Brookline Bancorp - 10-K annual report 2016

Washington, DC 20549

or

for the transition period from           N/A           to                                 .

Commission File Number: 0-23695

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(617) 425-4600

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

BROOKLINE BANCORP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

Certain statements contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K that are not historical facts may constitute 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, as amended, and are intended to be covered by the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties. These statements, which are based on certain assumptions and describe Brookline Bancorp, Inc.'s (the "Company's") future plans, strategies and expectations, can generally be identified by the use of the words "may," "will," "should," "could," "would," "plan," "potential," "estimate," "project," "believe," "intend," "anticipate," "expect," "target" and similar expressions. These statements include, among others, statements regarding the Company's intent, belief or expectations with respect to economic conditions, trends affecting the Company's financial condition or results of operations, and the Company's exposure to market, liquidity, interest-rate and credit risk.

Forward-looking statements are based on the current assumptions underlying the statements and other information with respect to the beliefs, plans, objectives, goals, expectations, anticipations, estimates and intentions of management and the financial condition, results of operations, future performance and business are only expectations of future results. Although the Company believes that the expectations reflected in the Company's forward-looking statements are reasonable, the Company's actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements as a result of, among other factors, adverse conditions in the capital and debt markets; changes in interest rates; competitive pressures from other financial institutions; weakness in general economic conditions on a national basis or in the local markets in which the Company operates, including changes which adversely affect borrowers' ability to service and repay their loans and leases; changes in the value of securities and other assets in the Company's investment portfolio; changes in loan and lease default and charge-off rates; the adequacy of allowances for loan and lease losses; deposit levels necessitating increased borrowing to fund loans and investments; changes in government regulation; the risk that goodwill and intangibles recorded in the Company's financial statements will become impaired; and changes in assumptions used in making such forward-looking statements, as well as the other risks and uncertainties detailed in Item 1A, "Risk Factors." Forward-looking statements speak only as of the date on which they are made. The Company does not undertake any obligation to update any forward-looking statement to reflect circumstances or events that occur after the date the forward-looking statements are made.

Item 1.    Business

General

Brookline Bancorp, Inc. (the "Company"), a Delaware corporation, operates as a multi-bank holding company for Brookline Bank and its subsidiaries, Bank Rhode Island ("BankRI") and its subsidiaries, First Ipswich Bank ("First Ipswich") and its subsidiaries, and Brookline Securities Corp.

The Company focuses its business efforts on profitably growing its commercial lending businesses, both organically and through acquisitions. The Company's customer focus, multi-bank structure, and risk management are integral to its organic growth strategy and serve to differentiate the Company from its competitors. As full-service financial institutions, the Banks and their subsidiaries focus on the continued addition of well-qualified customers, the deepening of long-term banking relationships through a full complement of products and excellent customer service, and strong risk management. The Company's multi-bank structure retains the local-bank orientation while relieving local bank management of the responsibility for most back-office functions, which are consolidated at the holding company level. Branding and decision-making, including credit decisions and pricing, remain largely local in order to better meet the needs of bank customers and further motivate the Banks' commercial, business and retail bankers.

The Company, has, from time to time, acquired other business lines or financial institutions that it believes share the Company's relationship and customer service orientations and provide access to complementary markets, customers, products and services. The Company expanded its geographic footprint with the acquisitions of First Ipswich in February 2011 and BankRI in January 2012.

The Company's headquarters and executive management are located at 131 Clarendon Street, Boston, Massachusetts 02116 and its telephone number is 617-425-4600.

Competition

The Company's primary competitors for attracting deposits are savings banks, commercial banks, credit unions, and other non-depository institutions such as securities and brokerage firms and insurance companies. Competitive factors considered in attracting and retaining deposits include product offerings and rate of return, convenient branch locations and automated teller machines and online access to accounts. Deposit customers are generally in communities where banking offices are located.

Market Area and Credit Risk Concentration

Economic Conditions and Governmental Policies

Repayment of multi-family and commercial real estate loans is generally dependent on the properties generating sufficient income to cover operating expenses and debt service. Repayment of commercial loans and equipment financing loans and leases generally is dependent on the demand for the borrowers' products or services and the ability of borrowers to compete and operate on a profitable basis. Repayment of residential mortgage loans, home equity loans and indirect automobile loans generally is dependent on the financial well-being of the borrowers and their capacity to service their debt levels. The asset quality of the Company's loan and lease portfolio, therefore, is greatly affected by the economy.

Should there be any setback in the economy or increase in the unemployment rates in the Boston, Massachusetts, or Providence, Rhode Island, metropolitan areas, the resulting negative consequences could affect occupancy rates in the properties financed by the Company and cause certain individual and business borrowers to be unable to service their debt obligations.

The earnings and business of the Company are affected by external influences such as general economic conditions and the policies of governmental authorities, including the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the "FRB"). The FRB regulates the supply of money and bank credit to influence general economic conditions throughout the United States of America. The instruments of monetary policy employed by the FRB affect interest rates earned on investment securities and loans and interest rates paid on deposits and borrowed funds. The rate-setting actions of the Federal Open Market Committee of the FRB have a significant effect on the Company's operating results and the level of growth in its loans and leases and deposits.

Personnel

Access to Information

As a public company, Brookline Bancorp, Inc. is subject to the informational requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and in accordance therewith, files reports, proxy and information statements and other information with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). The Company makes available on or through its internet website, www.brooklinebancorp.com, without charge, its annual reports on Form 10-K, proxy, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act, as soon as reasonably practicable after such reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC. The Company’s reports filed with, or furnished to, the SEC are also available at the SEC’s website at www.sec.gov. Press releases are also maintained on the Company’s website. Additional information for Brookline Bank, BankRI and First Ipswich can be found at www.brooklinebank.com, www.bankri.com and www.firstipswich.com, respectively. Information on the Company’s and any subsidiary's website is not incorporated by reference into this document and should not be considered part of this Report.

Supervision and Regulation

The following discussion addresses elements of the regulatory framework applicable to bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. This regulatory framework is intended primarily for the protection of the safety and soundness of depository institutions, the federal deposit insurance system, and depositors, rather than for the protection of shareholders of a bank holding company such as the Company.

As a bank holding company, the Company is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the FRB under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHCA”), and by the Massachusetts Division of Banks (the “MDOB”) under Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 167A. The FRB is also the primary federal regulator of the Banks. In addition, Brookline Bank and First Ipswich are subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the MDOB, and BankRI is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the Banking Division of the Rhode Island Department of Business Regulation (the “RIBD”).

The following is a summary of certain aspects of various statutes and regulations applicable to the Company and its subsidiaries. This summary is not a comprehensive analysis of all applicable law, and is qualified by reference to the applicable statutes and regulations.

The Company is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the FRB, which has the authority, among other things, to order bank holding companies to cease and desist from unsafe or unsound banking practices; to assess civil money penalties; and to order termination of non-banking activities or termination of ownership and control of a non-banking subsidiary by a bank holding company.

Pursuant to the BHCA, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, the Company is required to serve as a source of financial strength for the Banks in the event of the financial distress of the Banks. This provision of the Dodd-Frank Act codifies the longstanding policy of the FRB. This support may be required at times when the bank holding company may not have the resources to provide the additional financial support required by its subsidiary banks. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy, any commitment by the bank holding company to a federal bank regulatory agency to maintain the capital of a bank subsidiary will be assumed by the bankruptcy trustee and entitled to priority of payment.

The BHCA prohibits a bank holding company, without prior approval of the FRB, from acquiring all or substantially all the assets of a bank, acquiring control of a bank, merging or consolidating with another bank holding company, or acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of any voting shares of another bank or bank holding company if, after such acquisition, the acquiring bank holding company would control more than 5% of any class of the voting shares of such other bank or bank holding company. Further, as a Massachusetts bank holding company, the Company generally must obtain the prior approval of the Massachusetts Board of Bank Incorporation to acquire ownership or control of more than 5% of any voting stock in any other banking institution, acquire substantially all the assets of a bank, or merge with another bank holding company. However, there is an exemption from this approval requirement in certain cases in which the banking institution to be acquired, simultaneously with the acquisition, merges with a banking institution subsidiary of the Company in a transaction approved by the Massachusetts Commissioner of Banks.

The BHCA prohibits a bank holding company from engaging directly or indirectly in activities other than those of banking, managing or controlling banks or furnishing services to its subsidiary banks. However, a bank holding company may engage in and may own shares of companies engaged in certain activities that the FRB has determined to be so closely related to banking or managing and controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto.

The Change in Bank Control Act prohibits a person or group of persons from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company unless the FRB has been notified and has not objected to the transaction. Under a rebuttable presumption established by the FRB, the acquisition of 10% or more of a class of voting securities of a bank holding company, such as the Company, with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act, would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute the acquisition of control of a bank holding company. In addition, the BHCA prohibits any company from acquiring control of a bank or bank holding company without first having obtained the approval of the FRB. Pursuant to the BHCA, a company is deemed to have control of a bank or bank holding company in a number of ways including: if the

company owns, controls or holds with power to vote 25% or more of a class of voting securities of the bank or bank holding company; controls in any manner the election of a majority of directors or trustees of the bank or bank holding company; or the FRB has determined, after notice and opportunity for hearing, that the company has the power to exercise a controlling influence over the management or policies of the bank or bank holding company.

Brookline Bank and First Ipswich are subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the FRB and the MDOB. BankRI is subject to regulation, supervision and examination by the FRB and the RIBD. The enforcement powers available to federal and state banking regulators include, among other things, the ability to issue cease and desist or removal orders to terminate insurance of deposits; to assess civil money penalties; to issue directives to increase capital; to place the bank into receivership; and to initiate injunctive actions against banking organizations and institution-affiliated parties.

The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (the “FDIA”), as amended by the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act and the Dodd-Frank Act, requires the FDIC to take steps as may be necessary to cause the ratio of deposit insurance reserves to estimated insured deposits - the designated reserve ratio - to reach 1.35% by September 30, 2020, and it mandates that the reserve ratio designated by the FDIC for any year may not be less than 1.35%. The FDIC utilizes a risk-based assessment system that imposes insurance premiums based upon a risk matrix that takes into account a bank’s capital level and supervisory rating (“CAMELS rating”). CAMELS ratings reflect the applicable bank regulatory agencies’ evaluation of the financial institution’s capital, asset quality, management, earnings, liquidity and sensitivity to risk. Assessment rates may also vary for certain institutions based on long-term debt issuer ratings, issuance of unsecured debt and levels of brokered deposits. Further, the Dodd-Frank Act required that, in setting assessments, the FDIC offset the effect of the increase in the minimum reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35% on banks with less than $10 billion in assets.

To satisfy these requirements, on March 15, 2016, the FDIC’s Board of Directors approved a final rule to increase the reserve ratio to the statutorily required minimum ratio of 1.35% of estimated insured deposits. The final rule imposes on large banks a surcharge of 4.5 basis points of their assessment base, after making certain adjustments. Large banks, which are generally banks with $10 billion or more in assets, will pay quarterly surcharges in addition to their regular risk-based assessments. Overall regular risk-based assessment rates will decline once the reserve ratio reaches 1.15%. Small banks, such as the Banks, will receive credits to offset the portion of their assessments that help to raise the reserve ratio from 1.15% to 1.35%. After the reserve ratio reaches 1.38%, the FDIC will automatically apply a small bank’s credits to reduce its regular assessment up to the entire amount of the assessment. The final rule provided that these changes would become effective July 1, 2016 if the reserve ratio reached 1.15% prior to that date. On June 30, 2016, the reserve ratio rose to 1.17%, which resulted in the revised deposit insurance assessment pricing becoming effective on July 1, 2016.

Deposit premiums are based on assets. To determine its deposit insurance premium, the Bank computes the base amount of its average consolidated assets less its average tangible equity (defined as the amount of Tier 1 capital) and the applicable assessment rate. On April 26, 2016, the FDIC’s Board of Directors adopted a final rule that changed the manner in which deposit insurance assessment rates are calculated for established small banks, generally those banks with less than $10 billion of assets that have been insured for at least five years. The rule updated the data and methodology that the FDIC uses to determine risk-based assessment rates for these institutions with the intent of better reflecting risks and ensuring that banks that take on greater risks pay more for deposit insurance than their less risky counterparts. The rule revised the financial ratios method used to determine assessment rates for these banks so that it is based on a statistical model that estimates the probability of failure over three years. The rule eliminated risk categories for established small banks and uses the financial ratios method. Under this method, each of seven financial ratios and a weighted average of CAMELS component ratings will be multiplied by a corresponding pricing multiplier. The sum of these products will be added to a uniform amount, with the resulting sum being an institution’s initial base assessment rate (subject to minimum or maximum assessment rates based on a bank’s CAMELS composite rating). This method takes into account various measures that are similar to the factors that the FDIC previously considered in assigning institutions to risk categories, including an institution’s leverage ratio, brokered deposit ratio, one year asset growth, the ratio of net income before taxes to total assets and considerations related to asset quality. Under the small

bank pricing rule, beginning the first assessment period after June 30, 2016, where the DIF’s reserve ratio has reached 1.15%, assessments for established small banks with a CAMELS rating of 1 or 2 will range from 1.5 to 16 basis points, after adjustments, while assessment rates for established small banks with a CAMELS composite rating of 4 or 5 may range from 11 to 30 basis points, after adjustments. Assessments for established small banks with a CAMELS rating of 3 will range from 3 to 30 basis points.

Similar to the source of strength doctrine discussed above in “Regulation of the Company-Source of Strength,” under the cross-guarantee provisions of the FDIA, the FDIC can hold any FDIC-insured depository institution liable for any loss suffered or anticipated by the FDIC in connection with (i) the “default” of a commonly controlled FDIC-insured depository institution; or (ii) any assistance provided by the FDIC to a commonly controlled FDIC-insured depository institution “in danger of default.”

The Banks must seek prior regulatory approval from the FRB to acquire another bank or establish a new branch office. Brookline Bank and First Ipswich must also seek prior regulatory approval from the MDOB to acquire another bank or establish a new branch office and BankRI must also seek prior regulatory approval from the RIBD to acquire another bank or establish a new branch office. Well capitalized and well managed banks may acquire other banks in any state, subject to certain deposit concentration limits and other conditions, pursuant to the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994, as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes a state-chartered bank to establish new branches on an interstate basis to the same extent a bank chartered by the host state may establish branches.

Section 24 of the FDIA generally limits the types of equity investments that FDIC-insured state-chartered banks, such as the Banks, may make and the kinds of activities in which such banks may engage, as a principal, to those that are permissible for national banks. Further, the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (the “GLBA”) permits state banks, to the extent permitted under state law, to engage through “financial subsidiaries” in certain activities which are permissible for subsidiaries of a financial holding company. In order to form a financial subsidiary, a state-chartered bank must be well capitalized, and must comply with certain capital deduction, risk management and affiliate transaction rules, among other requirements.

The Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”) requires the FRB to evaluate each of the Banks with regard to their performance in helping to meet the credit needs of the communities each of the Banks serve, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods, consistent with safe and sound banking operations, and to take this record into consideration when evaluating certain applications. The FRB’s CRA regulations are generally based upon objective criteria of the performance of institutions under three key assessment tests: (i) a lending test, to evaluate the institution’s record of making loans in its service areas; (ii) an investment test, to evaluate the institution’s record of investing in community development projects, affordable housing, and programs benefiting low or moderate income individuals and businesses; and (iii) a service test, to evaluate the institution’s delivery of services through its branches, ATMs, and other offices. Failure of an institution to receive at least a “Satisfactory” rating could inhibit the Banks or the Company from undertaking certain activities, including engaging in activities permitted as a financial holding company under GLBA and acquisitions of other financial institutions. Each Bank has

achieved a rating of “Satisfactory” on its most recent CRA examination. Both Massachusetts and Rhode Island have adopted specific community reinvestment requirements which are substantially similar to those of the FRB.

Federal law limits a bank’s authority to extend credit to its directors, executive officers and holders of more than 10% of the Company's common stock, as well as to entities controlled by such persons. Among other things, extensions of credit to insiders are required to be made on terms that are substantially the same as, and follow credit underwriting procedures that are not less stringent than, those prevailing for comparable transactions with unaffiliated persons. Also, the terms of such extensions of credit may not involve more than the normal risk of repayment or present other unfavorable features and may not exceed certain limitations on the amount of credit extended to such persons, individually and in the aggregate, which limits are based, in part, on the amount of the bank’s capital. The Dodd-Frank Act explicitly provides that an extension of credit to an insider includes credit exposure arising from a derivatives transaction, repurchase agreement, reverse repurchase agreement, securities lending transaction or securities borrowing transaction. Additionally, the Dodd-Frank Act requires that asset sale transactions with insiders must be on market terms, and if the transaction represents more than 10% of the capital and surplus of the bank, be approved by a majority of the disinterested directors of the bank.

The FRB has issued risk-based and leverage capital rules applicable to U.S. banking organizations such as the Company and the Banks. These rules are intended to reflect the relationship between the banking organization’s capital and the degree of risk associated with its operations based on transactions recorded on-balance sheet as well as off-balance sheet items. The FRB may from time to time require that a banking organization maintain capital above the minimum levels discussed below, due to the banking organization’s financial condition or actual or anticipated growth.

Under the capital rules, risk-based capital ratios are calculated by dividing common equity Tier 1, Tier 1, and total risk-based capital, respectively, by risk-weighted assets. Assets and off-balance sheet credit equivalents are assigned to one of several categories of risk-weights, based primarily on relative risk. Under the FRB's rules, the Company and the Banks are each required to maintain a minimum common equity Tier 1 capital ratio requirement of 4.5%, a minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement of 6%, a minimum total capital requirement of 8% and a minimum leverage ratio requirement of 4%. Additionally subject to a transition schedule, these rules require an institution to establish a capital conservation buffer of common equity Tier 1 capital in an amount above the minimum risk-based capital requirements for "adequately capitalized" institutions equal to 2.5% of total risk weighted assets, or face restrictions on the ability to pay dividends, pay discretionary bonuses, and to engaged in share repurchases.

A bank holding company, such as the Company, is considered "well capitalized" if the bank holding company (i) has a total risk based capital ratio of at least 10%, (ii) has a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 6%, and (iii) is not subject to any written agreement order, capital directive or prompt corrective action directive to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure. In addition, under the FRB's prompt corrective action rules, a state member bank is considered “well capitalized” if it (i) has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0% or greater; (ii) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.0% or

greater; (iii) a common Tier 1 equity ratio of at least 6.5% or greater, (iv) a leverage capital ratio of 5.0% or greater; and (v) is not subject to any written agreement, order, capital directive, or prompt corrective action directive to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure. The FRB also considers: (i) concentrations of credit risk; (ii) interest rate risk; and (iii) risks from non-traditional activities, as well as an institution’s ability to manage those risks. When determining the adequacy of an institution’s capital, this evaluation is a part of the institution’s regular safety and soundness examination. Each of the Banks is currently considered well-capitalized under all regulatory definitions.

Generally, a bank, upon receiving notice that it is not adequately capitalized (i.e., that it is “undercapitalized”), becomes subject to the prompt corrective action provisions of Section 38 of FDIA that, for example, (i) restrict payment of capital distributions and management fees, (ii) require that its federal bank regulator monitor the condition of the institution and its efforts to restore its capital, (iii) require submission of a capital restoration plan, (iv) restrict the growth of the institution’s assets and (v) require prior regulatory approval of certain expansion proposals. A bank that is required to submit a capital restoration plan must concurrently submit a performance guarantee by each company that controls the bank. A bank that is “critically undercapitalized” (i.e., has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets that is equal to or less than 2.0%) will be subject to further restrictions, and generally will be placed in conservatorship or receivership within 90 days.

The Banks are considered “well capitalized” under the FRB's prompt corrective action rules and the Company is considered “well capitalized” under the FRB's rules applicable to bank holding companies.

The FDIA requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to prescribe standards, by regulations or guidelines, relating to internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate risk exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings, stock valuation and compensation, fees and benefits, and such other operational and managerial standards as the agencies deem appropriate. Guidelines adopted by the federal bank regulatory agencies establish general standards relating to internal controls and information systems, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, asset quality, earnings and compensation, fees and benefits. In general, these guidelines require, among other things, appropriate systems and practices to identify and manage the risk and exposures specified in the guidelines. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal stockholder. In addition, the federal banking agencies adopted regulations that authorize, but do not require, an agency to order an institution that has been given notice by an agency that it is not satisfying any of such safety and soundness standards to submit a compliance plan. If, after being so notified, an institution fails to submit an acceptable compliance plan or fails in any material respect to implement an acceptable compliance plan, the agency must issue an order directing action to correct the deficiency and may issue an order restricting asset growth, requiring an institution to increase its ratio of tangible equity to assets or directing other actions of the types to which an undercapitalized institution is subject under the “prompt corrective action” provisions of FDIA. See “Regulatory Capital Requirements” above. If an institution fails to comply with such an order, the agency may seek to enforce such order in judicial proceedings and to impose civil money penalties.

The Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Banks. The revenue of the Company (on a parent company only basis) is derived primarily from dividends paid to it by the Banks. The right of the Company, and consequently the right of shareholders of the Company, to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of the Banks through the payment of such dividends or otherwise is necessarily subject to the prior claims of creditors of the Banks (including depositors), except to the extent that certain claims of the Company in a creditor capacity may be recognized.

The FRB has authority to prohibit bank holding companies from paying dividends if such payment is deemed to be an unsafe or unsound practice. The FRB has indicated generally that it may be an unsafe or unsound practice for bank holding companies to pay dividends unless the bank holding company’s net income for the prior year is sufficient to fund the dividends and the expected rate of earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition. Further, the Company's ability to pay dividends will be restricted if it does not maintain the required capital conservation buffer. See “Capital Adequacy and Safety and Soundness-Regulatory Capital Requirements” above.

The FRB has the authority to use its enforcement powers to prohibit a bank from paying dividends if, in its opinion, the payment of dividends would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice. Federal law also prohibits the payment of dividends by a bank that will result in the bank failing to meet its applicable capital requirements on a pro forma basis. In addition, a state bank that is a member of the Federal Reserve System may not declare or pay a dividend if the total of all dividends declared during the calendar year, including the proposed dividend, exceeds the sum of the bank's net income (as reportable in its Reports of Condition and Income) during the current calendar year and the retained net income of the prior two calendar years, unless the dividend has been approved by the FRB. Payment of dividends by a bank is also restricted pursuant to various state regulatory limitations.

The Company and the Banks are subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect consumers and prohibit unfair or deceptive business practices. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, Fair Housing Act, Home Ownership Protection Act, Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (the “FACT Act”), GLBA, Truth in Lending Act, the CRA, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, National Flood Insurance Act and various state law counterparts. These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must interact with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans and providing other services. Further, the Dodd-Frank Act established the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau ("CFPB"), which has the responsibility for making rules and regulations under the federal consumer protection laws relating to financial products and services. The CFPB also has a broad mandate to prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive acts and practices and is specifically empowered to require certain disclosures to consumers and draft model disclosure forms. Failure to comply with consumer protection laws and regulations can subject financial institutions to enforcement actions, fines and other penalties. The FRB examines the Banks for compliance with CFPB rules and enforce CFPB rules with respect to the Banks.

The Dodd-Frank Act prescribes certain standards that mortgage lenders must consider before making a residential mortgage loan, including verifying a borrower’s ability to repay such mortgage loan, and allows borrowers to assert violations of certain provisions of the Truth-in-Lending Act as a defense to foreclosure proceedings. Under the Dodd-Frank Act, prepayment penalties are prohibited for certain mortgage transactions and creditors are prohibited from financing insurance policies in connection with a residential mortgage loan or home equity line of credit. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act prohibits mortgage originators from receiving compensation based on the terms of residential mortgage loans and generally limits the ability of a mortgage originator to be compensated by others if compensation is received from a consumer. The Dodd-Frank Act

requires mortgage lenders to make additional disclosures prior to the extension of credit, in each billing statement and for negative amortization loans and hybrid adjustable rate mortgages. Additionally, the CFPB’s qualified mortgage rule, (the “QM Rule”), requires creditors, such as the Banks, to make a reasonable good faith determination of a consumer's ability to repay any consumer credit transaction secured by a dwelling prior to making the loan. 

The GLBA requires financial institutions to implement policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of nonpublic personal information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. In general, the Banks must provide their customers with an annual disclosure that explains their policies and procedures regarding the disclosure of such nonpublic personal information, and, except as otherwise required or permitted by law, the Banks are prohibited from disclosing such information except as provided in such policies and procedures. If the financial institution only discloses information under exceptions from the GLBA that do not require an opt out to be provided and if there has been no change in the financial institutions privacy policies and practices since its most recent disclosures provide to customers, an annual disclosure is not required to be provided by the financial institution. The GLBA also requires that the Banks develop, implement and maintain a comprehensive written information security program designed to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer information (as defined under GLBA), to protect against anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such information and to protect against unauthorized access to or use of such information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. The Banks are also required to send a notice to customers whose “sensitive information” has been compromised if unauthorized use of this information is “reasonably possible.” Most of the states, including the states where the Banks operate, have enacted legislation concerning breaches of data security and the duties of the Banks in response to a data breach. Congress continues to consider federal legislation that would require consumer notice of data security breaches. Pursuant to the FACT Act, the Banks must also develop and implement a written identity theft prevention program to detect, prevent, and mitigate identity theft in connection with the opening of certain accounts or certain existing accounts. Additionally, the FACT Act amends the Fair Credit Reporting Act to generally prohibit a person from using information received from an affiliate to make a solicitation for marketing purposes to a consumer, unless the consumer is given notice and a reasonable opportunity and a reasonable and simple method to opt out of the making of such solicitations.

Under the Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”), a financial institution is required to have systems in place to detect certain transactions, based on the size and nature of the transaction. Financial institutions are generally required to report to the United States Treasury any cash transactions involving more than $10,000. In addition, financial institutions are required to file suspicious activity reports for any transaction or series of transactions that involve more than $5,000 and which the financial institution knows, suspects or has reason to suspect involves illegal funds, is designed to evade the requirements of the BSA or has no lawful purpose. The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (the “USA PATRIOT Act”), which amended the BSA, is designed to deny terrorists and others the ability to obtain anonymous access to the U.S. financial system. The USA PATRIOT Act has significant implications for financial institutions and businesses of other types involved in the transfer of money. The USA PATRIOT Act, together with the implementing regulations of various federal regulatory agencies, has caused financial institutions, such as the Banks, to adopt and implement additional policies or amend existing policies and procedures with respect to, among other things, anti-money laundering compliance, suspicious activity, currency transaction reporting, customer identity verification and customer risk analysis. In evaluating an application under Section 3 of the BHCA to acquire a bank or an application under the Bank Merger Act to merge banks or effect a purchase of assets and assumption of deposits and other liabilities, the applicable federal banking regulator must consider the anti-money laundering compliance record of both the applicant and the target. In addition, under the USA PATRIOT Act, financial institutions are required to take steps to monitor their correspondent banking and private banking relationships as well as, if applicable, their relationships with “shell banks.”

The U.S. has imposed economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others. These sanctions, which are administered by the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (“OFAC”), take many different forms. Generally, however, they contain one or more of the following elements: (i) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on “U.S. persons” engaging in financial or other transactions relating to a sanctioned country or with certain designated persons and entities; (ii) a blocking of assets in which the government or specially designated nationals of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in

The Dodd-Frank Act prohibits banking organizations, such as the Company and the Banks, from engaging in proprietary trading and from sponsoring and investing in hedge funds and private equity funds, except as permitted under certain limited circumstances, in a provision commonly referred to as the “Volcker Rule.” Under the Dodd-Frank Act, proprietary trading generally means trading by a banking entity or its affiliate for its trading account. Hedge funds and private equity funds are described by the Dodd-Frank Act as funds that would be registered under the Investment Company Act but for certain enumerated exemptions. The Volcker Rule restrictions apply to the Company, the Banks and all of their subsidiaries and affiliates.

Item 1A.    Risk Factors

Before deciding to invest in us or deciding to maintain or increase your investment, you should carefully consider the risks described below, in addition to the other information contained in this report and in our other filings with the SEC. The risks and uncertainties described below and in our other filings are not the only ones facing us. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our business. If any of these known or unknown risks or uncertainties actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed. In that event, the market price for our common stock could decline and you may lose your investment.

We operate in a highly regulated industry, and laws and regulations, or changes in them, could limit or restrict our activities and could have a material adverse effect on our operations.

We and our banking subsidiaries are subject to regulation and supervision by the FRB. Our banking subsidiaries are also subject to regulation and supervision by state banking regulators and the FRB. Federal and state laws and regulations govern numerous matters affecting us, including changes in the ownership or control of banks and bank holding companies, maintenance of adequate capital and the financial condition of a financial institution, permissible types, amounts and terms of extensions of credit and investments, permissible non-banking activities, the level of reserves against deposits and restrictions on dividend payments. The FRB and the state banking regulators have the power to issue cease and desist orders to prevent or remedy unsafe or unsound practices or violations of law by banks subject to their regulation, and the FRB possesses similar powers with respect to bank holding companies. These and other restrictions limit the manner in which we and our banking subsidiaries may conduct business and obtain financing.

As a highly regulated business, the laws, rules, regulations, and supervisory guidance and policies applicable to us are subject to regular modification and change. Changes to statutes, regulations, or regulatory policies, including changes in interpretation or implementation of statutes, regulations, or policies, or supervisory guidance could affect in enforcement and other legal actions by federal or state authorities, including criminal and civil penalties, the loss of FDIC insurance, revocation of a banking charter, other sanctions by regulatory agencies, civil money penalties, and/or reputational damage, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations. See the "Supervision and Regulation" section of Item 1, "Business."

We became subject to new capital requirements in 2015. These new standards, which now apply and will be fully phased-in over the next several years, force bank holding companies and their bank subsidiaries to maintain substantially higher levels of capital as a percentage of their assets, with a greater emphasis on common equity as opposed to other components of capital. The need to maintain more and higher quality capital, as well as greater liquidity, and generally increased regulatory scrutiny with respect to capital levels, may at some point limit our business activities, including lending, and our ability to expand. It could also result in our being required to take steps to increase our regulatory capital and may dilute shareholder value or limit our ability to pay dividends or otherwise return capital to our investors through stock repurchases. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Act, we were permitted to make a one-time, permanent election to continue to exclude accumulated other comprehensive income from capital. The Company made this election.

The Community Reinvestment Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act, and other fair lending laws and regulations impose community investment and nondiscriminatory lending requirements on financial institutions. The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, the Department of Justice and other federal agencies are responsible for enforcing these laws and regulations. A successful regulatory challenge to an institution’s performance under the Community Reinvestment Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Housing Act or other fair lending laws and regulations could result in a wide variety of sanctions, including damages and civil money penalties, injunctive relief, restrictions on mergers and acquisitions, restrictions on expansion and restrictions on entering new business lines. Private parties may also have the ability to challenge an institution’s performance under fair lending laws in private class action litigation. Such actions could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We face significant legal risks, both from regulatory investigations and proceedings and from private actions brought against us.

From time to time we are named as a defendant or are otherwise involved in various legal proceedings, including class actions and other litigation or disputes with third parties. There is no assurance that litigation with private parties will not increase in the future. Actions against us may result in judgments, settlements, fines, penalties or other results adverse to us, which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition or results of operations, or cause serious reputational harm to us. As a participant in the financial services industry, it is likely that we could continue to experience a high level of litigation related to our businesses and operations.

Our businesses and operations are also subject to increasing regulatory oversight and scrutiny, which may lead to additional regulatory investigations or enforcement actions. These and other initiatives from federal and state officials may subject us to further judgments, settlements, fines or penalties, or cause us to be required to restructure our operations and activities, all of which could lead to reputational issues, or higher operational costs, thereby reducing our revenue.

We may incur fines, penalties and other negative consequences from regulatory violations, possibly even inadvertent or unintentional violations.

The financial services industry is subject to intense scrutiny from bank supervisors in the examination process and aggressive enforcement of federal and state regulations, particularly with respect to mortgage-related practices and other consumer compliance matters, and compliance with anti-money laundering, Bank Secrecy Act and Office of Foreign Assets Control regulations, and economic sanctions against certain foreign countries and nationals. Enforcement actions may be initiated for violations of laws and regulations and unsafe or unsound practices. We maintain systems and procedures designed to ensure that we comply with applicable laws and regulations; however, some legal/regulatory frameworks provide for the imposition of fines or penalties for noncompliance even though the noncompliance was inadvertent or unintentional and even though there was in place at the time systems and procedures designed to ensure compliance. Failure to comply with these and other regulations, and supervisory expectations related thereto, may result in fines, penalties, lawsuits, regulatory sanctions, reputation damage, or restrictions on our business.

Weakness in the U.S. economy may adversely affect our business. While in recent years there has been a gradual improvement in the U.S. economy, the outlook remains uncertain amid concerns about short- and long-term interest rates, debt and equity capital markets and financial market conditions generally. A deterioration of business and economic conditions could adversely affect the credit quality of our loans, results of operations and financial condition. Increases in loan delinquencies and default rates could adversely impact our loan charge-offs and provision for loan and lease losses. Deterioration or defaults made by issuers of the underlying collateral of our investment securities may cause additional credit-related other-than-temporary impairment charges to our income statement. Our ability to borrow from other financial institutions or to access the debt or equity capital markets on favorable terms or at all could be adversely affected by disruptions in the capital markets or other events, including actions by rating agencies and deteriorating investor expectations.

Deterioration in local economies or real estate market may adversely affect our business.

We primarily serve individuals and businesses located in the greater Boston metropolitan area, eastern Massachusetts, New York, New Jersey, and Rhode Island. Our success is largely dependent on the economic conditions, including employment levels, population growth, income levels, savings trends and government policies, in those market areas. Weaker economic conditions caused by recession, unemployment, inflation, a decline in real estate values or other factors beyond our control may adversely affect the ability of our borrowers to service their debt obligations, and could result in higher loan and lease losses and lower net income for us.

If our allowance for loan and lease losses is not sufficient to cover actual loan and lease losses, our earnings may decrease.

We are exposed to the risk that our borrowers may default on their obligations. A borrower's default on its obligations under one or more loans or leases may result in lost principal and interest income and increased operating expenses as a result of the allocation of management time and resources to the collection and work-out of the loan or lease. In certain situations, where collection efforts are unsuccessful or acceptable work-out arrangements cannot be reached, we may have to write off the loan or lease in whole or in part. In such situations, we may acquire real estate or other assets, if any, that secure the loan or lease through foreclosure or other similar available remedies, and often the amount owed under the defaulted loan or lease exceeds the value of the assets acquired.

We periodically make a determination of an allowance for loan and lease losses based on available information, including, but not limited to, the quality of the loan and lease portfolio as indicated by loan risk ratings, economic conditions, the value of the underlying collateral and the level of nonaccruing and criticized loans and leases. Management relies on its loan officers and credit quality reviews, its experience and its evaluation of economic conditions, among other factors, in determining the amount of provision required for the allowance for loan and lease losses. Provisions to this allowance result in an expense for the period. If, as a result of general economic conditions, previously incorrect assumptions, or an increase in defaulted loans or leases, we determine that additional increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses are necessary, additional expenses may be incurred.

Determining the allowance for loan and lease losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks and trends, all of which may undergo material changes. At any time, there are likely to be loans and/or leases in our portfolio that will result in losses but that have not been identified as nonperforming or potential problem credits. We cannot be sure that we will be able to identify deteriorating credits before they become nonperforming assets or that we will be able to limit losses on those loans and leases that are identified. We have in the past been, and in the future may be, required to increase our allowance for loan and lease losses for any of several reasons. State and federal regulators, in reviewing our loan and lease portfolio as part of a regulatory examination, may request that we increase the allowance for loan and lease losses. Changes in economic conditions or individual business or personal circumstances affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans and leases, identification of additional problem loans and leases and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan and lease losses. In addition, if charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan and lease losses, we will need additional increases in its allowance for loan and lease losses. Any increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses may result in a decrease in our net income and, possibly, our capital, and could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our loan and lease portfolios include commercial real estate mortgage loans and commercial loans and leases, which are generally riskier than other types of loans.

Our commercial real estate and commercial loan and lease portfolios currently comprise 80.8% of total loans and leases. Commercial loans and leases generally carry larger balances and involve a higher risk of nonpayment or late payment than residential mortgage loans. Most of the commercial loans and leases are secured by borrower business assets such as accounts receivable, inventory, equipment and other fixed assets. Compared to real estate, these types of collateral are more difficult to monitor, harder to value, may depreciate more rapidly and may not be as readily saleable if repossessed. Repayment of commercial loans and leases is largely dependent on the business and financial condition of borrowers. Business cash flows are dependent on the demand for the products and services offered by the borrower's business. Such demand may be reduced when economic conditions are weak or when the products and services offered are viewed as less valuable than those offered by competitors. Because of the risks associated with commercial loans and leases, we may experience higher rates of default than if the portfolio were more heavily weighted toward residential mortgage loans. Higher rates of default could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Environmental liability associated with our lending activities could result in losses.

In the course of business, we may acquire, through foreclosure, properties securing loans originated or purchased that are in default. Particularly in commercial real estate lending, there is a risk that material environmental violations could be discovered on these properties. In this event, we might be required to remedy these violations at the affected properties at our sole cost and expense. The cost of remedial action could substantially exceed the value of affected properties. We may not have adequate remedies against the prior owner or other responsible parties and could find it difficult or impossible to sell the affected properties. These events could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Competition in the financial services industry could make it difficult for us to sustain adequate profitability.

We face significant competition for loans, leases and deposits from other banks and financial institutions both within and beyond our local marketplace. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources and higher lending limits than we do and may offer products and services that we do not, or cannot, provide. There is also increased competition by out-of-market

competitors through the internet. The ability of non-banking financial institutions to provide services previously limited to commercial banks has intensified competition. Because non-banking financial institutions are not subject to the same regulatory restrictions as banks and bank holding companies, they can often operate with greater flexibility and lower cost structures. Securities firms and insurance companies that elect to become financial holding companies may acquire banks and other financial institutions. This may significantly change the competitive environment in which we conduct our business. As a result of these various sources of competition, we could lose business to competitors or could be forced to price products and services on less advantageous terms to retain or attract clients, either of which would adversely affect our profitability.

Channels for servicing our customers are evolving rapidly, with less reliance on traditional branch facilities, more use of online and mobile banking, and increased demand for universal bankers and other relationship managers who can service multiples product lines. We compete with larger providers who are rapidly evolving their service channels and escalating the costs of evolving the service process. We have a process for evaluating the profitability of our branch system and other office and operational facilities. The identification of unprofitable operations and facilities can lead to restructuring charges and introduce the risk of disruptions to revenues and customer relationships.

Our consolidated results of operations depend, on a large part, on net interest income, which is the difference between (i) interest income on interest-earning assets, such as loans, leases and securities, and (ii) interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and borrowed funds. As a result, our earnings and growth are significantly affected by interest rates, which are subject to the influence of economic conditions generally, both domestic and foreign, to events in the capital markets and also to the monetary and fiscal policies of the United States and its agencies, particularly the FRB. The nature and timing of any changes in such policies or general economic conditions and their effect on us cannot be controlled and are extremely difficult to predict. An increase in interest rates could also have a negative impact on our results of operations by reducing the ability of borrowers to repay their current loan obligations, which could not only result in increased loan defaults, foreclosures and charge-offs, but also necessitate further increases to our allowances for loan losses. A decrease in interest rates may trigger loan prepayments, which may serve to reduce net interest income if we are unable to lend those funds to other borrowers or invest the funds at the same or higher interest rates.

Our securities portfolio performance in difficult market conditions could have adverse effects on our results of operations.

Unrealized losses on investment securities result from changes in credit spreads and liquidity issues in the marketplace, along with changes in the credit profile of individual securities issuers. Under GAAP, we are required to review our investment portfolio periodically for the presence of other-than-temporary impairment of our securities, taking into consideration current market conditions, the extent and nature of changes in fair value, issuer rating changes and trends, volatility of earnings, current analysts' evaluations, our ability and intent to hold investments until a recovery of fair value, as well as other factors. Adverse developments with respect to one or more of the foregoing factors may require us to deem particular securities to be other-than-temporarily impaired, with the credit-related portion of the reduction in the value recognized as a charge to our earnings. Subsequent valuations, in light of factors prevailing at that time, may result in significant changes in the values of these securities in future periods. Any of these factors could require us to recognize further impairments in the value of our securities portfolio, which may have an adverse effect on our results of operations in future periods.

Potential downgrades of U.S. government securities by one or more of the credit ratings agencies could have a material adverse effect on our operations, earnings and financial condition.

A possible future downgrade of the sovereign credit ratings of the U.S. government and a decline in the perceived creditworthiness of U.S. government-related obligations could impact our ability to obtain funding that is collateralized by affected instruments, as well as affect the pricing of that funding when it is available. A downgrade may also adversely affect the market value of such instruments. We cannot predict if, when or how any changes to the credit ratings or perceived creditworthiness of these organizations will affect economic conditions. Such ratings actions could result in a significant adverse impact on us. Among other things, a downgrade in the U.S. government’s credit rating could adversely impact the value of our securities portfolio and may trigger requirements that the Company post additional collateral for trades relative to these securities. A downgrade of the sovereign credit ratings of the U.S. government or the credit ratings of related institutions, agencies or instruments would significantly exacerbate the other risks to which we are subject and any related adverse effects on the business, financial condition and results of operations.

Wholesale funding sources may prove insufficient to replace deposits at maturity and support our operations and future growth.

We and our banking subsidiaries must maintain sufficient funds to respond to the needs of depositors and borrowers. To manage liquidity, we draw upon a number of funding sources in addition to core deposit growth and repayments and maturities of loans and investments. These sources include Federal Home Loan Bank advances, proceeds from the sale of investments and loans, and liquidity resources at the holding company. Our ability to manage liquidity will be severely constrained if we are unable to maintain access to funding or if adequate financing is not available to accommodate future growth at acceptable costs. In addition, if we are required to rely more heavily on more expensive funding sources to support future growth, our revenues may not increase proportionately to cover our costs. In this case, operating margins and profitability would be adversely affected. Turbulence in the capital and credit markets may adversely affect our liquidity and financial condition and the willingness of certain counterparties and customers to do business with us.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.

Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and commercial soundness of other financial institutions.  Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty and other relationships.  We have exposure to many different counterparties, and we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, other commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, and other financial institutions.  As a result, defaults by, or even rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, could lead to market-wide liquidity problems and losses or defaults by us or by other institutions and organizations.  Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty or client.  In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be liquidated or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due to us.  There is no assurance that any such losses would not materially and adversely affect our results of operations.

Loss of deposits or a change in deposit mix could increase our cost of funding.

Damage to our reputation could significantly harm our business, including our competitive position and business prospects.

We are dependent on our reputation within our market area, as a trusted and responsible financial company, for all aspects of our relationships with customers, employees, vendors, third-party service providers, and others, with whom we conduct business or potential future business. Our ability to attract and retain customers and employees could be adversely affected if our reputation is damaged. Our actual or perceived failure to address various issues could give rise to reputational risk that could cause harm to us and our business prospects. These issues also include, but are not limited to, legal and regulatory requirements; properly maintaining customer and employee personal information; record keeping; money-laundering; sales and trading practices; ethical issues; appropriately addressing potential conflicts of interest; and the proper identification of the legal, reputational, credit, liquidity and market risks inherent in our products. Failure to appropriately address any of these issues could also give rise to additional regulatory restrictions and legal risks, which could, among other consequences, increase the size and number of litigation claims and damages asserted or subject us to enforcement actions, fines and penalties and incur related costs and expenses.

Our ability to service our debt and pay dividends is dependent on capital distributions from our subsidiary banks, and these distributions are subject to regulatory limits and other restrictions.

We are a legal entity that is separate and distinct from the Banks. Our revenue (on a parent company only basis) is derived primarily from dividends paid to us by the Banks. Our right, and consequently the right of our shareholders, to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of the Banks through the payment of such dividends or otherwise is necessarily subject to the prior claims of creditors of the Banks (including depositors), except to the extent that certain claims of ours in a creditor capacity may be recognized. It is possible, depending upon the financial condition of our subsidiary banks and other factors, that applicable regulatory authorities could assert that payment of dividends or other payments is an unsafe or unsound practice. If one or more of our subsidiary banks is unable to pay dividends to us, we may not be able to service our debt or pay dividends on our common stock. Further, as a result of the capital conservation buffer requirement of the Final Capital Rule, our ability to pay dividends on our common stock or service our debt could be restricted if we do not maintain a capital conservation buffer. A reduction or elimination of dividends could adversely affect the market price of our common stock and would adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. See Item 1, “Business-

Supervision and Regulation-Dividend Restrictions” and “Business-Supervision and Regulation-Capital Adequacy and Safety and Soundness-Regulatory Capital Requirements.”

To the extent that we acquire other companies, our business may be negatively impacted by certain risks inherent with such acquisitions.

We have acquired and will continue to consider the acquisition of other financial services companies. To the extent that we acquire other companies in the future, our business may be negatively impacted by certain risks inherent with such acquisitions. Some of these risks include the following:

We may be required to write down goodwill and other acquisition-related identifiable intangible assets.

We face continuing and growing security risks to our information base, including the information we maintain relating to our customers.

In the ordinary course of business, we rely on electronic communications and information systems to conduct our business and to store sensitive data, including financial information regarding customers. Our electronic communications and information systems infrastructure could be susceptible to cyberattacks, hacking, identity theft or terrorist activity. We have implemented and regularly review and update extensive systems of internal controls and procedures as well as corporate governance policies and procedures intended to protect our business operations, including the security and privacy of all confidential customer information. In addition, we rely on the services of a variety of vendors to meet our data processing and communication needs. No matter how well designed or implemented our controls are, we cannot provide an absolute guarantee to protect our business operations from every type of problem in every situation. A failure or circumvention of these controls could have a material adverse effect on our business operations and financial condition.

We may not be able to successfully implement future information technology system enhancements, which could adversely affect our business operations and profitability.

We rely on other companies to provide key components of our business infrastructure.

Third party vendors provide key components of our business infrastructure such as internet connections, network access and core application processing. While we have selected these third party vendors carefully, we do not control their actions. Any problems caused by these third parties, including as a result of their not providing us their services for any reason or their performing their services poorly, could adversely affect our ability to deliver products and services to our customers or otherwise conduct our business efficiently and effectively. Replacing these third party vendors could also entail significant delay and expense.

Our internal controls, procedures and policies may fail or be circumvented.

Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures, and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well-designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any failure or circumvention of the controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

If our risk management framework does not effectively identify or mitigate our risks, we could suffer losses.

Our risk management framework seeks to mitigate risk and appropriately balance risk and return. We have established processes and procedures intended to identify, measure, monitor and report the types of risk to which we are subject, including credit risk, operations risk, compliance risk, reputation risk, strategic risk, market risk, and liquidity risk. We seek to monitor and control our risk exposure through a framework of policies, procedures and reporting requirements. Management of our risks in some cases depends upon the use of analytical and/or forecasting models. If the models used to mitigate these risks are inadequate, we may incur losses. In addition, there may be risks that exist, or that develop in the future, that we have not appropriately anticipated, identified or mitigated. If our risk management framework does not effectively identify or mitigate our risks, we could suffer unexpected losses and could be materially adversely affected.

We may be unable to attract and retain qualified key employees, which could adversely affect our business prospects, including our competitive position and results of operations.

Our success is dependent upon our ability to attract and retain highly skilled individuals. There is significant competition for those individuals with the experience and skills required to conduct many of our business activities. We may not be able to hire or retain the key personnel that we depend upon for success. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of these or other key personnel could have a material adverse impact on our business because of their skills, knowledge of the markets in which we operate, years of industry experience and the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel.

Our financial statements are based in part on assumptions and estimates, which, if wrong, could cause unexpected losses in the future.

Pursuant to accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S., we are required to use certain assumptions and estimates in preparing our financial statements, including in determining loan loss and litigation reserves, goodwill impairment and the fair value of certain assets and liabilities, among other items. If assumptions or estimates underlying our financial statements are incorrect, we may experience material losses. See the "Critical Accounting Policies" section in Item 7, "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations."

Changes in generally accepted accounting principles can be difficult to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations.

Our accounting policies and methods are fundamental to how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. From time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board changes the financial accounting and reporting

principles that govern the preparation of our financial statements. These changes can be hard to anticipate and implement, and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations.

Differences in interpretation of tax laws and regulations and any potential resulting litigation may adversely impact our financial statements.

Local, state or federal tax authorities may interpret tax laws and regulations differently than we do and challenge tax positions that we have taken on tax returns. This may result in differences in the treatment of revenues, deductions, credits and/or differences in the timing of these items. The differences in treatment may result in payment of additional taxes, interest or penalties that could have a material adverse effect on our results.

Future capital offerings may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.

In the future, we may attempt to increase our capital resources or, if our or our banking subsidiaries' capital ratios fall below required minimums, we could be forced to raise additional capital by making additional offerings of debt, common or preferred stock, trust preferred securities, and senior or subordinated notes. Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock and lenders with respect to other borrowings will receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders of our common stock. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock, or both. Because our decision to issue securities in any future offering will depend on market conditions and other factors beyond our control, we cannot predict or estimate the amount, timing or nature of our future offerings. Moreover, we cannot assure you that such capital will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Our inability to raise sufficient additional capital on acceptable terms when needed could adversely affect our businesses, financial condition and results of operations.

The market price and trading volume of our common stock may be volatile.

The market price of our common stock may be volatile. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate and cause significant price variations to occur. We cannot assure you that the market price of our common stock will not fluctuate or decline significantly in the future. Some of the factors that could negatively affect our share price or result in fluctuations in the price or trading volume of our common stock include:

Anti-takeover provisions could negatively impact our stockholders.

Provisions of Delaware law and provisions of our certificate of incorporation and by-laws could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire control of us or have the effect of discouraging a third party from attempting to acquire control of us, even if an acquisition might be in the best interest of our stockholders.

Item 1B.    Unresolved Staff Comments

None.

Item 2.    Properties

Item 3.    Legal Proceedings

Item 4.    Mine Safety Disclosures

Not applicable.

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

Five-Year Performance Comparison

The following graph compares total shareholder return on the Company's common stock over the last five years with the the S&P 500 Index, the Russell 2000 Index and the SNL Index of Banks with assets between $5 billion and $10 billion. Index values are as of December 31 of each of the indicated years.

Item 6.    Selected Financial Data

The selected financial and other data of the Company set forth below are derived in part from, and should be read in conjunction with, the Consolidated Financial Statements of the Company and Notes thereto presented elsewhere herein.

_______________________________________________________________________________

(1) Core deposits consist of demand checking, NOW, money market and savings accounts.

(2) Nonperforming loans and leases consist of nonaccrual loans and leases.

(3) Nonperforming assets consist of nonperforming loans and leases, other real estate owned and other repossessed assets.

(4) The efficiency ratio is calculated by dividing non-interest expense by the sum of net interest income and non-interest income for the period.

(5) Total growth is calculated by dividing the change in the balance during the period by the balance at the beginning of the period.

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

(**) Refer to Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Reconciliation to GAAP.

(***) Common equity tier 1 capital ratio is calculated by dividing common equity Tier 1 capital by risk-weighted assets. The ratio was established as part of the implementation of Basel III, effective January 1, 2015.

Item 7.    Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations

Introduction

Brookline Bancorp, Inc., a Delaware corporation, operates as a multi-bank holding company for Brookline Bank and its subsidiaries; Bank Rhode Island and its subsidiaries; First Ipswich Bank and its subsidiaries; and Brookline Securities Corp.

The Company focuses its business efforts on profitably growing its commercial lending businesses, both organically and through acquisitions. The Company’s customer focus, multi-bank structure, and risk management are integral to its organic growth strategy and serve to differentiate the Company from its competitors. As full-service financial institutions, the Banks and their subsidiaries focus on the continued acquisition of well-qualified customers, the deepening of long-term banking relationships through a full complement of products and excellent customer service, and strong risk management.

The Company manages the Banks under uniform strategic objectives, with one set of uniform policies consistently applied by one executive management team. Within this environment, the Company believes that the ability to make customer decisions locally enhances management's motivation, service levels and, as a consequence, the Company's financial results. As such, while most back-office functions are consolidated at the holding company level, branding and decision-making, including credit decisions and pricing, remain largely local in order to better meet the needs of bank customers and further motivate the Banks’ commercial, business and retail bankers.

The Company and the Banks are supervised, examined and regulated by the FRB. As a Massachusetts-chartered savings bank and trust company, respectively, Brookline Bank and First Ipswich are also subject to regulation under the laws of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts and the jurisdiction of the Massachusetts Division of Banks. As a Rhode Island-chartered financial institution, BankRI is also subject to regulation under the laws of the State of Rhode Island and the jurisdiction of the Banking Division of the Rhode Island Department of Business Regulation. The FDIC continues to insure each of the Banks’ deposits up to $250,000 per depositor. Additionally, as a Massachusetts-chartered savings bank, Brookline Bank is also insured by the Depositors Insurance Fund (“DIF”), a private industry-sponsored company. The DIF insures savings bank deposits in excess of the FDIC insurance limits. As such, Brookline Bank offers 100% insurance on all deposits as a result of a combination of insurance from the FDIC and the DIF.

Executive Overview

Critical Accounting Policies

The accounting policies described below are considered critical to understanding the Company's financial condition and operating results. Such accounting policies are considered to be especially important because they involve a higher degree of

complexity and require management to make difficult and subjective judgments which often require assumptions or estimates about matters that are inherently uncertain. The use of different judgments, assumptions and estimates could result in material differences in the Company's operating results or financial condition.

Investment Securities

Investment securities classified as available-for-sale are carried at estimated fair value, with any unrealized gains and losses, net of taxes, reported as accumulated other comprehensive income or loss in stockholders' equity. Debt securities that the Company has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity are classified as "held-to-maturity" and are carried at amortized cost.

See Note 21, "Fair Value of Financial Instruments" to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on how management determines the fair value of its financial instruments.

Acquired Loans

Loans that the Company acquired are initially recorded at fair value with no carryover of the related allowance for loan and lease losses. Determining the fair value of the acquired loans involves estimating the amount and timing of principal and interest cash flows initially expected to be collected on the loans and discounting those cash flows at an appropriate market rate of interest. The Company continues to evaluate the reasonableness of expectations for the timing and the amount of cash to be collected. Subsequent decreases in expected cash flows may result in changes in the amortization or accretion of fair market value adjustments, and in some cases may result in a loan being considered impaired.

Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses

The allowance for loan and lease losses represents management's estimate of probable losses inherent in the loan and lease portfolio. Additions to the allowance for loan and lease losses are made by charges to the provision for credit losses. Losses on loans and leases are deducted from the allowance when all or a portion of a loan or lease is considered uncollectable. The determination of the loans on which full collectability is not reasonably assured, the estimates of the fair value of the underlying collateral, and the assessment of economic and other conditions are subject to assumptions and judgments by management. Valuation allowances could differ materially as a result of changes in, or different interpretations of, these assumptions and judgments.

Management evaluates the adequacy of the allowance on a quarterly basis and reviews its conclusion as to the amount to be established with the Audit Committee and the Board of Directors.

See Note 7, "Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses," to the consolidated financial statements for additional information on how management determines the balance of the allowance for loan and lease losses for each portfolio and class of loans.

Goodwill

Goodwill is presumed to have an indefinite useful life and is tested at least annually for impairment. Impairment exists when the carrying amount of goodwill exceeds its implied fair value. If fair value exceeds the carrying amount at the time of testing, goodwill is not considered impaired. Quoted market prices in active markets are the best evidence of fair value and are considered to be used as the basis for measurement, when available. Other acceptable valuation methods include present-value measurements based on multiples of earnings or revenues, or similar performance measures. Differences in valuation techniques could result in materially different evaluations of impairment. In September 2011, the FASB issued Accounting Standards Update ("ASU") 2011-08 which provides guidance for companies when testing goodwill for impairment. The

objective of the ASU is to simplify how entities test goodwill for impairment. Pursuant to the ASU, entities may now assess qualitative factors to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount as a basis for determining whether it is necessary to perform the two-step goodwill impairment test. The more-likely-than-not threshold is defined as having a likelihood of more than 50%.

To determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount, an entity should consider the extent to which each of the adverse events or circumstances identified could affect the comparison of a reporting unit's fair value with its carrying amount.

Pursuant to the ASU, an entity should place more weight on the events and circumstances that have the greatest impact on a reporting unit's fair value or the carrying amount of its net assets; and may affect its determination of whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount.

Qualitative factors that have been assessed to determine whether it is more likely than not that the fair value of a reporting unit is less than its carrying amount including goodwill: general economic conditions, regulatory environment, share price, real estate values, lending concentrations, interest-rate environment, asset quality, capital, financial performance, integration of acquired companies and conversion to a new data processing system.

Identified Intangible Assets

Identified intangible assets are assets resulting from acquisitions that are being amortized over their estimated useful lives. The recoverability of identified intangible assets is evaluated for impairment at least annually. If impairment is deemed to have occurred, the amount of impairment is charged to expense when identified.

Income Taxes

Certain areas of accounting for income taxes require management's judgment, including determining the expected realization of deferred tax assets and the adequacy of liabilities for uncertain tax positions. Judgments are made regarding various tax positions, which are often subjective and involve assumptions about items that are inherently uncertain. If actual factors and conditions differ materially from estimates made by management, the actual realization of the net deferred tax assets or liabilities for uncertain tax positions could vary materially from the amounts previously recorded.

Deferred tax assets arise from items that may be claimed as a tax deduction or credit in future income tax returns, for which a financial statement tax benefit has been recognized. The Company’s realization of the deferred tax asset depends upon future levels of its taxable income and the existence of prior years' taxable income for which claims for refunds can be carried back. Where necessary, valuation allowances are recorded against those deferred tax assets which a Company has determined will not be realized. Deferred tax liabilities represent items that will require a future tax payment. Deferred tax liabilities generally represent tax expense recognized in the Company's financial statements for which payment has been deferred, or a deduction claimed on the Company's tax return but not yet recognized as an expense in the Company's financial statements. Deferred tax liabilities are also recognized for certain non-cash items such as goodwill.

Recent Accounting Developments

Non-GAAP Financial Measures and Reconciliation to GAAP

In addition to evaluating the Company's results of operations in accordance with GAAP, management periodically supplements this evaluation with an analysis of certain non-GAAP financial measures, such as operating earnings metrics, the return on tangible assets or equity, the tangible equity ratio, tangible stockholders' equity, tangible book value per share, dividend payout ratio and the ratio of the allowance for loan and lease losses related to originated loans and leases as a percentage of originated loans and leases. Management believes that these non-GAAP financial measures provide useful information to investors for understanding the Company's underlying operating performance and trends. These non-GAAP financial measures may also aid investors in facilitating comparisons with the performance assessment of the Company's financial performance, including non-interest expense control, while the tangible equity ratio and tangible book value per share are used to analyze the relative strength of the Company's capital position.

In light of diversity in presentation among financial institutions, the methodologies used by the Company for determining the non-GAAP financial measures discussed above may differ from those used by other financial institutions.

Operating earnings exclude compensation-related and acquisition-related items from net income. By excluding such items, the Company's results can be measured and assessed on a more consistent basis from period to period. Items excluded from operating earnings are also excluded when calculating the operating return and operating efficiency ratios.

The following table summarizes the Company's operating earnings and operating earnings per share ("EPS") for the periods indicated:

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

(1) Compensation-related expenses include expense related to the departure of the Company's Chief Financial Officer in 2013.

(2) Acquisition-related expenses include expenses related to the acquisition of BankRI in January 2012.

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

_______________________________________________________________________________

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".

(*) Previously reported amounts prior to January 1, 2015 have been restated to reflect a retrospective change in accounting principle for investments in qualified affordable housing projects, in accordance with ASU 2014-01. Refer to Note 10, "Other Assets".