Glacier Bancorp - 10-K annual report 2013

The Company includes the parent holding company and nine wholly-owned subsidiaries which consist of the Bank and eight non-bank subsidiaries. The eight non-bank subsidiaries include GBCI Other Real Estate Owned (“GORE”) and seven trust subsidiaries. The Company formed GORE to isolate certain bank foreclosed properties for legal protection and administrative purposes and the remaining properties are currently held for sale. GORE is included in the Bank operating segment due to its insignificant activity. The Company owns the following trust subsidiaries, each of which issued trust preferred securities as Tier 1 capital instruments: Glacier Capital Trust II, Glacier Capital Trust III, Glacier Capital Trust IV, Citizens (ID) Statutory Trust I, Bank of the San Juans Bancorporation Trust I, First Company Statutory Trust 2001 and First Company Statutory Trust 2003. The trust subsidiaries are not included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements. As of December 31, 2013, none of the Company’s subsidiaries were engaged in any operations in foreign countries.

On April 30, 2012, the Company combined its multiple bank subsidiaries into a single bank subsidiary, Glacier Bank. Subsequently, the bank subsidiaries operate as separate bank divisions within the Bank, using the same names and management teams as before the combination. Prior to the combination of the bank subsidiaries, the Company considered each of its bank subsidiaries, GORE, and the parent holding company to be its operating segments. Subsequent to the combination of the bank subsidiaries, the Company considered the Bank to be its sole operating segment.

The Company provides full service brokerage services (selling products such as stocks, bonds, mutual funds, limited partnerships, annuities and other insurance products) through Raymond James Financial Services, a non-affiliated company. The Company shares in the commissions generated, without devoting significant employee time to this portion of the business.

The Company’s strategy is to profitably grow its business through internal growth and selective acquisitions. The Company continues to look for profitable expansion opportunities in existing markets and new markets in the Rocky Mountain states. During the last five years, the Company has completed the following acquisitions:

 

The market area’s economic base primarily focuses on tourism, energy, construction, mining, manufacturing, agriculture, service industry, and health care. The tourism industry is highly influenced by two national parks, several ski resorts, significant lakes, and rural scenic areas.

Commercial banking is a highly competitive business and operates in a rapidly changing environment. There are a large number of depository institutions including savings and loans, commercial banks, and credit unions in the markets in which the Company has offices. Non-depository financial service institutions, primarily in the securities and insurance industries, have also become competitors for retail savings and investment funds. In addition to offering competitive interest rates, the principal methods used by the Bank to attract deposits include the offering of a variety of services including on-line banking, mobile banking and convenient office locations and business hours. The primary factors in competing for loans are interest rates and rate adjustment provisions, loan maturities, loan fees, and the quality of service to borrowers and brokers.

The Company’s Board of Directors (“Board”) has the ultimate authority and responsibility for overseeing risk management at the Company. Some aspects of risk oversight are fulfilled at the full Board level and the Board delegates other aspects of its risk oversight function to its committees. The Board has established, among others, an Audit Committee, a Compensation Committee, a Nominating/Corporate Governance Committee, Compliance Committee and a Risk Oversight Committee. Additional information regarding Board committees is set forth under the heading “Meetings and Committees of the Board of Directors - Committee Membership” in the Company’s 2014 Annual Meeting Proxy Statement and is incorporated herein by reference.

Copies of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 are available free of charge through the Company’s website (www.glacierbancorp.com) as soon as reasonably practicable after the Company has filed the material with, or furnished it to, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Copies can also be obtained by accessing the SEC’s website (www.sec.gov).

The following discussion provides an overview of certain elements of the extensive regulatory framework applicable to the Company and the Bank. This regulatory framework is primarily designed for the protection of depositors, the federal Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) and the banking system as a whole, rather than specifically for the protection of shareholders. Due to the breadth and growth of this regulatory framework, the costs of compliance continue to increase in order to monitor and satisfy these requirements.

To the extent that this section describes statutory and regulatory provisions, it is qualified by reference to those provisions. These statutes and regulations, as well as related policies, are subject to change by Congress, state legislatures and federal and state banking regulators. Changes in statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company, including the interpretation or implementation thereof, could have a material effect on the Company’s business or operations. Numerous changes to the statutes, regulations or regulatory policies applicable to the Company have been made or proposed in recent years. The full extent to which these changes will impact the Company is not yet known. However, continued efforts to monitor and comply with new regulatory requirements add to the complexity and cost of the Company’s business.

The Bank is subject to regulation and supervision by the Montana Department of Administration's Banking and Financial Institutions Division, the FDIC, and, with respect to branches of the Bank outside of Montana, applicable state regulators.

The Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branching Efficiency Act of 1994 (“Interstate Act”) together with the Dodd-Frank Act, relaxed prior interstate branching restrictions under federal law by permitting, subject to regulatory approval, state and federally chartered commercial banks to establish branches in states where the laws permit banks chartered in such states to establish branches. The Interstate Act requires regulators to consult with community organizations before permitting an interstate institution to close a branch in a low-income area. Federal bank regulations prohibit banks from using their interstate branches primarily for deposit production and federal bank regulatory agencies have implemented a loan-to-deposit ratio screen to ensure compliance with this prohibition.

A principal source of the parent holding company’s cash is from dividends received from the Bank, which are subject to government regulation and limitation. Regulatory authorities may prohibit banks and bank holding companies from paying dividends in a manner that would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. In addition, a bank may not pay cash dividends if that payment could reduce the amount of its capital below that necessary to meet minimum applicable regulatory capital requirements. The Bank is subject to Montana state law and cannot declare a dividend greater than the previous two years' net earnings without providing notice to the state. Additionally, current guidance from the Federal Reserve provides, among other things, that dividends per share on the Company’s common stock generally should not exceed earnings per share, measured over the previous four fiscal quarters. The third installment of the Basel Accords (the “Basel III”) introduces additional limitations on banks’ ability to issue dividends by imposing a capital conservation buffer requirement.

The Federal Reserve conducts periodic inspections of bank holding companies, which are performed both onsite and offsite. The supervisory objectives of the inspection program are to ascertain whether the financial strength of a bank holding company is maintained on an ongoing basis and to determine the effects or consequences of transactions between a bank holding company or its non-banking subsidiaries and its bank subsidiaries. For bank holding companies under $10 billion in assets, the inspection type and frequency varies depending on asset size, complexity of the organization, and the bank holding company’s rating at its last inspection.

Banks are subject to periodic examinations by their primary regulators. Bank examinations have evolved from reliance on transaction testing in assessing a bank’s condition to a risk-focused approach. These examinations are extensive and cover the entire breadth of operations of a bank. Generally, safety and soundness examinations occur on an 18-month cycle for banks under $500 million in total assets that are well capitalized and without regulatory issues, and 12-months otherwise. Examinations alternate between the federal and state bank regulatory agency or may occur on a combined schedule. The frequency of consumer compliance and CRA examinations is linked to the size of the institution and its compliance and CRA ratings at its most recent examinations. However, the examination authority of the Federal Reserve and the FDIC allows them to examine supervised banks as frequently as deemed necessary based on the condition of the bank or as a result of certain triggering events.

As a publicly reporting company, the Company is subject to the requirements of the Act and related rules and regulations issued by the SEC and NASDAQ. After enactment, the Company updated its policies and procedures to comply with the Act’s requirements and has found that such compliance, including compliance with Section 404 of the Act relating to the Company’s internal control over financial reporting, has resulted in significant additional expense for the Company. The Company will continue to incur additional expense in its ongoing compliance.

In response to market turmoil and financial crises affecting the overall banking system and financial markets in the United States, the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 (“EESA”) was enacted on October 3, 2008. EESA provides the U.S. Department of the Treasury (“Treasury”) with broad authority to implement certain actions intended to help restore stability and liquidity to the U.S. financial markets.

The Bank's deposits are insured under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, up to the maximum applicable limits and are subject to deposit insurance assessments designed to tie what banks pay for deposit insurance to the risks they pose. The Dodd-Frank Act broadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments. Assessments are now based on the average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital of a financial institution. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act raised the minimum designated reserve ratio (the FDIC is required to set the reserve ratio each year) of the DIF from 1.15 percent to 1.35 percent; requires that the DIF meet that minimum ratio of insured deposits by 2020; and eliminates the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to insured depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds. The FDIC has established a higher reserve ratio of 2 percent as a long-term goal beyond what is required by statute. The deposit insurance assessments to be paid by the Bank could increase as a result.

As a result of the financial crises, on July 21, 2010 the Dodd-Frank Act was signed into law. The Dodd-Frank Act significantly changed the bank regulatory structure and is affecting the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies, including the Company and the Bank. The full impact of the Dodd-Frank Act may not be known for years. Some of the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act that may impact the Company's business are summarized below.

The Dodd-Frank Act requires publicly traded companies to provide their shareholders with 1) a non-binding shareholder vote on executive compensation; 2) a non-binding shareholder vote on the frequency of such vote; 3) disclosure of “golden parachute” arrangements in connection with specified change in control transactions; and 4) a non-binding shareholder vote on golden parachute arrangements in connection with these change in control transactions. Except with respect to “smaller reporting companies” and participants in the Capital Purchase Program, the new rules applied to proxy statements relating to annual meetings of shareholders held after January 20, 2011. “Smaller reporting companies,” those with a public float of less than $75 million, are required to include the non-binding shareholder votes on executive compensation and the frequency thereof in proxy statements relating to annual meetings occurring on or after January 21, 2013.

The Dodd-Frank Act generally prohibits a depository institution from converting from a state to federal charter, or vice versa, while it is the subject to an enforcement action unless the depository institution seeks prior approval from its regulator and complies with specified procedures to ensure compliance with the enforcement action.

The Dodd-Frank Act created a new, independent federal agency called the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection (“CFPB”). The CFPB has broad rulemaking, supervision and enforcement authority for a wide range of consumer protection laws applicable to banks with greater than $10 billion in assets. Smaller institutions are subject to certain rules promulgated by the CFPB but will continue to be examined and supervised by their federal banking regulators for compliance purposes. The CFPB has issued numerous regulations amending the Truth in Lending Act that will increase the compliance burden of the Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Act repeals the federal prohibitions on the payment of interest on demand deposits, thereby permitting depository institutions to pay interest on business transaction and other accounts.

The Company’s earnings and growth are affected not only by general economic conditions, but also by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government, particularly the Federal Reserve. The Federal Reserve implements national monetary policy for such purposes as curbing inflation and combating recession, but its open market operations in U.S. government securities, control of the discount rate applicable to borrowings from the Federal Reserve, and establishment of reserve requirements against certain deposits, influence the growth of bank loans, investments and deposits, and also affect interest rates charged on loans or paid on deposits. The nature and impact of future changes in monetary policies and their impact on the Company or the Bank cannot be predicted with certainty.

An investment in the Company’s common stock involves certain risks. The following is a discussion of the most significant risks and uncertainties that may affect the Company’s business, financial condition and future results.

The national economy, and the financial services sector in particular, are still facing significant challenges. Substantially all of the Company’s loans are to businesses and individuals in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, Utah, Colorado and Washington markets facing many of the same challenges as the national economy, including continued unemployment and slow recovery in commercial and residential real estate. Although some economic indicators are improving both nationally and in the Company’s markets, there remains substantial uncertainty regarding when and how strongly a sustained economic recovery will occur, and whether there will be another recession. These economic conditions can cause borrowers to be unable to pay their loans. The inability of borrowers to repay loans can erode earnings by reducing net interest income and by requiring the Company to add to its allowance for loan and lease losses (“ALLL” or “allowance”). While the Company cannot accurately predict how long these conditions may exist, the challenging economy could continue to present risks for some time for the industry and the Company. A further deterioration in economic conditions in the nation as a whole or in the Company’s markets could result in the following consequences, any of which could have an adverse impact, which may be material, on the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, and could also cause the market price of the Company’s stock to decline:

The Company maintains an allowance in an amount that it believes is adequate to provide for losses in the loan portfolio. While the Company strives to carefully manage and monitor credit quality and to identify loans that may become non-performing, at any time there are loans included in the portfolio that will result in losses, but that have not been identified as non-performing or potential problem loans. With respect to real estate loans and property taken in satisfaction of such loans (“other real estate owned” or “OREO”), the Company can be required to recognize significant declines in the value of the underlying real estate collateral or OREO quite suddenly as values are updated through appraisals and evaluations (new or updated) performed in the normal course of monitoring the credit quality of the loans. There are many factors that can cause the value of real estate to decline, including declines in the general real estate market, changes in methodology applied by appraisers, and/or using a different appraiser than was used for the prior appraisal or evaluation. The Company’s ability to recover on real estate loans by selling or disposing of the underlying real estate collateral is adversely impacted by declining values, which increases the likelihood the Company will suffer losses on defaulted loans beyond the amounts provided for in the ALLL. This, in turn, could require material increases in the Company’s provision for loan losses and ALLL. By closely monitoring credit quality, the Company attempts to identify deteriorating loans before they become non-performing assets and adjust the ALLL accordingly. However, because future events are uncertain, and if difficult economic conditions continue or worsen, there may be loans that deteriorate to a non-performing status in an accelerated time frame. As a result, future additions to the ALLL may be necessary. Because the loan portfolio contains a number of loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or a few of these loans may cause a significant increase in non-performing loans, requiring an increase to the ALLL. Additionally, future significant additions to the ALLL may be required based on changes in the mix of loans comprising the portfolio, changes in the financial condition of borrowers, which may result from changes in economic conditions, or changes in the assumptions used in determining the ALLL. Additionally, federal and state banking regulators, as an integral part of their supervisory function, periodically review the Company’s loan portfolio and the adequacy of the ALLL. These regulatory authorities may require the Company to recognize further loan loss provisions or charge-offs based upon their judgments, which may be different from the Company’s judgments. Any increase in the ALLL could have an adverse effect, which could be material, on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company has a high degree of concentration in loans secured by real estate. A slower recovery in the real estate markets could adversely impact borrowers’ ability to repay loans secured by real estate and the value of real estate collateral, thereby increasing the credit risk associated with the loan portfolio. The Company’s ability to recover on these loans by selling or disposing of the underlying real estate collateral is adversely impacted by declining real estate values, which increases the likelihood that the Company will suffer losses on defaulted loans secured by real estate beyond the amounts provided for in the ALLL. This, in turn, could require material increases in the ALLL which would adversely affect the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The Company declared dividends of $0.60 per share and $0.53 per share in 2013 and 2012, respectively. The Company may not be able to continue paying quarterly dividends commensurate with recent levels given that the ability to pay dividends on the Company’s common stock depends on a variety of factors. The payment of dividends is subject to government regulation in that regulatory authorities may prohibit banks and bank holding companies from paying dividends that would constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice. Current guidance from the Federal Reserve provides, among other things, that dividends per share should not exceed earnings per share measured over the previous four fiscal quarters. The Bank is also subject to Montana state law and cannot declare a dividend greater than the previous two years’ net earnings without providing notice to the state. As a result, future dividends will generally depend on the sufficiency of earnings.

Historically, the Company has expanded through a combination of organic growth and acquisitions. If market and regulatory conditions remain challenging, the Company may be unable to grow organically or successfully complete or integrate potential future acquisitions. Furthermore, there can be no assurance that the Company can successfully complete such transactions, since they are subject to regulatory review and approval.

The Dodd-Frank Act broadened the base for FDIC insurance assessments and assessments are now based on the average consolidated total assets less tangible equity capital of a financial institution. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act established 1.35 percent as the minimum Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio. The FDIC has determined that the fund reserve ratio should be 2.0 percent and has adopted a plan under which it will meet the statutory minimum fund reserve ratio of 1.35 percent by the statutory deadline of September 30, 2020. The Dodd-Frank Act requires the FDIC to offset the effect on institutions with assets less than $10 billion of the increase in the statutory minimum fund reserve ratio to 1.35 percent from the former statutory minimum of 1.15 percent. As a result, the deposit insurance assessments to be paid by the Company could increase.

Despite the FDIC’s actions to restore the Deposit Insurance Fund, the fund will suffer additional losses in the future due to failures of insured institutions. There could be additional significant deposit insurance premium increases, special assessments or prepayments in order to restore the insurance fund’s reserve ratio. Any significant premium increases or special assessments could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations.

The loan portfolio contains a high percentage of commercial, commercial real estate, real estate acquisition and development loans in relation to the total loans and total assets. These types of loans have historically been viewed as having more risk of default than residential real estate loans or certain other types of loans or investments. In fact, the FDIC has issued pronouncements alerting banks of its concern about banks with a heavy concentration of commercial real estate loans. These types of loans also typically are larger than residential real estate loans and other commercial loans. Because the Company’s loan portfolio contains a significant number of commercial and commercial real estate loans with relatively large balances, the deterioration of one or more of these loans may cause a significant increase in non-performing loans. An increase in non-performing loans could result in a loss of earnings from these loans, an increase in the provision for loan losses, or an increase in loan charge-offs, which could have a material adverse impact on results of operations and financial condition.

The Company may experience increases in non-performing assets in the future. Non-performing assets (which include OREO) adversely affect the Company’s net income and financial condition in various ways. The Company does not record interest income on non-accrual loans or OREO, thereby adversely affecting its income. When the Company takes collateral in foreclosures and similar proceedings, it is required to mark the related asset to the then fair value of the collateral, less estimated cost to sell, which may result in a charge-off of the value of the asset and lead the Company to increase the provision for loan losses. An increase in the level of non-performing assets also increases the Company’s risk profile and may impact the capital levels its regulators believe are appropriate in light of such risks. Further decreases in the value of these assets, or the underlying collateral, or in these borrowers’ performance or financial condition, whether or not due to economic and market conditions beyond the Company’s control, could adversely affect the Company’s business, results of operations and financial condition, perhaps materially. In addition to the carrying costs to maintain OREO, the resolution of non-performing assets increases the Company’s loan administration costs generally, and requires significant commitments of time from management and the Company’s directors, which reduces the time they have to focus on profitably growing the Company’s business.

The fair value of the Company’s investment securities could decline as a result of factors including changes in market interest rates, credit quality and credit ratings, lack of market liquidity and other economic conditions. An investment security is impaired if the fair value of the security is less than the carrying value. When a security is impaired, the Company determines whether the impairment is temporary or other-than-temporary. If an impairment is determined to be other-than-temporary, an impairment loss is recognized by reducing the amortized cost only for the credit loss associated with the other-than-temporary loss with a corresponding charge to earnings for a like amount. Any such impairment charge would have an adverse effect, which could be material, on the Company’s results of operations and financial condition, including its capital.

With relatively soft loan demand and increased market liquidity, the investment securities portfolio has grown significantly over the past seven years. However, the Company experienced loan growth during the current year and the investment securities portfolio decreased from 48 percent of total assets at December 31, 2012 to 41 percent of total assets at December 31, 2013. While the Company believes that the terms of such investments have been kept relatively short, the Company is subject to elevated interest rate risk exposure if rates were to increase sharply. Further, the change in the mix of the Company’s assets to more investment securities presents a different type of asset quality risk than the loan portfolio. In addition, in connection with the ongoing monitoring of its investment securities portfolio, the Company reclassified obligations of state and local government securities with a fair value of approximately $485 million, inclusive of a net unrealized gain of $4.6 million, from available-for-sale (“AFS”) classification to held-to-maturity (“HTM”) classification. The reclassification occurred on January 1, 2014 and changed the allocation of the Company’s entire investment securities portfolio from 100 percent AFS to approximately 85 percent AFS and 15 percent/ HTM. The future impact of this reclassification, if any, on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations will depend on interest rate environments and other factors which are not estimable at this time. While the Company believes a relatively conservative management approach has been applied to the investment portfolio, there is always potential loss exposure under changing economic conditions.

On June 10, 2013, Standard and Poor's reaffirmed its AA+ rating of U.S. government long-term debt but with an improved outlook of stable from negative. On July 18, 2013, Moody's also upgraded its outlook to stable from negative while maintaining its Aaa rating on U.S. government long-term debt. However, on October 15, 2013 Fitch placed its AAA long-term debt rating of the U.S. on rating watch negative due to the U.S. government’s inability to raise the federal debt ceiling in a timely manner. It is difficult to predict the effect of any future downgrades or changes in outlook by the three major credit rating agencies. However, these events could impact the trading market for U.S. government securities, including U.S. agency securities, and the securities markets more broadly, and consequently could impact the value and liquidity of financial assets, including assets in the Company’s investment portfolio. These actions could also create broader financial turmoil and uncertainty, which may negatively affect the global banking system and limit the availability of funding, including borrowing under securities sold under agreements to repurchase (“repurchase agreements”), at reasonable terms. In turn, this could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s liquidity, financial condition and results of operations.

The Company’s profitability is dependent to a large extent upon net interest income, which is the difference (or “spread”) between the interest earned on loans, investment securities and other interest earning assets and interest paid on deposits, borrowings, and other interest bearing liabilities. Because of the differences in maturities and repricing characteristics of interest earning assets and interest bearing liabilities, changes in interest rates do not produce equivalent changes in interest income earned on interest earning assets and interest paid on interest bearing liabilities. Accordingly, fluctuations in interest rates could adversely affect the Company’s interest rate spread, and, in turn, profitability. The Company seeks to manage its interest rate risk within well established policies and guidelines. Generally, the Company seeks an asset and liability structure that insulates net interest income from large deviations attributable to changes in market rates. However, the Company’s structures and practices to manage interest rate risk may not be effective in a highly volatile rate environment.

The Company has entered into interest rate swap agreements in order to manage a portion of the interest rate volatility risk. The Company anticipates that it may enter into additional interest rate swaps. These swap agreements involve other risks, such as the risk that the counterparty may fail to honor its obligations under these arrangements, leaving the Company vulnerable to interest rate movements. The Company’s current interest rate swap agreements include bilateral collateral agreements whereby the net fair value position is collateralized by the party in a net liability position. The bilateral collateral agreements reduce the Company’s counterparty risk exposure. There can be no assurance that these arrangements will be effective in reducing the Company’s exposure to changes in interest rates.

Accounting standards require the Company to account for acquisitions using the acquisition method of accounting. Under acquisition accounting, if the purchase price of an acquired company exceeds the fair value of its net assets, the excess is carried on the acquirer’s balance sheet as goodwill. In accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”), goodwill is not amortized but rather is evaluated for impairment on an annual basis or more frequently if events or circumstances indicate that a potential impairment exists. The Company's goodwill was not considered impaired as of December 31, 2013 and 2012. The Company maintains $130 million in goodwill on its statements of financial condition as of December 31, 2013 and there can be no assurance that future evaluations of goodwill will not result in findings of additional impairment and write-downs, which could be material. While a non-cash item, additional impairment of goodwill could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial condition and results of operations. Furthermore, additional impairment of goodwill could subject the Company to regulatory limitations, including the ability to pay dividends on its common stock.

During 2013 and in prior years, the Company has been active in acquisitions and may in the future engage in selected acquisitions of additional financial institutions. There are risks associated with any such acquisitions that could adversely affect profitability and other performance measures. These risks include, among other things, incorrectly assessing the asset quality of a financial institution being acquired, discovering compliance or regulatory issues after the acquisition, encountering greater than anticipated cost and use of management time associated with integrating acquired businesses into the Company’s operations, and being unable to profitably deploy funds acquired in an acquisition. The Company may not be able to continue to grow through acquisitions, and if it does, there is a risk of negative impacts of such acquisitions on the Company’s operating results and financial condition.

The Company anticipates that it might issue capital stock in connection with future acquisitions. Acquisitions and related issuances of stock may have a dilutive effect on earnings per share and the percentage ownership of current shareholders.

A tightening of the credit markets and the inability to obtain or retain adequate funds for continued loan growth at an acceptable cost may negatively affect the Company’s asset growth and liquidity position and, therefore, earnings capability. In addition to core deposit growth, maturity of investment securities and loan payments, the Company also relies on alternative funding sources through correspondent banking and borrowings with the Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) to fund loan growth. In the event the economy continues to see a slow recovery, particularly in the housing market, these resources could be negatively affected, both as to price and availability, which would limit and or raise the cost of the funds available to the Company.

In the current economic environment, the Company believes it is prudent to consider alternatives for raising capital when opportunities to raise capital at attractive prices present themselves, in order to further strengthen the Company’s capital and better position itself to take advantage of opportunities that may arise in the future. Such alternatives may include issuance and sale of common or preferred stock or borrowings by the parent holding company, with proceeds contributed to the Bank. Any such capital raising alternatives could dilute the holders of the Company’s outstanding common stock, and may adversely affect the market price of the Company’s common stock and performance measures such as earnings per share.

The Company believes its success to date has been substantially dependent on its Chief Executive Officer (“CEO”) and other members of the executive management team, and on the Presidents of its Bank divisions. The unexpected loss of any of these persons could have an adverse effect on the Company’s business and future growth prospects.

Commercial banking is a highly competitive business and a consolidating industry. The Company competes with other commercial banks, savings and loans, credit unions, finance, insurance and other non-depository companies operating in its market areas. The Company is subject to substantial competition for loans and deposits from other financial institutions. Some of its competitors are not subject to the same degree of regulation and restriction as the Company. Some of the Company’s competitors have greater financial resources than the Company. If the Company is unable to effectively compete in its market areas, the Company’s business, results of operations and prospects could be adversely affected.

The Company’s operations rely heavily on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information on the its computer systems and networks. Any failure, interruption or breach in security or operational integrity of these systems could result in failures or disruptions in the Company’s online banking system, customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit and loan servicing and other systems. The security and integrity of the Company’s systems could be threatened by a variety of interruptions or information security breaches, including those caused by computer hacking, cyber attacks, electronic fraudulent activity or attempted theft of financial assets. The Company cannot assure that any such failures, interruption or security breaches will not occur, or if they do occur, that they will be adequately addressed. While the Company has certain protective policies and procedures in place, the nature and sophistication of the threats continue to evolve. The Company may be required to expend significant additional resources in the future to modify and enhance its protective measures.

Additionally, the Company faces the risk of operational disruption, failure, termination or capacity constraints of any of the third parties that facilitate its business activities, including exchanges, clearing agents, clearing houses or other financial intermediaries. Such parties could also be the source of an attack on, or breach of, the Company’s operational systems.

Any failures, interruptions or security breaches in the Company’s information systems could damage its reputation, result in a loss of customer business, result in a violation of privacy or other laws, or expose the Company to civil litigation, regulatory fines or losses not covered by insurance.

The Company is subject to extensive regulation, supervision and examination by federal and state banking regulators. In addition, as a publicly-traded company, the Company is subject to regulation by the SEC. Any change in applicable regulations or federal, state or local legislation or in policies or interpretations or regulatory approaches to compliance and enforcement, income tax laws and accounting principles could have a substantial impact on the Company and its operations. Changes in laws and regulations may also increase expenses by imposing additional fees or taxes or restrictions on operations. Additional legislation and regulations that could significantly affect powers, authority and operations may be enacted or adopted in the future, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Failure to appropriately comply with any such laws, regulations or principles could result in sanctions by regulatory agencies or damage to the Company’s reputation, all of which could adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition or results of operations.

In that regard, sweeping financial regulatory reform legislation was enacted in July 2010. Among other provisions, the new legislation 1) creates a new CFPB with broad powers to regulate consumer financial products such as credit cards and mortgages; 2) creates a Financial Stability Oversight Council comprised of the heads of other regulatory agencies; 3) will lead to new capital requirements from federal banking regulatory agencies; 4) places new limits on electronic debt card interchange fees; and 5) requires the SEC and national stock exchanges to adopt significant new corporate governance and executive compensation reforms. The new legislation and regulations are expected to increase the overall costs of regulatory compliance.

Further, regulators have significant discretion and authority to prevent or remedy unsafe or unsound practices or violations of laws or regulations by financial institutions and bank holding companies in the performance of their supervisory and enforcement duties. Recently, these powers have been utilized more frequently due to the challenging national, regional and local economic conditions. The exercise of regulatory authority may have a negative impact on the Company’s financial condition and results of operations. Additionally, the Company’s business is affected significantly by the fiscal and monetary policies of the federal government and its agencies, including the Federal Reserve.

The Company cannot accurately predict the full effects of recent legislation or the various other governmental, regulatory, monetary and fiscal initiatives which have been and may be enacted on the financial markets and on the Company. The terms and costs of these activities, or the failure of these actions to help stabilize the financial markets, asset prices, market liquidity and a continuation or worsening of current financial market and economic conditions could materially and adversely affect the Company’s business, financial condition, results of operations, and the trading price of the Company’s common stock.

The Company’s articles of incorporation include certain provisions that could make more difficult the acquisition of the Company by means of a tender offer, a proxy contest, merger or otherwise. These provisions include a requirement that any “Business Combination” (as defined in the articles of incorporation) be approved by at least 80 percent of the voting power of the then outstanding shares, unless it is either approved by the Company’s Board or certain price and procedural requirements are satisfied. In addition, the authorization of preferred stock, which is intended primarily as a financing tool and not as a defensive measure against takeovers, may potentially be used by management to make more difficult uninvited attempts to acquire control of the Company. These provisions may have the effect of lengthening the time required to acquire control of the Company through a tender offer, proxy contest or otherwise, and may deter any potentially unfriendly offers or other efforts to obtain control of the Company. This could deprive the Company’s shareholders of opportunities to realize a premium for their Glacier Bancorp, Inc. common stock, even in circumstances where such action is favored by a majority of the Company’s shareholders.

 

None

 

 

The Company believes that all of its facilities are well maintained, generally adequate and suitable for the current operations of its business, as well as fully utilized. In the normal course of business, new locations and facility upgrades occur as needed.

For additional information regarding the Company’s premises and equipment and lease obligations, see Note 5 to the Consolidated Financial Statements in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

The Company and its subsidiaries are parties to various claims, legal actions and complaints in the ordinary course of their businesses. In the Company’s opinion, all such matters are adequately covered by insurance, are without merit or are of such kind, or involve such amounts, that unfavorable disposition would not have a material adverse effect on the financial position or results of operations of the Company.

Not Applicable

 

The following table summarizes the Company’s dividends declared per quarter for the periods indicated:

Future cash dividends will depend on a variety of factors, including net income, capital, asset quality, general economic conditions and regulatory considerations.

There have been no securities of the Company sold within the last three years which were not registered under the Securities Act.

The following graphs compare the yearly cumulative total return of the Company’s common stock over both a five-year and ten-year measurement period with the yearly cumulative total return on the stocks included in 1) the Russell 2000 Index, and 2) the SNL Bank Index comprised of banks and bank holding companies with total assets between $5 billion and $10 billion. Each of the cumulative total returns are computed assuming the reinvestment of dividends at the frequency with which dividends were paid during the applicable years.

The following financial data of the Company is derived from the Company’s historical audited financial statements and related notes. The information set forth below should be read in conjunction with “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” contained elsewhere in this report.

In addition to the results presented in accordance with GAAP, this Form 10-K contains certain non-GAAP financial measures. The Company believes that providing these non-GAAP financial measures provides investors with information useful in understanding the Company’s financial performance, performance trends, and financial position. While the Company uses these non-GAAP measures in its analysis of the Company’s performance, this information should not be considered an alternative to measurements required by GAAP. 

The reconciling item between the GAAP and non-GAAP financial measures was the third quarter of 2011 goodwill impairment charge (net of tax) of $32.6 million.

The following discussion is intended to provide a more comprehensive review of the Company’s operating results and financial condition than can be obtained from reading the Consolidated Financial Statements alone. The discussion should be read in conjunction with the Consolidated Financial Statements and the notes thereto included in “Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data.”

This Annual Report on Form 10-K may contain forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about management’s plans, objectives, expectations and intentions that are not historical facts, and other statements identified by words such as “expects,” “anticipates,” “intends,” “plans,” “believes,” “should,” “projects,” “seeks,” “estimates” or words of similar meaning. These forward-looking statements are based on current beliefs and expectations of management and are inherently subject to significant business, economic and competitive uncertainties and contingencies, many of which are beyond the Company’s control. In addition, these forward-looking statements are subject to assumptions with respect to future business strategies and decisions that are subject to change. The following factors, among others, could cause actual results to differ materially from the anticipated results or other expectations in the forward-looking statements, including those set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or the documents incorporated by reference:

Additional factors that could cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed in the forward-looking statements are discussed in “Item 1A. Risk Factors.” Please take into account that forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K (or documents incorporated by reference, if applicable). The Company does not undertake any obligation to publicly correct or update any forward-looking statement if it later becomes aware that actual results are likely to differ materially from those expressed in such forward-looking statement.

During the current year, the Company completed the acquisition of Wheatland and its subsidiary, First State Bank, and completed the acquisition of NCBI and its subsidiary, North Cascades National Bank. As a result of the Wheatland acquisition, the Company has increased its presence in the State of Wyoming and further diversified the Company’s customer base with Wheatland’s strong commitment to agriculture. The NCBI acquisition expanded the Company’s presence into central Washington and further diversified the Company’s customer base with NCBI’s strong economic mix of agriculture, fruit processing and tourism.

The Company had all time record earnings of $95.6 million for 2013, which was an increase of $20.1 million, or 27 percent over the 2012 net income of $75.5 million. Diluted earnings per share for 2013 was $1.31, an increase of $0.26, or 25 percent, from the prior year diluted earnings per share of $1.05. The net income improvement for 2013 over 2012 was principally due to an increase in net interest income and the continued decrease in credit quality expenses.

The current year increase in net interest income resulted from a $9.8 million increase in interest income and a $7.0 million decrease in interest expense. The increase in interest income was primarily attributable to an increase in volume of commercial loans and an increase in yields on investment securities. The increased yields on investment securities was primarily driven by the slowdown of refinance activity that occurred during 2013 and the resulting decrease in premium amortization (net of discount accretion) on the investment securities portfolio (“premium amortization”).

The Company experienced an increase in its net interest margin as a percentage of earning assets, on a tax-equivalent basis, during each of the prior four quarters, which ultimately resulted in the current year net interest margin of 3.48 percent which was an 11 basis points increase over the prior year net interest margin of 3.37 percent. The increase was the result of a combination of factors including a decrease in borrowing and deposit interest rates, higher yielding investment securities, and a shift in earning assets to the higher yielding loan portfolio.

For the third consecutive year, the Company decreased its non-performing assets. During the current year, the Company’s non-performing assets of $109 million decreased $34.1 million or, 24 percent, from the prior year end. The decrease in non-performing assets was the result of the Company’s continued patience and focus on actively managing the disposal of non-performing assets. The improvement in credit quality was reflected in a decrease in credit quality expenses of $26.4 million during 2013 compared to 2012 from the combined decrease in the provision for loan losses and the in OREO expense. Provision for loan losses of $6.9 million during the current year decreased $14.6 million, or 68 percent, over the prior year. OREO expenses of $7.2 million during the current year decreased $11.8 million, or 62 percent, over the prior year.

The Company was pleased with its organic loan growth during the current year which was the first annual increase since 2008. Excluding acquisitions, loans receivable increased $278 million, or 8 percent, during the current year, with the primary increase in commercial loans which increased $294 million from the prior year end. The increase in the loan portfolio allowed the Company to decrease the lower yielding investment securities portfolio during the current year. Excluding the acquisitions and wholesale deposits, the Company’s non-interest bearing deposits increased $75.6 million, or 6 percent, during the year while interest bearing deposits remained stable with a small increase of $18.4 million, or less than 1 percent, during the current year. Tangible stockholders’ equity increased $35.5 million, or $0.12 per share, as a result of stock issued in connection with the acquisitions and earnings retention which were offset by the decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income. The Company increased its quarterly dividend twice during 2013 from $0.14 per share to $0.16 per share for a record dividend of $0.60 per share for 2013 compared to $0.53 per share for 2012.

Looking forward, the Company’s future performance will depend on many factors including economic conditions in the markets the Company serves, interest rate changes, increasing competition for deposits and loans, loan quality, and regulatory burden.

On May 31, 2013, the Company completed the acquisition of Wheatland and its subsidiary, First State Bank, and on July 31, 2013, the Company completed the acquisition of NCBI and its subsidiary, North Cascades National Bank. The Company incurred $1.5 million of expense in connection with the acquisitions for the year ended December 31, 2013. The Company’s results of operations and financial condition include the acquisitions of Wheatland and NCBI from the acquisition dates. The following table provides information on the fair value of selected classifications of assets and liabilities acquired:

Investment securities decreased $460 million, or 12 percent, from December 31, 2012 as the Company implemented a strategy to reduce the overall size of the investment securities portfolio as the higher yielding loan portfolio increased. The Company continued to purchase investment securities during the year, although at a much smaller pace than the principal paydowns. The growth in the loan portfolio provided the Company the opportunity to retain higher yielding loans than what the Company could achieve with investment securities. At December 31, 2013, investment securities represented 41 percent of total assets, down from 48 percent at December 31, 2012.

A positive trend for the four consecutive quarters during the current year has been the organic loan growth. Excluding the loans receivable from the acquisitions, the loan portfolio increased $278 million, or 8 percent, during the current year with increases in both residential real estate and commercial loans. Excluding the acquisitions, the largest dollar increase during the current year was in commercial loans which increased $294 million, or 13 percent, of which $200 million of the increase was in commercial real estate loans. The decreases in consumer and other loans was primarily attributable to customers paying off home equity lines of credit as they refinanced their first mortgage.

Excluding the acquisitions, non-interest bearing deposits of $1.374 billion at December 31, 2013 increased $75.6 million, or 6 percent, during the current year. Interest bearing deposits of $4.206 billion at December 31, 2013 included $205 million of wholesale deposits (i.e., brokered deposits classified as NOW, money market deposit and certificate accounts). Excluding the acquisitions, interest bearing deposits at December 31, 2013 decreased $410 million, or 10 percent, from December 31, 2012 primarily the result of a decrease of $429 million in wholesale deposits. FHLB advances of $840 million at December 31, 2013 decreased $157 million, or 16 percent, from the prior year end and will continue to fluctuate as the need for funding changes.

Tangible stockholders’ equity of $824 million at year end increased $35.4 million, or 4 percent, from the prior year end. The higher capital levels were the result of $45.0 million of Company stock issued in connection with the acquisitions and an increase in earnings retention of $51.4 million which were offset by the decrease in accumulated other comprehensive income of $38.3 million. Tangible book value per common share of $11.08 increased $0.12 per share from the prior year end.

Net income for the year ended December 31, 2013 was $95.6 million, an increase of $20.1 million, or 27 percent, from the $75.5 million of net income for the prior year. Diluted earnings per share for the current year was $1.31 per share, an increase of $0.26, or 25 percent, from the diluted earnings per share in the prior year.

 

Net interest income for 2013 increased $16.8 million, or 8 percent, over last year. Interest income for the current year increased $9.8 million, or 4 percent, from the prior year and was principally due to the increased volume of commercial loans in addition to the decrease in premium amortization on investment securities, which were partially reduced by a decrease in yields within the loan portfolio. During 2013, the Company experienced four consecutive quarters of decreases in premium amortization, compared to significant increases experienced during the preceding seven quarters. Interest income was reduced by $64.1 million in premium amortization on investment securities during the current year which was a decrease of $7.9 million from the prior year. Interest expense for 2013 decreased $7.0 million, or 19 percent, from the prior year and was primarily attributable to the decreases in interest rates on interest bearing deposits and borrowings.  The funding cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) for the current year was 42 basis points compared to 55 basis points for the prior year.

The net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, for 2013 was 3.48 percent, an 11 basis points increase from the net interest margin of 3.37 percent for 2012. The net interest margin was benefited by the decreased interest rates on deposits and borrowings. The net interest margin was further supported by the continued shift in earning assets from investment securities to the higher yielding loan portfolio and the increased yield on the investment securities portfolio. The increased yields on investment securities was driven by lower premium amortization on investment securities. The premium amortization for 2013 accounted for a 90 basis points reduction in the net interest margin, which was a decrease of 14 basis points compared to the 104 basis points reduction in the net interest margin for last year.

Non-interest income of $93.0 million for 2013 increased $1.6 million, or 2 percent, over last year. Service charge fee income increased $4.8 million, or 10 percent, from the prior year which was driven by increases in the number of deposit accounts and changes in internal deposit processing. Gains of $28.5 million on the sale of loans for the current year decreased $3.7 million, or 12 percent, from the prior year. The Company experienced a slowdown in refinance during the current year as mortgage rates moved up, although, the decrease in gain on sale of loans was more than offset by the decrease in premium amortization on investment securities, both of which were attributable to the continuing slowdown of refinance activity. Other income for the current year increased $806 thousand, or 8 percent, over the the prior year. Included in other income was operating revenue of $400 thousand from OREO and gains of $3.1 million on the sale of OREO, which combined totaled $3.5 million for the current year compared to $2.4 million for the prior year.

Compensation and employee benefits for 2013 increased $8.8 million, or 9 percent, from the same period last year. The increase in compensation and employee benefits from the prior year was primarily due to the acquisitions of Wheatland and NCBI and increases in benefit expense and annual merit raises. Outsourced data processing expense increased $1.2 million, or 35 percent, from the prior year primarily from the acquired banks outsourced data processing expense. OREO expense of $7.2 million in the current year decreased $11.8 million, or 62 percent, from the prior year. The OREO expense for the current year included $2.7 million of operating expenses, $3.6 million of fair value write-downs, and $880 thousand of loss on sale of OREO. Other expense for the current year increased by $2.8 million, or 8 percent, from the prior year and was attributable to the legal and professional expenses associated with the acquisitions, debit card fraud losses and deposit account losses.

The Company calculates the efficiency ratio as non-interest expense before OREO expenses, core deposit intangibles amortization, goodwill impairment charges, and non-recurring expense items as a percentage of tax-equivalent net interest income and non-interest income, excluding gains or losses on sale of investments, OREO income, and non-recurring income items. The efficiency ratio was 55 percent for 2013 and 54 percent for 2012. Although there was an increase net interest income during the current year over the prior year, it was not enough to offset the increase in non-interest expense, excluding OREO expense, resulting in the increased efficiency ratio.

The following table summarizes the provision for loan losses, net charge-offs and select ratios relating to the provision for loan losses for the previous eight quarters:

The provision for loan losses was $6.9 million for 2013, a decrease of $14.6 million, or 68 percent, from the same period in the prior year. Net charged-off loans during the current year were $7.4 million, a decrease of $20.8 million from the prior year. Such provision and net-charge off decreases were driven by the continued increase in credit quality that has continued over the prior three years.

Net interest income for 2012 decreased $17.6 million, or 7 percent, over the same period the prior year. Interest income decreased $26.4 million, or 9 percent, while interest expense decreased $8.8 million, or 20 percent from 2011. The decrease in interest income from the prior year was principally due to the increase in premium amortization on investment securities and the reduction in balances and yields on loans, the combination of which put further pressure on earning asset yields. Interest income was reduced by $72.0 million in premium amortization on investment securities which was an increase of $33.9 million from the prior year. This increase in premium amortization was the result of both the increased purchases of investment securities combined with the continued refinance activity. The decrease in interest expense during 2012 was primarily attributable to the decreases in rates on interest bearing deposits and borrowings. The funding cost (including non-interest bearing deposits) for 2012 was 55 basis points compared to 74 basis points for 2011. 

The net interest margin, on a tax-equivalent basis, for 2012 was 3.37 percent, a 52 basis points reduction from the net interest margin of 3.89 percent for 2011. The reduction was attributable to a lower yield and volume of loans coupled with an increase in lower yielding investment securities and higher premium amortization on investment securities, both of which outpaced the reduction in funding cost. The premium amortization in 2012 accounted for a 104 basis points reduction in the net interest margin which was an increase of 44 basis points compared to the 60 basis points reduction in the net interest margin for the same period in the prior year. 

Non-interest income of $91.5 million for 2012 increased $13.3 million, or 17 percent, over non-interest income of $78.2 million for 2011. Service charge fee income increased $1.6 million, or 3 percent, the majority of which was from higher debit card income driven by the increased number of deposit accounts. Gain on sale of loans for 2012 increased $11.1 million, or 53 percent, from 2011 due to greater refinance and loan origination activity. Included in other income was operating revenue of $355 thousand from OREO and gains of $2.0 million on the sale of OREO, which totaled $2.4 million for 2012 compared to $2.7 million for the same period in the prior year.

Compensation and employee benefits for 2012 increased $9.7 million, or 11 percent, and was attributable to an increase in commissions on residential real estate loan originations, a revised Company incentive program and the restoration in 2012 of certain compensation cuts made in 2011. OREO expense of $19.0 million for 2012 decreased $8.3 million, or 30 percent, from the prior year. The OREO expense for 2012 included $3.6 million of operating expenses, $13.3 million of fair value write-downs, and $2.1 million of loss on sale of OREO.

The provision for loan losses was $21.5 million for 2012, a decrease of $43.0 million, or 67 percent, from the same period in the prior year. Net charged-off loans during the 2012 was $28.2 million, a decrease of $35.9 million from 2011. The largest category of net charge-offs was in land, lot and other construction loans which had net charge-offs of $9.8 million, or 35 percent of total net charged-off loans. Net charge-offs totaled $31.3 million in this loan category in 2011.

The Company focuses its lending activities primarily on the following types of loans: 1) first-mortgage, conventional loans secured by residential properties, particularly single-family, 2) commercial lending that concentrates on targeted businesses, and 3) installment lending for consumer purposes (e.g., automobile, home equity, etc.). Supplemental information regarding the Company’s loan portfolio and credit quality based on regulatory classification is provided in the section captioned “Loans by Regulatory Classification” included in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” The regulatory classification of loans is based primarily on the type of collateral for the loans. Loan information included in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” is based on the Company’s loan segments and classes which is based on the purpose of the loan, unless otherwise noted as a regulatory classification.

The following table summarizes the Company’s loan portfolio as of the dates indicated: