Flushing Financial Corp - 10-Q quarterly report FY2012 Q1

For the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012

Commission file number 001-33013

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

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

(Address of principal executive offices)

(Registrant's telephone number, including area code)

 

 

 

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements

PART I – FINANCIAL INFORMATION

(Unaudited)

 

(Unaudited)

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

(Unaudited)

 

 

The accompanying notes are an integral part of these consolidated financial statements.

 

The primary business of Flushing Financial Corporation (the “Holding Company”) is the operation of its wholly-owned subsidiary, Flushing Savings Bank, FSB (the “Savings Bank”).  The Holding Company and its direct and indirect wholly-owned subsidiaries, the Savings Bank, Flushing Commercial Bank, Flushing Preferred Funding Corporation, Flushing Service Corporation, and FSB Properties Inc., are collectively herein referred to as the “Company.” The unaudited consolidated financial statements presented in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (“Quarterly Report”) include the collective results of the Company on a consolidated basis.

 

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements are prepared in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America (“GAAP”) and general practices within the banking industry. The information furnished in these interim statements reflects all adjustments which are, in the opinion of management, necessary for a fair statement of the results for such presented periods of the Company.  Such adjustments are of a normal recurring nature, unless otherwise disclosed in this Quarterly Report. All inter-company balances and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.  The results of operations in the interim statements are not necessarily indicative of the results that may be expected for the full year.

 

The accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in conformity with the instructions to Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q and Article 10, Rule 10-01 of Regulation S-X for interim financial statements.  Accordingly, certain information and footnote disclosures normally included in financial statements prepared in accordance with GAAP have been condensed or omitted pursuant to the rules and regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). The unaudited consolidated interim financial information should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2011.

 

When necessary, certain reclassifications have been made to the prior-period consolidated financial statements to conform to the current-period presentation.

 

 

The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements, and reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period. Estimates that are particularly susceptible to change in the near term are used in connection with the determination of the allowance for loan losses, the evaluation of goodwill for impairment, the evaluation of the need for a valuation allowance of the Company’s deferred tax assets and the evaluation of other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) on securities. The current economic environment has increased the degree of uncertainty inherent in these material estimates.  Actual results could differ from these estimates.

 

 

Earnings per common share have been computed based on the following:

 

 

The Company’s investments are classified in one of the following three categories and accounted for accordingly: (1) trading securities, (2) securities available for sale and (3) securities held-to-maturity.

 

The Company did not hold any trading securities or securities held-to-maturity during the three month periods ended March 31, 2012 and 2011. Securities available for sale are recorded at fair value.

 

The following table summarizes the Company’s portfolio of securities available for sale at March 31, 2012:

 

 

The following table shows the Company’s available for sale securities with gross unrealized losses and their fair value aggregated by category and length of time the individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, at March 31, 2012:

 

Other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”) losses on impaired securities must be fully recognized in earnings if an investor has the intent to sell the debt security or if it is more likely than not that the investor will be required to sell the debt security before recovery of its amortized cost. However, even if an investor does not expect to sell a debt security, the investor must evaluate the expected cash flows to be received and determine if a credit loss has occurred. In the event that a credit loss has occurred, only the amount of impairment associated with the credit loss is recognized in earnings in the Consolidated Statements of Income. Amounts relating to factors other than credit losses are recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income (“AOCI”) within Stockholders’ Equity. Additional disclosures regarding the calculation of credit losses as well as factors considered by the investor in reaching a conclusion that an investment is not other-than-temporarily impaired are required.

 

The Company reviewed each investment that had an unrealized loss at March 31, 2012. An unrealized loss exists when the current fair value of an investment is less than its amortized cost basis. Unrealized losses on available for sale securities, that are deemed to be temporary, are recorded in AOCI, net of tax.  Unrealized losses that are considered to be other-than-temporary are split between credit related and noncredit related impairments, with the credit related impairment being recorded as a charge against earnings and the noncredit related impairment being recorded in AOCI, net of tax.

 

The Company evaluates its pooled trust preferred securities, included in the table above in the row labeled “Other”, using an impairment model through an independent third party, which includes evaluating the financial condition of each counterparty.  For single issuer trust preferred securities, the Company evaluates the issuer’s financial condition. The Company evaluates its mortgage-backed securities by reviewing the characteristics of the securities, including delinquency and foreclosure levels, projected losses at various loss severity levels and credit enhancement and coverage. In addition, private issue CMOs are evaluated using an impairment model through an independent third party. When an OTTI is identified, the portion of the impairment that is credit related is determined by management using the following methods: (1) for trust preferred securities, the credit related impairment is determined by using a discounted cash flow model from an independent third party, with the difference between the present value of the projected cash flows and the amortized cost basis of the security recorded as a credit related loss against earnings; (2) for mortgage-backed securities, credit related impairment is determined for each security by estimating losses based on a set of assumptions, which includes delinquency and foreclosure levels, projected losses at various loss severity levels, credit enhancement and coverage; and (3) for private issue CMOs, through an impairment model from an independent third party and then recording those estimated losses as a credit related loss against earnings.

 

The unrealized losses in U.S. Government Agencies at March 31, 2012, consist of losses on two U.S. Government securities. The unrealized losses were caused by movements in interest rates. It is not anticipated that these securities would be settled at a price that is less than the amortized cost of the Company’s investment. Each of these securities is performing according to its terms and, in the opinion of management, will continue to perform according to its terms. The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities. Therefore, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

The unrealized losses in Municipal securities at March 31, 2012, consist of losses on 12 municipal securities. The unrealized losses were caused by movements in interest rates. It is not anticipated that these securities would be settled at a price that is less than the amortized cost of the Company’s investment. Each of these securities is performing according to its terms and, in the opinion of management, will continue to perform according to its terms. The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities. Therefore, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

The unrealized losses in Other Securities at March 31, 2012, consist of losses on one single issuer trust preferred security and two pooled trust preferred securities. The unrealized losses on  such securities were caused by market interest volatility, a significant widening of credit spreads across markets for these securities and illiquidity and uncertainty in the financial markets. These securities are currently rated below investment grade. The pooled trust preferred securities do not have collateral that is subordinate to the classes the Company owns. The Company’s management evaluates these securities using an impairment model, through an independent third party, that is applied to debt securities. In estimating other-than-temporary impairment losses, management considers: (1) the length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than amortized cost; (2) the current interest rate environment; (3) the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, if applicable; and (4) the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the security for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value. Additionally, management reviews the financial condition of each individual issuer within the pooled trust preferred securities. All of the issuers of the underlying collateral of the pooled trust preferred securities we reviewed are banks.

For each bank, our review included the following performance items:

 

 

Based on the review of the above factors, we concluded that:

 

 

 

In order to estimate potential future defaults and deferrals, we segregated the performing underlying issuers by their Texas Ratio. We then reviewed performing issuers with Texas Ratios in excess of 50%. The Texas Ratio is a key indicator of the health of the institution and the likelihood of failure. This ratio compares the problem assets of the institution to the institution’s available capital and reserves to absorb losses that are likely to occur in these assets. There was one issuer with a Texas Ratio in excess of 50% for which we concluded there would not be a default, primarily due to its current operating results and demonstrated ability to raise additional capital.

 

There were no remaining performing issuers in our pooled trust preferred securities which had a Texas Ratio in excess of 85.00%. For the remaining issuers with a Texas Ratio between 50.00% and 84.99%, we estimated 25% of the related cash flows of the issuer would not be realized. We concluded that issuers with a Texas Ratio below 50.00% are considered healthy and there was a minimal risk of default. We assigned a zero default rate to these issuers. Our analysis also assumed that issuers currently deferring would default with no recovery and issuers that have defaulted will have no recovery.

 

We had an independent third party prepare a discounted cash flow analysis for each of these pooled trust preferred securities based on the assumptions discussed above. Other significant assumptions were: (1) no issuers will prepay; (2) senior classes will not call the debt on their portions; and (3) use of the forward London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) curve. The cash flows were discounted at the effective rate for each security. For each issuer that we assumed a 25% shortfall in the cash flows, the cash flow analysis eliminates 25% of the cash flow for each issuer effective immediately.

 

One of the pooled trust preferred securities is over 90 days past due and the Company has stopped accruing interest. The remaining pooled trust preferred security as well as the single issuer trust preferred security both are performing according to their terms.  The Company also owns a pooled trust preferred security that is carried under the fair value option, where the unrealized losses are included in the Consolidated Statements of Income – Net gain (loss) from fair value adjustments.  This security is over 90 days past due and the Company has stopped accruing interest.

 

It is not anticipated at this time that the one single issuer trust preferred security and the two pooled trust preferred securities would be settled at a price that is less than the amortized cost of the Company’s investment. Each of these securities is performing according to its terms; except for the pooled trust preferred securities for which the Company has stopped accruing interest as discussed above and, in the opinion of management based on the review performed at March 31, 2012, will continue to perform according to its terms. The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities’ amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities. Therefore, the Company did not consider the one single issuer trust preferred security and the two pooled trust preferred securities to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

At March 31, 2012, the Company held six trust preferred issues which had a current credit rating of at least one rating below investment grade. Two of those issues are carried under the fair value option and therefore, changes in fair value are included in the Consolidated Statement of Income – Net gain (loss) from fair value adjustments.

The following table details the remaining four trust preferred issues that were evaluated to determine if they were other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012. The class the Company owns in pooled trust preferred securities does not have any excess subordination.

 

 

The unrealized losses in Real Estate Mortgage Investment Conduit (“REMIC”) and CMO securities at March 31, 2012 consist of three issues from the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (“FHLMC”), one issue from the Federal National Mortgage Association (“FNMA”), one issue from Government National Mortgage Association (“GNMA”) and seven private issues.

 

The unrealized losses on the REMIC and CMO securities issued by FHLMC, FNMA and GNMA were caused by movements in interest rates. It is not anticipated that these securities would be settled at a price that is less than the amortized cost of the Company’s investment. Each of these securities is performing according to its terms and, in the opinion of management, will continue to perform according to its terms. The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities.  Therefore, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

The unrealized losses at March 31, 2012 on REMIC and CMO securities issued by private issuers were caused by movements in interest rates, a significant widening of credit spreads across markets for these securities and illiquidity and uncertainty in the financial markets. Each of these securities has some level of credit enhancements and none are collateralized by sub-prime loans.  Currently, three of these securities are performing according to their terms, with four of these securities remitting less than the full principal amount due.  The principal loss for these four securities totaled $0.4 million for the three months ended March 31, 2012.  These losses were anticipated in the cumulative credit related OTTI charges recorded for these four securities.

 

Credit related impairment for mortgage-backed securities are determined for each security by estimating losses based on the following set of assumptions: (1) delinquency and foreclosure levels; (2) projected losses at various loss severity levels; and (3) credit enhancement and coverage. Based on these reviews, an OTTI charge was not recorded during the three months ended March 31, 2012.

 

It is not anticipated at this time that the seven private issue CMOs would be settled at a price that is less than the current amortized cost of the Company’s investment.  The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities.  Therefore, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

At March 31, 2012, the Company held 16 private issue CMOs which had a current credit rating of at least one rating below investment grade. Six of those issues are carried under the fair value option and therefore, changes in fair value are included in the Consolidated Statement of Income – Net gain (loss) from fair value adjustments.

The following table details the remaining 10 private issue CMOs that were evaluated to determine if they were other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012:

The unrealized losses in FNMA securities at March 31, 2012 consist of losses on one FNMA security. The unrealized losses were caused by movements in interest rates. It is not anticipated that these securities would be settled at a price that is less than the amortized cost of the Company’s investment. Each of these securities is performing according to its terms, and, in the opinion of management, will continue to perform according to its terms. The Company does not have the intent to sell these securities and it is more likely than not the Company will not be required to sell the securities before recovery of the securities amortized cost basis. This conclusion is based upon considering the Company’s cash and working capital requirements, and contractual and regulatory obligations, none of which the Company believes would cause the sale of the securities.  Therefore, the Company did not consider these investments to be other-than-temporarily impaired at March 31, 2012.

 

The following table details gross unrealized losses recorded in AOCI and the ending credit loss amount on debt securities, as of March 31, 2012, for which the Company has recorded a credit related OTTI charge in the Consolidated Statements of Income:

 

 

The following table represents the activity related to the credit loss component recognized in earnings on debt securities held by the Company for which a portion of OTTI was recognized in AOCI for the period indicated:

 

 

 

 

The following table summarizes the Company’s portfolio of securities available for sale at December 31, 2011:

 

Mortgage-backed securities shown in the table above include two private issue CMO that are collateralized by commercial real estate mortgages with amortized cost and market values of $19.0 million and $19.2 million, respectively, at December 31, 2011.  The remaining private issue mortgage-backed securities are backed by one-to-four family residential mortgage loans.

 

 

 

 

Loans are reported at their outstanding principal balance, net of any unearned income, charge-offs, deferred loan fees and costs on originated loans and unamortized premiums or discounts on purchased loans. Interest on loans is recognized on the accrual basis. The accrual of income on loans is generally discontinued when certain factors, such as contractual delinquency of 90 days or more, indicate reasonable doubt as to the timely collectability of such income. Uncollected interest previously recognized on non-accrual loans is reversed from interest income at the time the loan is placed on non-accrual status. A non-accrual loan can be returned to accrual status when contractual delinquency returns to less than 90 days delinquent. Subsequent cash payments received on non-accrual loans that do not bring the loan to less than 90 days delinquent are recorded on a cash basis. Subsequent cash payments can also be applied first as a reduction of principal until all principal is recovered and then subsequently to interest, if in management’s opinion, it is evident that recovery of all principal due is unlikely to occur. Net loan origination costs and premiums or discounts on loans purchased are amortized into interest income over the contractual life of the loans using the level-yield method. Prepayment penalties received on loans which pay in full prior to their scheduled maturity are included in interest income in the period they are collected.

 

The Company maintains an allowance for loan losses at an amount, which, in management’s judgment, is adequate to absorb probable estimated losses inherent in the loan portfolio. Management’s judgment in determining the adequacy of the allowance is based on evaluations of the collectability of loans. This evaluation is inherently subjective, as it requires estimates that are susceptible to significant revisions as more information becomes available. In assessing the adequacy of the Company's allowance for loan losses, management considers various factors such as, the current fair value of collateral for collateral dependent loans, the Company's historical loss experience, recent trends in losses, collection policies and collection experience, trends in the volume of non-performing and classified loans, changes in the composition and volume of the gross loan portfolio and local and national economic conditions. The Company’s Board of Directors (the “Board of Directors”) reviews and approves management’s evaluation of the adequacy of the allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis.

 

The allowance for loan losses is established through charges to earnings in the form of a provision for loan losses. Increases and decreases in the allowance for loan losses other than charge-offs and recoveries are included in the provision for loan losses. When a loan or a portion of a loan is determined to be uncollectible, the portion deemed uncollectible is charged against the allowance and subsequent recoveries, if any, are credited to the allowance.

 

The Company recognizes a loan as non-performing when the borrower has indicated the inability to bring the loan current, or due to other circumstances which, in our opinion, indicate the borrower will be unable to bring the loan current within a reasonable time. All loans classified as non-performing, which includes all loans past due 90 days or more, are classified as non-accrual unless there is, in our opinion, compelling evidence the borrower will bring the loan current in the immediate future. Appraisals and/or updated internal evaluations are obtained as soon as practical and before the loan become 90 days delinquent. The loan balances of collateral dependant impaired loans are compared to the loan’s updated fair value. The balance which exceeds fair value is generally charged-off.  Management reviews the allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis and records as a provision the amount deemed appropriate, after considering current year charge-offs, charge-off trends, new loan production, current balance by particular loan categories and delinquent loans by particular loan categories.

 

A loan is considered impaired when, based upon the most current information, the Company believes it is probable that it will be unable to collect all amounts due, both principal and interest, according to the contractual terms of the loan. Impaired loans are measured based on the present value of the expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, or at the loan’s observable market price, or the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. Interest income on impaired loans is recorded on a cash basis. The Company’s management considers all non-accrual loans impaired.

 

The Company reviews each impaired loan to determine if a charge-off is to be recorded or if a valuation allowance is to be allocated to the loan. The Company does not allocate a valuation allowance to loans for which we have concluded the current value of the underlying collateral will allow for recovery of the loan balance either through the sale of the loan or by foreclosure and sale of the property.

 

The Company evaluates the underlying collateral through a third party appraisal, or when a third party appraisal is not available, the Company will use an internal evaluation. The internal evaluations are performed using an income approach or a sales approach. The income approach is used for income producing properties and uses current revenues less operating expenses to determine the net cash flow of the property. Once the net cash flow is determined, the value of the property is calculated using an appropriate capitalization rate for the property. The sales approach uses comparable sales prices in the market.  When an internal evaluation is used, we place greater reliance on the income approach to value the collateral.

 

In preparing internal evaluations of property values, the Company seeks to obtain current data on the subject property from various sources, including: (1) the borrower; (2) copies of existing leases; (3) local real estate brokers and appraisers; (4) public records (such as for real estate taxes and water and sewer charges); (5) comparable sales and rental data in the market; (6) an inspection of the property; and (7) interviews with tenants. These internal evaluations primarily focus on the income approach and comparable sales data to value the property.

 

As of March 31, 2012, the Company utilized recent third party appraisals of the collateral to measure impairment for $143.1 million, or 75.5%, of collateral dependent impaired loans and used internal evaluations of the property’s value for $46.4 million, or 24.5%, of collateral dependent impaired loans.

 

The Company may restructure a loan to enable a borrower to continue making payments when it is deemed to be in the Company’s best long-term interest. This restructure may include reducing the interest rate or amount of the monthly payment for a specified period of time, after which the interest rate and repayment terms revert to the original terms of the loan. We classify these loans as Troubled Debt Restructured (“TDR”) when the Savings Bank grants a concession to a borrower who is experiencing financial difficulties.

 

These restructurings have not included a reduction of principal balance. The Company believes that restructuring these loans in this manner will allow certain borrowers to become and remain current on their loans. All loans classified as TDR are considered impaired, however TDR loans which have been current for six consecutive months at the time they are restructured as TDR remain on accrual status and are not included as part of non-performing loans. Loans which were delinquent at the time they are restructured as a TDR are placed on non-accrual status and reported as non-performing loans until they have made timely payments for six consecutive months. Loans that are restructured as TDR but are not performing in accordance with the restructured terms are placed on non-accrual status and reported as non-performing loans.

 

The allocation of a portion of the allowance for loan losses for a performing TDR loan is based upon the present value of the future expected cash flows discounted at the loan’s original effective rate, or for a non-performing TDR which is collateral dependent, the fair value of the collateral. At March 31, 2012, there were no commitments to lend additional funds to borrowers whose loans were modified to a TDR. The modification of loans to a TDR did not have a significant effect on our operating results, nor did it require a significant allocation of the allowance for loan losses.

 

During the three months ended March 31, 2012, two one-to-four family – mixed use property loans totaling $0.5 million were modified and classified as TDR, as each of these borrowers was given an interest rate that was considered below market for that borrower; and one commercial mortgage loan totaling $1.4 million was modified and classified as TDR, as the borrower had two business line of credit loans rolled into one five year fixed rate commercial mortgage and was given an interest rate that was considered below market for that borrower with the loan’s amortization term extended. For each of the loans that were modified and classified as TDR, the borrower was experiencing financial difficulties. The recorded investment of each of the loans modified and classified to TDR was unchanged as there was no principal forgiven in any of these modifications.

 

During the three months ended March 31, 2011, six multi-family loans totaling $1.8 million were modified and classified as TDR, as each of these borrowers was given an interest rate that was considered below market for that borrower and each had the loan’s amortization term extended; two constructions loans totaling $24.2 million were modified and classified as TDR, as each of these borrowers was given an interest rate that was considered below market for that borrower; one commercial business loan for $2.0 million was modified and classified as TDR, as the borrower was given an interest rate that was considered below market for that borrower.

 

The following table shows loans classified as TDR that are performing according to their restructured terms at the periods indicated:

 

 

The following table shows loans classified as TDR that are not performing according to their restructured terms at the periods indicated:

 

 

During the three months ended March 31, 2012, three multi-family TDR totaling $6.9 million were transferred to non-accrual.

 

The following table shows our non-performing loans at the periods indicated:

 

The interest foregone on non-accrual loans and loans classified as TDR totaled $2.5 million and $2.7 million for the three months ended March 31, 2012 and March 31, 2011, respectively.

 

 

The following table shows an age analysis of our recorded investment in loans at March 31, 2012:

 

 

The following table shows an age analysis of our recorded investment in loans at December 31, 2011:

 

 

The following table shows the activity in the allowance for loan losses for the three months ended March 31, 2012: