The Financial Code provides that a bank may not make a cash distribution to its stockholders in excess of the lesser of a bank’s (1) retained earnings; or (2) net income for its last three fiscal years, less the amount of any distributions made by the bank or by any majority-owned subsidiary of the bank to the stockholders of the bank during such period. However, a bank may, with the approval of the DFPI, make a distribution to its stockholders in an amount not exceeding the greatest of (a) its retained earnings; (b) its net income for its last fiscal year; or (c) its net income for its current fiscal year. In the event that bank regulators determine that the stockholders’ equity of a bank is inadequate or that the making of a distribution by the bank would be unsafe or unsound, the regulators may order the bank to refrain from making a proposed distribution. The payment of dividends could, depending on the financial condition of a bank, be deemed to constitute an unsafe or unsound practice. Under the foregoing provision of the Financial Code, the amount available for distribution from the Bank to the Corporation was approximately $298.4 million at December 31, 2020.

Approval of the Federal Reserve is required for payment of any dividend by a state chartered bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve, such as the Bank, if the total of all dividends declared by the bank in any calendar year would exceed the total of its retained net income for that year combined with its retained net income for the preceding two years. In addition, a state member bank may not pay a dividend in an amount greater than its undivided profits without regulatory and stockholder approval. The Bank is also prohibited under federal law from paying any dividend that would cause it to become undercapitalized.

Under the FDIC’s risk-based deposit premium assessment system, the assessment rates for an insured depository institution are determined by an assessment rate calculator, which is based on a number of elements that measure the risk each institution poses to the Deposit Insurance Fund. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, the calculated assessment rate is applied to average consolidated assets less the average tangible equity of the insured depository institution during the assessment period to determine the dollar amount of the quarterly assessment. Under the current system, premiums are assessed quarterly and could increase if, for example, criticized loans and leases and/or other higher risk assets increase or balance sheet liquidity decreases. In addition, the FDIC can impose special assessments in certain instances. Deposit insurance assessments fund the DIF. Under FDIC regulations issued pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, all insured depository institutions that were assessed as small institutions at any time during the period from July 1, 2016, through September 30, 2018, were awarded assessment credits for the portion of their assessments that contributed to the growth in the reserve ratio from the former minimum of 1.15% to 1.35%. Prior to July 1, 2019, the Bank was classified as small institution, eligible for assessment credits. Starting the third quarter of 2018, the Bank reported assets of $10 billion or more in its quarterly reports of condition for four consecutive quarters, and was classified as large institution beginning the third quarter of 2019.

Based on the current FDIC insurance assessment methodology, our FDIC insurance premium expense was $3.6 million for 2020, $764,000 for 2019, and $3.0 million in 2018. The decrease in FDIC insurance premium expense in 2019 was due to small institution assessment credits during the year. 

Transactions between a bank and its “affiliates” are quantitatively and qualitatively restricted under Sections 23A and 23B of the FRA. Section 23A restricts the aggregate amount of covered transactions with any individual affiliate to 10% of the capital and surplus of the financial institution. The aggregate amount of covered transactions with all affiliates is limited to 20% of the institution’s capital and surplus. Certain transactions with affiliates are required to be secured by collateral in an amount and of a type described in Section 23A and the purchase of low quality assets from affiliates are generally prohibited. Section 23B generally provides that certain transactions with affiliates, including loans and asset purchases, must be on terms and under circumstances, including credit standards, that are substantially the same or at least as favorable to the institution as those prevailing at the time for comparable transactions with non-affiliated companies. The Federal Reserve has promulgated Regulation W, which codifies prior interpretations under Sections 23A and 23B of the FRA and provides interpretive guidance with respect to affiliate transactions. Affiliates of a bank include, among other entities, a bank’s holding company and companies that are under common control with the bank. The Corporation is considered to be an affiliate of the Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Act generally enhanced the restrictions on transactions with affiliates under Section 23A and 23B of the FRA, including an expansion of the definition of “covered transactions” and an increase in the amount of time for which collateral requirements regarding covered credit transactions must be satisfied. Insider transaction limitations are expanded through the strengthening of loan restrictions to insiders and the expansion of the types of transactions subject to the various limits, including derivatives transactions, repurchase agreements, reverse repurchase agreements and securities lending or borrowing transactions. Restrictions are also placed on certain asset sales to and from an insider to an institution, including requirements that such sales be on market terms and, in certain circumstances, approved by the institution’s board of directors.

In addition, the federal banking agencies have also adopted safety and soundness guidelines with respect to asset quality and for evaluating and monitoring earnings to ensure that earnings are sufficient for the maintenance of adequate capital and reserves. These guidelines provide six standards for establishing and maintaining a system to identify problem assets and prevent those assets from deteriorating. Under these standards, an insured depository institution should: (i) conduct periodic asset quality reviews to identify problem assets; (ii) estimate the inherent losses in problem assets and establish reserves that are sufficient to absorb estimated losses; (iii) compare problem asset totals to capital; (iv) take appropriate corrective action to resolve problem assets; (v) consider the size and potential risks of material asset concentrations; and (vi) provide periodic asset quality reports with adequate information for management and the board of directors to assess the level of asset risk.

Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, the CFPB has broad authority to regulate and supervise the retail consumer financial products and services activities of banks and various non-bank providers. The CFPB has authority to promulgate regulations, issue orders, guidance and policy statements, conduct examinations and bring enforcement actions with regard to consumer financial products and services. With assets exceeding $10 billion since 2019, the Bank is subject to examination for consumer compliance by the CFPB. The creation of the CFPB by the Dodd-Frank Act has led to, and is likely to continue to lead to, enhanced and strengthened enforcement of consumer financial protection laws.

Federal law currently contains extensive customer privacy protection provisions. Under these provisions, a financial institution must provide to its customers, at the inception of the customer relationship and annually thereafter, the institution’s policies and procedures regarding the handling of customers’ nonpublic personal financial information. These provisions also provide that, except for certain limited exceptions, a financial institution may not provide such personal information to unaffiliated third parties unless the institution discloses to the customer that such information may be so provided and the customer is given the opportunity to opt out of such disclosure. In June 2018, the California legislature passed the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (the “CCPA”), which took effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA, which covers businesses that obtain or access personal information on California resident consumers, grants consumers enhanced privacy rights and control over their personal information and imposes significant requirements on covered companies with respect to consumer data privacy rights. We expect this trend of state-level activity to continue, and are continually monitoring developments in other states in which we operate.

The Corporation and the Bank report their income on a consolidated basis using the accrual method of accounting, and are subject to federal and state income taxation in the same manner as other corporations with some exceptions. For 2020, 2019 and 2018, the Company was subject to a maximum federal income tax rate of 21.00%. State income tax rates the Company is subject to varies, based on jurisdiction. The highest state income tax rate the Company is subject to is 10.84%, which is attributable to California. The Company has not been audited by the Internal Revenue Service (“IRS”).

Ownership of our common stock involves certain risks. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as all other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. If any of these risks actually occurs, our business, financial condition, and/or results of operations could be materially, adversely affected.

The COVID-19 pandemic continues to cause economic disruption both worldwide and in the markets we operate. Given the ongoing and dynamic nature of these circumstances, it is difficult to predict the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on our business, and there is no guarantee that our efforts to address or mitigate the adverse impacts of the coronavirus will be effective. To date, the impact has included periods of significant volatility in financial, commodities, and other markets. This volatility, if it continues, could have an adverse impact on our customers and on our business, financial condition, and results of operations, as well as our growth strategy.

Our business is dependent upon the willingness and ability of our customers to conduct financial transactions and fulfill their obligations. The spread of COVID-19 has caused (and could continue to cause) severe disruptions in the U.S. economy, and has resulted (and may continue to result) in disruptions to our customers’ businesses, and a decrease in consumer confidence, and adversely affect business generally. In addition, actions by US federal, state, and local governments to address the pandemic, including travel bans, stay-at-home orders, and school, business, and entertainment venue closures, have had (and may continue to have) a significant adverse effect on our customers and the markets in which we conduct our business. The extent of impacts resulting from the pandemic and other events beyond our control remain dependent on future developments, including but not limited to the effectiveness and level of acceptance of vaccines, new information that may emerge concerning the severity of the pandemic, the duration of the coronavirus pandemic, any resurgence in the number of COVID-19 cases, any development and proliferation of new strains of COVID-19, actions taken to contain the coronavirus or its impact, and other similar factors; all of which are uncertain and cannot be predicted.

Although new loan originations began to rebound during the latter part of 2020, we believe economic impacts stemming from COVID-19 will continue to influence our loan originations in the near term, both in terms of both a reduction in overall demand for new loans and our continued emphasis on prudent credit risk management, particularly within the context of the continued uncertainty surrounding the economic environment.

Disruptions to our customers or business in general could result in increased risk of delinquencies, defaults, foreclosures, and losses on our loans. The escalation of the pandemic may also negatively impact regional economic conditions for a period of time, which could result in declines in loan demand, liquidity of loan guarantors, loan collateral (particularly in real estate), loan originations, and deposit availability. If the global response to contain COVID-19 escalates or is unsuccessful, we could experience a material adverse situation that could affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Our financial condition and results of operations are dependent on the U.S. economy, generally, and markets we serve, specifically. We primarily serve markets in California, and major metropolitan areas in Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Nevada, though certain of our products and services are offered nationwide. Financial stress on our customers as a result of an uncertain future economic environment could have an adverse effect on the Company’s customers and their ability to repay their loans, which could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, and results of operations. A weakening of these conditions in the markets in which we operate would likely have an adverse effect on us and others in the financial institutions industry. For example, a deterioration in economic conditions in our markets could drive losses beyond that which is provided for in our allowance for credit losses. We may also face the following risks in connection with these events:

As these conditions or similar ones exist or worsen, we could experience adverse effects on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Our business activities and credit exposure are concentrated in California, and to a lesser extent Washington, Oregon, Arizona, and Nevada. Difficult economic conditions in these markets may cause us to incur losses associated with higher default rates and decreased collateral values in our loan portfolio. In addition, demand for our products and services may decline. Declines in the California real estate market could hurt our business, because the majority of our loans are secured by real estate located within California. As of December 31, 2020, approximately 61% of the aggregate outstanding principal of our loans was secured by real estate were located in California. If real estate values were to decline in California, the collateral for our loans would provide less security. As a result, our ability to recover on defaulted loans by selling the underlying real estate would be diminished, and we would be more likely to suffer losses on defaulted loans.

Our profitability depends to a large extent upon net interest income, which is the difference between interest income and dividends we earn on interest-earning assets, such as loans and investments, and interest expense we pay on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowings. Any change in general market interest rates, whether as a result of changes in the monetary policy of the Federal Reserve or otherwise, may have a significant effect on net interest income and prepayments on our loans. Since March 2020, the Federal Reserve Board’s Open Market Committee has maintained its federal funds rate target in a range of 0% to 0.25%.

Our assets and liabilities may react differently to changes in overall interest rates or conditions. In general, higher interest rates are associated with a lower volume of loan originations while lower interest rates are usually associated with higher loan originations. Further, if interest rates decline, our loans may be refinanced at lower rates or paid off and our investments may be prepaid earlier than expected. If that occurs, we may have to redeploy the loan or investment proceeds into lower yielding assets, which might also decrease our income. Also, as many of our loans currently have interest rate floors, a rise in rates may increase the cost of our deposits while the rates on the loans remain at their floors, which could decrease our net interest income. Accordingly, changes in levels of market interest rates could materially and adversely affect our financial condition, loan origination volumes, net interest margin, results of operations, and profitability. Changes in interest rates also have a significant impact on the carrying value of certain of our assets, including loans, real estate, and investment securities, on our balance sheet.

We may incur debt in the future and that debt may also be sensitive to interest rates. Further, federal monetary policy significantly affects credit conditions for us, as well as for our borrowers, particularly as implemented by the Federal Reserve, primarily through open market operations in U.S. government securities, the federal funds rate target, the discount rate for bank borrowings, and reserve requirements. A material change in any of these conditions could have a material impact on us or our customers (including borrowers), and therefore on our results of operations.

The Company’s sensitivity to changes in interest rates is low in a rising interest rate environment based on the current profile of the Company’s loan portfolio and low-cost and no-cost deposits. See “Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk.” At December 31, 2020, we had $2.91 billion in interest-bearing demand deposits. In addition, at December 31, 2020, we had $5.66 billion in money market and savings deposits. If the interest rates on our loans increase comparably faster than the interest rate on our interest-bearing demand deposits, money market, and savings deposits, our core deposit balances may decrease as customers use those funds to repay higher cost loans. In addition, if we need to offer additional interest-bearing demand deposit products or higher interest rates on our current interest-bearing demand, money market, or savings deposit accounts in order to maintain current customers or attract new customers, our interest expense will increase, perhaps materially. Furthermore, if we fail to offer competitive rates sufficient to retain these accounts, our core deposits may be reduced, which would require us to seek alternative funding sources or risk slowing our future asset growth. In these circumstances, our net interest income may decrease, which may adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

As interest rates rise, our existing customers who have adjustable rate loans may see their loan payments increase and, as a result, may experience difficulty repaying those loans, which in turn could lead to higher losses for us. Increasing delinquencies, non-accrual loans, and defaults lead to higher loan loss provisions, and potentially greater eventual losses that would lower our current profitability and capital ratios.

At December 31, 2020, $3.93 billion of our securities were classified as available-for-sale with an aggregate net unrealized gain of $84.4 million. We increase or decrease stockholders’ equity by the amount of change from the unrealized gain or loss (the difference between the estimated fair value and the amortized cost) of our available-for-sale securities portfolio, net of the related tax, under the category of accumulated other comprehensive income/loss. Therefore, a decline in the estimated fair value of this portfolio will result in a decline in reported stockholders’ equity, as well as book value per common share and tangible book value per common share. This decrease will occur even though the securities are not sold. In the case of debt securities, if these securities are never sold and there are no credit impairments, the decrease will be recovered over the life of the securities. In the case of equity securities, which have no stated maturity, the declines in fair value may or may not be recovered over time.

At December 31, 2020, we had stock holdings in the FHLB of San Francisco totaling $17.3 million, $74.4 million in FRB stock, and $25.4 million in other stock, all carried at cost. The stock held by us is subject to recoverability testing under applicable accounting standards. For the year ended December 31, 2020, we did not recognize an impairment charge related to our stock holdings. There can be no assurance that future negative changes to the financial condition of the issuers may require us to recognize an impairment charge with respect to such stock holdings.

In 2017, the Financial Conduct Authority announced that after 2021 it will no longer compel banks to submit the rates required to calculate LIBOR. In November 2020, the administrator of LIBOR announced it will consult on its intention to extend the retirement date of certain offered rates whereby the publication of the one week and two month LIBOR offered rates will cease after December 31, 2021; but, the publication of the remaining LIBOR offered rates will continue until June 30, 2023. Given consumer protection, litigation, and reputation risks, the bank regulatory agencies have indicated that entering into new contracts that use LIBOR as a reference rate after December 31, 2021 would create safety and soundness risks and that they will examine bank practices accordingly. Therefore, the agencies encouraged banks to cease entering into new contracts that use LIBOR as a reference rate as soon as practicable and in any event by December 31, 2021.

There is uncertainty as to what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, or what the effect of any such changes in views or alternatives may be on the markets for LIBOR-indexed financial instruments. In response, the Alternative Reference Rates Committee (“ARRC”) was convened in the U.S. to explore alternative reference rates and supporting processes. The ARRC identified a potential successor rate to LIBOR in the SOFR and crafted the Paced Transition Plan to facilitate the transition. However, there are conceptual and technical differences between LIBOR and SOFR that remain unresolved at this time.

We have a significant number of loans, some securities and borrowings, and some deposit products with attributes that are either directly or indirectly dependent on LIBOR. We have not yet determined the optimal reference rate(s) that we will ultimately use for our financial instruments going forward. We have organized a multidisciplinary project team to identify operational and contractual best practices, assess our risks, identify the detailed list of all financial instruments impacted, manage the transition, facilitate communication with our customers and counterparties, and monitor the impacts. We drafted and began including fallback language in our loan agreements beginning in 2018.

The transition from LIBOR could create considerable costs and additional risk. The uncertainty as to the nature and effect of the discontinuance of LIBOR may adversely affect the value of, the return on or the expenses associated with our financial assets and liabilities that are based on or are linked to LIBOR, may require extensive changes to the contracts that govern these LIBOR-based products as well as our systems and processes, and could impact our pricing and interest rate risk models, our loan product structures, our funding costs, our valuation tools and result in increased compliance and operational costs. In addition, the market transition away from LIBOR to an alternative reference rate could prompt inquiries or other actions from regulators in respect of our preparation and readiness for the replacement of LIBOR with an alternative reference rate, and result in disputes, litigation or other actions with counterparties regarding the interpretation and enforceability of certain fallback language in LIBOR-based financial instruments. Furthermore, failure to adequately manage this transition process with our customers could adversely impact our reputation.

Although we are currently unable to assess the ultimate impact of the transition from LIBOR, the failure to adequately manage the transition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our total nonperforming assets amounted to $29.2 million, or 0.15% of our total assets, at December 31, 2020, an increase from $9.0 million or 0.08% at December 31, 2019. We had $16.9 million of net loan charge-offs for 2020, an increase from $7.5 million in 2019. Our provision for credit losses on loans was $172.3 million in 2020, an increase from $7.1 million in 2019. If increases in our nonperforming assets occur in the future, our net loan charge-offs and/or provision for credit losses may also increase, which may have an adverse effect upon our future results of operations and capital.

We seek to mitigate the risks inherent in our loan portfolio by adhering to specific underwriting practices. These practices generally include analysis of a borrower’s available cash flow (determined using financial statements and tax returns) and cash flow projections, valuation of collateral based on reports of independent appraisers, prior credit history, and liquid asset verifications. Although we believe that our underwriting criteria are appropriate for the various kinds of loans we make, we may incur losses on loans that meet our underwriting criteria but subsequently deteriorate, and these losses may exceed the amounts set aside as reserves in our ACL under the CECL methodology (and ALLL prior to January 1, 2020).

On January 1, 2020, we changed the way we estimate credit losses by replacing the incurred loss model used to determine the allowance for loan losses, or ALLL, with the current expected credit losses, or CECL, model. The CECL model incorporates the use of and is more reliant on reasonable and supportable forecasts of economic conditions, including, but not limited to: forecasts of GDP growth rates, levels of unemployment, vacancy rates, and changes in the value of commercial real estate properties.

Although we maintain an ACL at a level that we believe is adequate to absorb future expected credit losses under the CECL model, changes in economic, operating, and other conditions, including a sharp decline in real estate values and changes in interest rates, which are beyond our control, may cause our actual loan losses to exceed our current allowance estimates, which will adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the Federal Reserve and the DFPI, as part of their supervisory function, periodically review our credit loss reserves. Either agency may require us to increase our provision for loan losses or to recognize further loan losses, based on their judgments, which may be different from those of our management and could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

As of December 31, 2020, our commercial real estate loans amounted to $10.77 billion, or 81.3% of our total loan portfolio, and our commercial business loans amounted to $2.23 billion, or 16.8% of our total loan portfolio. At such date, our largest outstanding C&I loan was $86.7 million, our largest multiple borrower relationship was $165.4 million and our largest outstanding CRE loan was $94.1 million. CRE and commercial business loans are generally considered riskier than single-family or multi-family residential loans because they have larger balances to a single borrower or group of related borrowers. CRE and commercial business loans involve risks because the borrowers’ ability to repay the loans typically depends primarily on the successful operation of the businesses or the properties securing the loans. Most of the Company’s commercial business loans are made to small or middle market business customers who may have a heightened vulnerability to economic conditions. Moreover, a portion of these borrowers may not have experienced a complete business or economic cycle. Furthermore, the deterioration of our borrowers’ businesses may hinder their ability to repay their loans with us, which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.

Our operations are subject to extensive regulation by federal, state and local governmental authorities and are subject to various laws and judicial and administrative decisions imposing requirements and restrictions on all or part of our operations. Federal and state banking regulators have significant discretion and authority to prevent or remedy what they perceive to be unsafe or unsound practices or violations of laws or regulations by financial institutions and bank holding companies in the performance of their supervisory and enforcement duties. The exercise of regulatory authority may have a negative impact on our financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, in order to conduct certain activities, including acquisitions, we are required to obtain regulatory approval. There can be no assurance that any required approvals can be obtained, or obtained without conditions or on a timeframe acceptable to the Company. The laws, rules and regulations applicable to us are subject to regular modification and change. Regulations affecting banks and other financial institutions, such as the Dodd-Frank Act, are continuously reviewed and change frequently. The ultimate effect of such changes cannot be predicted. Compliance with such regulations and laws may increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities. There can be no assurance that laws, rules and regulations will not be proposed or adopted in the future, which could (i) make compliance much more difficult or expensive, (ii) restrict our ability to originate, modify, broker or sell loans or accept certain deposits, (iii) restrict our ability to collect on defaulted loans or foreclose on property securing loans, (iv) further limit or restrict the amount of commissions, interest or other charges earned on loans originated or sold by us, or (v) otherwise materially and adversely affect our business or prospects for business. These risks could affect our deposit funding and the performance and value of our loan and investment securities portfolios, which could negatively affect our financial performance and financial condition.

Federal and state regulatory agencies, including the Federal Reserve, the DFPI, and the CFPB, periodically conduct examinations of our business, including compliance with laws and regulations. If, as a result of an examination, a regulatory agency were to determine in its discretion that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity, or other aspects of any of our operations had become unsatisfactory, or that the Company or its management was in violation of any law or regulation, it may take a number of different remedial actions as it deems appropriate. These actions include the power to enjoin “unsafe or unsound” practices, to require affirmative actions to correct any conditions resulting from any violation or practice, to issue an administrative order that can be judicially enforced, to direct an increase in our capital, to restrict our growth, to assess civil monetary penalties against the Bank or our officers or directors, to remove officers and directors and, if it is concluded that such conditions cannot be corrected or there is an imminent risk of loss to depositors, to terminate our deposit insurance. If we become subject to such regulatory actions, our business, results of operations and reputation may be negatively impacted.

We are subject to various privacy, information security and data protection laws, such as the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which among other things requires privacy disclosures, and maintenance of a robust security program that are increasingly subject to change which could have a significant impact on our current and planned privacy, data protection and information security-related practices, our collection, use, sharing, retention and safeguarding of consumer or employee information, and some of our current or planned business activities. We are also subject to the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, which came into effect on January 1, 2020, and provides a new private right of action for data breaches and requires companies that process information on California residents to make new disclosures to consumers about their data collection, use and sharing practices and allow consumers to opt out of certain data sharing with third parties. Our regulators also hold us responsible for privacy and data protection obligations performed by our third party service providers while providing services to us.

New or changes to existing laws increase our costs of compliance and business operations and could reduce income from certain business initiatives, including increased privacy-related enforcement activity, higher compliance and technology costs and could restrict our ability to provide certain products and services. Our failure to comply with privacy, data protection and information security laws could result in potentially significant regulatory or governmental investigations or actions, litigation, fines, sanctions and damage to our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations.

Our total assets were approximately $20 billion as of December 31, 2020, and our total assets have exceeded $10 billion since July 2018. The Dodd-Frank Act and its implementing regulations impose various additional requirements on banks and bank holding companies with $10 billion or more in total assets, including a more frequent and enhanced regulatory examination regime. In addition, banks with $10 billion or more in total assets (including our bank) are primarily examined by the CFPB with respect to various federal consumer financial protection laws and regulations, with the Federal Reserve maintaining supervision over some consumer related regulations. In light of the recent change in the U.S. Presidential administration, there is some uncertainty as to how the CFPB examination and regulatory authority might impact our business in the near and medium terms.

One key Dodd-Frank Act requirement applicable to banks with $10 billion or more in total assets has been compulsory stress testing (Dodd-Frank Act Stress Test or “DFAST”). The Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief, and Consumer Protection Act, signed into law on May 24, 2018, increased the asset threshold at which company-run stress tests are required from $10 billion to $250 billion. The elimination of DFAST has not eliminated the expectation of the regulatory agencies that we will conduct enhanced capital stress testing. However, standards establishing the framework surrounding such expectations have not been announced. The unknown nature and extent of future stress testing requirements creates uncertainty with respect to the impact of those requirements on our business. In addition, compliance with stress testing requirements may necessitate that we hire additional compliance or other personnel, design and implement additional internal controls, or incur other significant expenses, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Since July 1, 2019, we became subject to reduced interchange income, which has resulted in reduced revenues. Debit card interchange fee restrictions set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act, which is known as the Durbin Amendment, as implemented by regulations of the Federal Reserve, cap the maximum debit interchange fee that a bank debit card issuer with $10 billion or more in total assets may receive per transaction at the sum of $0.21 plus five basis points. A debit card issuer that adopts certain fraud prevention procedures may charge an additional $0.01 per transaction. Becoming subject to the Durbin Amendment has negatively affected, and may in the future negatively affect our debit card related fee income and pre-tax earnings.

The Company participated in the SBA Payment Protection Program (“PPP”) that was created to help eligible businesses, organizations and self-employed persons fund certain operational costs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Under this program, the SBA guarantees 100% of the amounts loaned under the PPP provided certain conditions are met. On July 28, 2020, the Company completed the sale of its entire portfolio of PPP loans. Nevertheless, the Company remains subject to potential litigation and repurchase demands related to its participation in the program. If a deficiency in the manner in which a PPP loan was originated is identified to be the result of the Company’s noncompliance with PPP requirements, the SBA may deny its liability under the guaranty and a repurchase demand could be triggered. Other financial institutions have experienced litigation related to their process and procedures used in processing applications for the PPP. Any material financial liability, litigation costs, or reputational damage caused by PPP related litigation or repurchase demands could have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Although we devote significant resources to maintain and regularly update our systems and processes that are designed to protect the security of our computer systems, software, networks and other technology assets, as well as the confidentiality, integrity and availability of information belonging to us and our customers, there is no assurance that all of our security measures will provide absolute security.

Many financial institutions, including the Company, have been subjected to attempts to infiltrate the security of their websites or other systems, some involving sophisticated and targeted attacks intended to obtain unauthorized access to confidential information, destroy data, disrupt or degrade service, sabotage systems or cause other damage, including through the introduction of computer viruses or malware, cyber-attacks and other means. We have been targeted by individuals and groups using phishing campaigns, pretext calling, malicious code and viruses, and have experienced distributed denial-of-service attacks with the objective of disrupting on-line banking services and expect to be subject to such attacks in the future.

Despite efforts to ensure the integrity of our systems, it is possible that we may not be able to anticipate, detect or recognize threats to our systems or to implement effective preventive measures against all security breaches of these types inside or outside our business, especially because the techniques used change frequently or are not recognized until launched, and because cyber-attacks can originate from a wide variety of sources, including individuals or groups who are associated with external service providers or who are or may be involved in organized crime or linked to terrorist organizations or hostile foreign governments. Those parties may also attempt to fraudulently induce employees, customers, third-party service providers or other users of our systems to disclose sensitive information in order to gain access to our data or that of our customers or clients. Similar to other companies, risks and exposures related to cybersecurity attacks have increased as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, the related increased reliance on remote working and increase in digital operations in efforts to comply with state and local mandates. Such risks and exposures are expected to remain high for the foreseeable future due to the rapidly evolving nature and sophistication of these threats and the expanding use of technology, as our web-based product offerings grow or we expand internal usage of web-based applications.

A successful penetration or circumvention of the security of our systems, including those of our third-party vendors, could cause serious negative consequences, including significant disruption of our operations, misappropriation of confidential information, or damage to computers or systems, and may result in violations of applicable privacy and other laws, financial loss, loss of confidence in our security measures, customer dissatisfaction, increased insurance premiums, significant litigation exposure and harm to our reputation, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and future prospects.

We rely on certain third parties to provide products and services necessary to maintain day-to-day operations, such as data processing and storage, recording and monitoring transactions, on-line banking interfaces and services, Internet connections, telecommunications, and network access. Even though we have a vendor risk management program to help us carefully select and monitor the performance of third parties, we do not control their actions. The failure of a third-party to perform in accordance with the contracted arrangements under service level agreements as a result of changes in the third party’s organizational structure, financial condition, support for existing products and services, strategic focus, system interruption or breaches, or for any other reason, could be disruptive to our operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Replacing these third parties could also create significant delays and expense. Accordingly, use of such third parties introduces additional risks to our business operations.

We are based in Irvine, California and, at December 31, 2020, approximately 61% of the aggregate outstanding principal of our loans was tied to businesses or secured by real estate located in California. In addition, the computer systems that operate our Internet websites and some of their back-up systems are located in Irvine, California and Las Vegas, Nevada. Historically, California has been vulnerable to natural disasters, such as earthquakes, wildfires, floods, mudslides, and droughts. Certain of these natural disasters may be exacerbated by changing climate conditions.

Natural or man-made disasters and severe weather events may cause operational disruptions and damage to both our properties and properties securing our loans. Natural disasters could harm our operations directly through interference with communications, including the interruption or loss of our information technology structure and websites, which could prevent us from gathering deposits, originating loans, and processing and controlling our flow of business, as well as through the destruction of facilities and our operational, financial, and management information systems. The measures we implemented to mitigate the risk of business interruption from natural disasters may not protect us fully from the effects of a natural disaster. A natural disaster or recurring power outages may also impair the value of our largest class of assets, our loan portfolio. Uninsured or underinsured disasters may reduce borrowers’ ability to repay mortgage loans. Disasters or recurring power outages may diminish the profitability of our business customers and reduce their ability to repay business loans. Disasters may also reduce the value of the real estate securing our loans, impairing our ability to recover on defaulted loans through foreclosure and making it more likely that we would suffer losses on defaulted loans. California has also experienced energy and water shortages, which, if they recur, could impair the value of the real estate or hinder the operations of businesses, including agricultural businesses, in those areas affected. The occurrence of natural disasters or energy shortages in California could have a material adverse effect on our business prospects, financial condition, and results of operations.

Further, political and social attention to the issue of climate change has increased. Federal and state legislatures and regulatory agencies continue to propose and advance numerous legislative and regulatory initiatives seeking to mitigate the effects of climate change. As a financial institution, it is unclear how future government regulations and shifts in business trends resulting from increased concern about climate change will affect our operations.

We have consummated eleven acquisitions since 2010. Most recently, we completed the acquisition of Opus, a California state chartered bank with approximately $8 billion in total assets on June 1, 2020. The success of the Opus acquisition or any future acquisition we may consummate will depend on, among other things, our ability to realize the anticipated revenue enhancements and efficiencies and to combine our business with the business of the target institution in a manner that does not materially disrupt the existing customer relationships of either institution, or result in decreased revenues resulting from any loss of customers, and that permits growth opportunities to occur. If we are not able to successfully achieve these objectives, the anticipated benefits of the subject acquisition may not be realized fully or at all or may take longer to realize than expected.

It is possible that the integration process associated with any pending or future acquisition could result in the loss of key employees, the disruption of ongoing businesses or inconsistencies in standards, controls, procedures and policies that adversely affect our ability to maintain relationships with clients, customers, depositors and employees or to achieve the anticipated benefits of the acquisitions. Integration efforts could also divert management attention and resources. These integration matters could have an adverse effect on the combined Company.

The acquisition of Opus was an all-stock transaction valued at approximately $749.6 million as of the date of close. The consideration payable to Opus stockholders upon consummation of the acquisition consisted of whole shares of the Corporation’s common stock and cash in lieu of fractional shares of the Corporation’s common stock. We issued approximately 34.4 million shares of common stock to Opus stockholders in connection with the acquisition, and the transaction resulted in initial tangible book value dilution of 2.8%, or $0.53 per share at the time of closing with an earnback period of 1.8 years. Future mergers or acquisitions, if any, may involve cash, debt or equity securities as transaction consideration. Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and market values, and, therefore, some dilution of our stock’s tangible book value and net income per common share may occur in connection with any future transaction. We cannot say with any certainty that we will be able to consummate, or if consummated, successfully integrate any future acquisitions, or that we will not incur disruptions or unexpected expenses in integrating such acquisitions. Furthermore, failure to realize the expected revenue increases, cost savings, increases in geographic or product presence, and/or other projected benefits from pending or future acquisitions could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We are required by federal and state regulators to maintain adequate levels of capital. We may need to raise additional capital in the future to meet regulatory or other internal requirements. As a publicly traded company, a likely source of additional funds is the capital markets, accomplished generally through the issuance of equity, both common and preferred stock, and the issuance of debt. Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on, among other things, conditions in the capital markets at that time, which are outside of our control, and our financial performance.

We cannot provide any assurance that access to such capital will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets, such as a decline in the confidence of debt purchasers or counter-parties participating in the capital markets, may materially and adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and, in turn, our liquidity. Further, if we need to raise capital in the future, we may have to do so when many other financial institutions are also seeking to raise capital and would then have to compete with those institutions for investors. The inability to raise additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could have a materially adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

The Corporation and the Bank are each subject to capital adequacy and liquidity rules and other regulatory requirements specifying minimum amounts and types of capital that must be maintained. From time to time, the regulators implement changes to these regulatory capital adequacy and liquidity guidelines. If we fail to meet these minimum capital and liquidity guidelines and other regulatory requirements, we may be restricted in the types of activities we may conduct and may be prohibited from taking certain capital actions, such as making payments on certain capital instruments, paying executive bonuses or dividends, and repurchasing or redeeming capital securities.

We have made a number of estimates and assumptions relating to the reporting of assets and liabilities and the disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the consolidated financial statements and the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period to prepare these consolidated financial statements in conformity with GAAP. Actual results could differ from these estimates. Material estimates subject to change in the near term include, among other items, the allowance for credit losses, particularly in light of the adoption of the new CECL standard on January 1, 2020; the carrying value of goodwill or other intangible assets; the fair value estimates of certain assets and liabilities; and the realization of deferred tax assets and liabilities. These estimates may be adjusted as more current information becomes available, and any adjustment may be significant.

We rely on quantitative models to measure risks and to estimate certain financial values. Models may be used in such processes as determining the pricing of various products, grading loans and extending credit, measuring interest rate and other market risks, predicting or estimating losses, assessing capital adequacy and calculating regulatory capital levels, as well as to estimate the value of financial instruments and balance sheet items. Poorly designed or implemented models present the risk that our business decisions based on information incorporating model output could be adversely affected due to the inaccuracy of that information. Models are often based on historical experience to predict future outcomes, as a result new experiences or events which are not part of historical experience can significantly increase model imprecision and impact model reliability. Model inputs can also include information provided by third parties, such as economic forecasts or macroeconomic variables (unemployment rates, real GDP etc.) upon which we rely. Some of the decisions that our regulators make, including those related to capital distributions, could be affected due to the perception that the quality of the models used to generate the relevant information is insufficient, which could have a negative impact on our ability to make capital distributions in the form of dividends or share repurchases. Our reliance on models continues to increase as rules, guidance and expectations change. The most recent example of this is the additional models used in the determination of our allowance for credit losses under CECL, which we adopted on January 1, 2020.

Our ability to pay cash dividends to our stockholders is partially dependent upon receiving dividends from the Bank. The Bank’s ability to pay dividends to us is subject to restrictions set forth in the Financial Code. The Financial Code provides that a bank may not make a cash distribution to its stockholders in excess of the lesser of (1) a bank’s retained earnings and (2) a bank’s net income for its last three fiscal years, less the amount of any distributions made by the bank or by any majority-owned subsidiary of the bank to the stockholders of the bank during such period. However, a bank may, with the approval of the DFPI, make a distribution to its stockholders in an amount not exceeding the greatest of (a) its retained earnings; (b) its net income for its last fiscal year; or (c) its net income for its current fiscal year. In the event that banking regulators determine that the stockholders’ equity of a bank is inadequate or that the making of a distribution by the bank would be unsafe or unsound, the regulators may order the bank to refrain from making a proposed distribution.

Approval of the Federal Reserve is required for payment of any dividend by a state chartered bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System, such as the Bank, if the total of all dividends declared by the Bank in any calendar year would exceed the total of its retained net income for that year combined with its retained net income for the preceding two years. In addition, a state member bank may not pay a dividend in an amount greater than its undivided profits without regulatory and stockholder approval. The Bank is also prohibited under federal law from paying any dividend that would cause it to become undercapitalized. A reduction or discontinuance of dividends from the Bank to the Corporation could have an adverse effect on our ability to pay dividends on our common stock, which in turn could have a material adverse effect on our business, including the market price of our common stock.

Our stockholders are only entitled to receive such dividends as our Board may declare out of funds legally available for such payments. In addition, in January 2021, our Board authorized us to repurchase up to 4,725,000 shares of our common stock. We are not required to pay dividends on, or effect repurchases of, our common stock and may reduce or eliminate our common stock dividend and/or share repurchase program in the future. Our ability to pay dividends to our stockholders is subject to the restrictions set forth in Delaware law, by the Federal Reserve, and by certain covenants contained in our subordinated debentures. Notification to the Federal Reserve is also required prior to our declaring and paying a cash dividend to our stockholders during any period in which our quarterly and/or cumulative twelve-month net earnings are insufficient to fund the dividend amount, among other requirements. We may not pay a dividend if the Federal Reserve objects or until such time as we receive approval from the Federal Reserve or we no longer need to provide notice under applicable regulations. In addition, we may be restricted by applicable law or regulation or actions taken by our regulators, now or in the future, from paying dividends to, or repurchasing shares of our common stock from, our stockholders. We cannot provide assurance that we will continue paying dividends on, or repurchase shares of, our common stock at current levels or at all. A reduction or discontinuance of dividends on our common stock or our share repurchase program could have a material adverse effect on the market price of our common stock.

None.

Not applicable.

The common stock of the Corporation has been publicly traded since 1997 and is currently traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market under the symbol PPBI. As of February 19, 2021, there were approximately 968 holders of record of our common stock.

The following table provides information as of December 31, 2020, with respect to options outstanding and shares available for future option, restricted stock and restricted stock unit awards under the Company’s active equity incentive plans.

In January 2019, we announced the initiation of a quarterly cash dividend. Our annual common equity cash dividend was $1.03 per share in 2020, compared to $0.88 per share in 2019, an increase of $0.15 or 17%.

The following table summarizes the Company’s quarterly common equity dividend declared during the periods indicated:

On January 21, 2021, the Corporation’s Board of Directors increased our quarterly cash dividend by $0.02 per share, or 7% to $0.30 per share, payable on February 12, 2021 to shareholders of record on February 5, 2021. The Corporation anticipates continuing a regular quarterly cash dividend. However, we have no obligation to pay dividends and we may change our dividend policy at any time without notice to our shareholders. Any future determination to pay dividends to holders of our common stock will depend on our results of operations, financial condition, capital requirements, banking regulations, contractual restrictions, and any other factors that our Board of Directors may deem relevant.

The Corporation’s ability to pay dividends on its common stock is dependent on the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to the Corporation. Various statutes restrict the amount of dividends that the Bank can pay without regulatory approval. For information on the statutory and regulatory limitations on the ability of the Corporation to pay dividends to its stockholders and on the Bank to pay dividends to the Corporation, see “Item 1. Business-Supervision and Regulation—Dividends” and “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity.”

On January 11, 2021, the Company’s Board of Directors approved a new stock repurchase program, which authorized the repurchase up to 4,725,000 shares of its common stock, representing approximately 5% of the Company’s issued and outstanding shares of common stock and approximately $150 million of common stock as of December 31, 2020 based on the closing price of the Company’s common stock on December 31, 2020. The stock repurchase program may be limited or terminated at any time without notice. The new stock repurchase program replaces and supersedes the previous $100 million stock repurchase program approved by the Board in December 2019, which the Company announced was suspended indefinitely in March 2020. The Company had not repurchased any shares of common stock under the previous stock repurchase program.

The following table sets forth certain of our consolidated financial and statistical information at or for each of the years presented. This data should be read in conjunction with “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” included herein at Item 7 and the Consolidated Financial Statements and Notes thereto included herein at Item 8.

Management’s discussion and analysis of financial condition and results of operations is intended to provide a better understanding of the significant changes in trends relating to the Company’s financial condition, results of operation, liquidity, and capital resources. This section should be read in conjunction with the disclosures regarding “Forward-Looking Statements” set forth in “Item I. Business-Forward Looking Statements”, as well as the discussion set forth in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data,” including the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.

The COVID-19 outbreak was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health Organization on January 30, 2020 and a pandemic by the World Health Organization on March 11, 2020. The ongoing COVID-19 global pandemic and national health emergency has caused significant disruption in the United States and international economies and financial markets. The operations and business results of the Company have been and could continue to be materially adversely affected.

Since the beginning of the crisis, we have been in close contact with our clients, assessing the level of impact on their businesses, and implementing a process to evaluate each client’s specific situation, and where appropriate, providing relief programs. We also enhanced client awareness of our digital banking offerings to ensure that we continue to provide a superior level of customer service. We have taken steps to comply with various government directives regarding social distancing and use of personal protective equipment in the work place, and we are following the guidance from the Centers of Disease Control (“CDC”) to protect our employees.

The Company continued its efforts to monitor the loan portfolio to identify potential at-risk segments and line of credit draws for deviations from normal activity, increase the allowance allocated to these portfolios, and support our customers affected by the COVID-19 pandemic, including but not limited to the following:

Additionally, the CARES Act provides for relief on existing and new SBA loans through the Small Business Debt Relief program. As part of the SBA Small Business Debt Relief, the SBA will automatically pay principal, interest and fees of certain SBA loans for a period of six months for both existing loans and new loans issued prior to September 27, 2020. On December 27, 2020, the CAA authorized a second round of SBA payments on covered loans approved before March 27, 2020, for a two-month period beginning with the first payment due on the loan on or after February 1, 2021 and for an additional three-month period for certain eligible borrowers. For new loans approved beginning on February 2, 2021 and ending on September 30, 2021, SBA will make the payments for a three-month period subject to the availability of funds. At December 31, 2020, approximately 507 loans, representing approximately $142.8 million aggregate reported balance, are eligible for this relief. The CARES Act also provides for mortgage payment relief and a foreclosure moratorium.

The extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic impacts the Company’s business, asset valuations, results of operations, and financial condition, as well as its regulatory capital and liquidity ratios, will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be accurately predicted, including the scope and duration of the COVID-19 pandemic and the actions taken by governmental authorities and other third parties in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Material adverse impacts may include all or a combination of valuation impairments on our intangible assets, investments, loans, loan servicing rights, and deferred tax assets.

The preventative measures taken by various state and local governments, as well as the U.S. government, to stem the spread and impact of the on-going COVID-19 pandemic, have contributed to further strain on economic conditions. Certain businesses and service providers have not been able to conduct operations in their usual manner or have had to temporarily halt operations altogether. While the magnitude of the impact from the on-going COVID-19 pandemic and the related preventative measures taken is uncertain and difficult to predict, we anticipate the on-going COVID-19 pandemic to have an impact on the following:

The U.S. government as well as other state and local policy makers have responded to the on-going COVID-19 pandemic with actions geared to support not only the health and well-being of the public, but also consumers, businesses, and the economy as a whole. However, the impact and overall effectiveness of these actions is difficult to determine at this time. In addition, many economists have expressed concern over the need for additional government stimulus to support an economic recovery. However, the likelihood of additional government stimulus is unknown at this time, and the lack thereof may hinder the prospects of further economic recovery.

Effective as of June 1, 2020, the Corporation completed the acquisition of Opus, a California-chartered state bank headquartered in Irvine, California, pursuant to a definitive agreement dated as of January 31, 2020. At closing, Opus had $8.32 billion in total assets, $5.94 billion in gross loans, and $6.91 billion in total deposits and operated 46 banking offices located throughout California, Washington, Oregon, and Arizona. As a result of the Opus acquisition, the Corporation acquired specialty lines of business, including trust and escrow services.

Pursuant to the terms of the merger agreement, the consideration paid to Opus shareholders consisted of whole shares of the Corporation’s common stock and cash in lieu of fractional shares of the Corporation’s common stock. Upon consummation of the transaction, (i) each share of Opus common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the acquisition was canceled and exchanged for the right to receive 0.900 shares of the Corporation’s common stock, with cash to be paid in lieu of fractional shares at a rate of $19.31 per share, and (ii) each share of Opus Series A non-cumulative, non-voting preferred stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the effective time of the acquisition was converted into and canceled in exchange for the right to receive that number of shares of the Corporation’s common stock equal to the product of (X) the number of shares of Opus common stock into which such share of Opus preferred stock was convertible in connection with, and as a result of, the acquisition, and (Y) 0.900, in each case, plus cash in lieu of fractional shares of the Corporation’s common stock.

The Corporation issued 34,407,403 shares, net of 165,136 shares for tax withholding from Opus equity award holders, of the Corporation’s common stock valued at $21.62 per share, which was the closing price of the Corporation’s common stock on May 29, 2020, the last trading day prior to the consummation of the acquisition, and paid cash in lieu of fractional shares. The Corporation assumed Opus’s warrants and options, which represented the issuance of up to approximately 406,778 and 9,538 additional shares of the Corporation’s common stock, valued at approximately $1.8 million and $46,000, respectively, and issued substitute restricted stock units in an aggregate amount of $328,000. The value of the total transaction consideration paid amounted to approximately $749.6 million. The Opus warrants assumed by the Corporation expired unexercised on September 30, 2020 and no longer remain outstanding. The Opus options assumed by the Corporation have been fully exercised during the third quarter of 2020.

As a result of the Opus acquisition, the Company acquired Opus and recorded net assets of $659.4 million. The estimated fair value of assets acquired and liabilities assumed primarily consist of the followings:

The fair values of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed were determined based on the requirements of FASB ASC Topic 820: Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures. Such fair values are preliminary estimates and are subject to adjustment for up to one year after the merger date or when additional information relative to the closing date fair values becomes available and such information is considered final, whichever is earlier.

The Company accounts for credit losses on loans in accordance with ASC 326, which requires the Company to record an estimate of expected lifetime credit losses for loans at the time of origination or acquisition. The ACL is maintained at a level deemed appropriate by management to provide for expected credit losses in the portfolio as of the date of the consolidated statements of financial condition. Estimating expected credit losses requires management to use relevant forward-looking information, including the use of reasonable and supportable forecasts. The measurement of the ACL is performed by collectively evaluating loans with similar risk characteristics. The Company measures the ACL on commercial real estate loans and commercial loans using a discounted cash flow approach, and a historical loss rate methodology is used to determine the ACL on retail loans. The Company’s discounted cash flow methodology incorporates a probability of default and loss given default model, as well as expectations of future economic conditions, using reasonable and supportable forecasts. The use of reasonable and supportable forecasts require significant judgment, such as selecting forecast scenarios and related scenario-weighting, as well as determining the appropriate length of the forecast horizon. Management leverages economic projections from a reputable and independent third party to inform and provide its reasonable and supportable economic forecasts. Other internal and external indicators of economic forecasts may also be considered by management when developing the forecast metrics. The Company’s ACL model reverts to long-term average loss rates for purposes of estimating expected cash flows beyond a period deemed reasonable and supportable. The Company forecasts economic conditions and expected credit losses over a two-year time horizon before reverting to long-term average loss rates over a period of three years. The duration of the forecast horizon, the period over which forecasts revert to long-term averages, the economic forecasts that management utilizes, as well as additional internal and external indicators of economic forecasts that management considers, may change over time depending on the nature and composition of our loan portfolio. Changes in economic forecasts, in conjunction with changes in loan specific attributes, impact a loan’s probability of default and loss given default, which can drive changes in the determination of the ACL.

Expectations of future cash flows are discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate. The resulting ACL represents the amount by which the loan’s amortized cost exceeds the net present value of a loan’s discounted cash flows. The ACL is recorded through a charge to provision for credit losses and is reduced by charge-offs, net of recoveries on loans previously charged-off. It is the Company’s policy to promptly charge-off loan balances at the time they have been deemed uncollectible.

The Company’s ACL model also includes adjustments for qualitative factors, where appropriate. Since historical information (such as historical net losses and economic cycles) may not always, by themselves, provide a sufficient basis for determining future expected credit losses, the Company periodically considers the need for qualitative adjustments to the ACL. Qualitative adjustments may be related to and include, but not limited to, factors such as: (i) management’s assessment of economic forecasts used in the model and how those forecasts align with management’s overall evaluation of current and expected economic conditions, (ii) organization specific risks such as credit concentrations, collateral specific risks, regulatory risks, and external factors that may ultimately impact credit quality, (iii) potential model limitations such as limitations identified through back-testing, and other limitations associated with factors such as underwriting changes, acquisition of new portfolios, changes in portfolio segmentation, and (iv) management’s overall assessment of the adequacy of the ACL, including an assessment of model data inputs used to determine the ACL.

The Company has a credit portfolio review process designed to detect problem loans. Problem loans are typically those of a substandard or worse internal risk grade, and may consist of loans on nonaccrual status, troubled debt restructurings, loans where the likelihood of foreclosure on underlying collateral has increased, collateral dependent loans and other loans where concern or doubt over the ultimate collectability of all contractual amounts due has become elevated. Such loans may, in the opinion of management, be deemed to no longer possess risk characteristics similar to other loans in the loan portfolio, and as such may require individual evaluation to determine an appropriate ACL for the loan. When a loan is individually evaluated, the Company typically measures the expected credit loss for the loan based on a discounted cash flow approach, unless the loan has been deemed collateral dependent. Collateral dependent loans are loans where the repayment of the loan is expected to come from the operation of and/or eventual liquidation of the underlying collateral. The ACL for collateral dependent loans is determined using estimates for the fair value of the underlying collateral, less costs to sell. Although management uses the best information available to derive estimates necessary to measure an appropriate level of the ACL, future adjustments to the ACL may be necessary due to economic, operating, regulatory, and other conditions that may extend beyond the Company’s control.

Various regulatory agencies, as an integral part of their examination process, periodically review the Company’s ACL and credit risk grading process. Such agencies may require the Company to recognize additions to the allowance based on judgments different from those of management.

The ALLL was increased by provisions for loan losses, and reduced by charge-offs, net of recoveries of amounts previously charged-off.

The Company accounts for business combinations under the acquisition method of accounting. Upon obtaining control of the acquired entity, the Company records all identifiable assets and liabilities at their estimated fair values. Goodwill is recorded when the consideration paid for an acquired entity exceeds the estimated fair value of the net assets acquired. Changes to the acquisition date fair values of assets acquired and liabilities assumed may be made as adjustments to goodwill over a 12-month measurement period following the date of acquisition. Such adjustments are attributable to additional information obtained related fair value estimates of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed. Certain costs associated with business combinations are expensed as incurred.

 

Loans acquired through purchase or a business combination are recorded at their fair value at the acquisition date. The Company performs an assessment of acquired loans to first determine if such loans have experienced more than insignificant deterioration in credit quality since their origination and thus should be classified and accounted for as purchased credit deteriorated (“PCD”) loans. For loans that have not experienced more than insignificant deterioration in credit quality since origination, referred to as non-PCD loans, the Company records such loans at fair value, with any resulting discount or premium accreted or amortized into interest income over the remaining life of the loan using the interest method. Additionally, upon the purchase or acquisition of non-PCD loans, the Company measures and records an ACL based on the Company’s methodology for determining the ACL. The ACL for non-PCD loans is recorded through a charge to provision for credit losses in the period in which the loans were purchased or acquired.

Acquired loans that are classified as PCD are acquired at fair value, which includes any resulting discounts or premiums. Discounts and premiums are accreted or amortized into interest income over the remaining life of the loan using the interest method. Unlike non-PCD loans, the initial ACL for PCD loans is established through an adjustment to the acquired loan balance and not through a charge to provision for credit losses in the period in which the loans were acquired. The ACL for PCD loans is determined with the use of the Company’s ACL methodology, and is recorded as an adjustment to the acquired loan balance on the date of acquisition. Characteristics of PCD loans include: delinquency, downgrade in credit quality since origination, loans on nonaccrual status, loans that had been modified, and/or other factors the Company may become aware of through its initial analysis of acquired loans that may indicate there has been more than insignificant deterioration in credit quality since a loan’s origination. In connection with the Opus acquisition on June 1, 2020, the Company acquired PCD loans with an aggregate fair value of approximately $841.2 million, and recorded a net ACL of approximately $21.2 million, which was added to the amortized cost of the loans.

Subsequent to acquisition, the ACL for both non-PCD and PCD loans are determined with the use of the Company’s ACL methodology in the same manner as all other loans.

The Company uses certain non-GAAP financial measures to provide meaningful supplemental information regarding the Company’s operational performance and to enhance investors’ overall understanding of such financial performance. Generally, a non-GAAP financial measure is a numerical measure of a company’s financial performance, financial position or cash flows that exclude (or include) amounts that are included in (or excluded from) the most directly comparable measure calculated and presented in accordance with GAAP. However, these non-GAAP financial measures are supplemental and are not a substitute for an analysis based on GAAP measures and may not be comparable to non-GAAP financial measures that may be presented by other companies. The non-GAAP measures the Company uses include the following:

The following tables provide reconciliations of the non-GAAP measures with financial measures defined by GAAP: