United Community Bank - 10-K annual report

 

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Report”) contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Forward-looking statements are not statements of historical fact and generally can be identified by the use of forward-looking terminology such as “believes”, “expects”, “may”, “will”, “could”, “should”, “projects”, “plans”, “goal”, “targets”, “potential”, “estimates”, “pro forma”, “seeks”, “intends”, or “anticipates”, or the negative thereof or comparable terminology. Forward-looking statements include discussions of strategy, financial projections, guidance and estimates (including their underlying assumptions), statements regarding plans, objectives, expectations or consequences of various transactions or events, and statements about the future performance, operations, products and services of United Community Banks, Inc. and its subsidiaries (“United”). We caution our shareholders and other readers not to place undue reliance on such statements. Forward-looking statements are subject to risks, uncertainties and assumptions that are difficult to predict with regard to timing, extent, likelihood and degree of occurrence, which could cause actual results to differ materially from anticipated results. Such risks, uncertainties and assumptions include, but are not limited to:

A more detailed description of these and other risks is contained in “Item 1A. Risk Factors” below. Many of such factors are beyond our ability to control or predict, and readers are cautioned not to put undue reliance on such forward-looking statements. We disclaim any obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements contained in this report, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. Additional information with respect to factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those contemplated by such forward-looking statements may also be included in other reports that United files with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”). United cautions that the foregoing list of factors is not exclusive. All subsequent written and oral forward-looking statements attributable to us or any person acting on our behalf are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained or referred to in this section.

We provide a wide array of commercial and consumer banking services and investment advisory services to our customers. Our business model combines the commitment to exceptional customer service of a local bank with the products and expertise of a larger institution. This combination of service and expertise, in our view, sets us apart and is instrumental in our model to build long-term relationships. We operate as a locally-focused community bank, supplemented by experienced, centralized support to deliver products and services to our larger, more complex, customers. Our organizational structure reflects these strengths, with local leaders for each market and market advisory boards operating in partnership with the product experts of our Commercial Banking Solutions unit. Our United States Small Business Administration / United States Department of Agriculture (“SBA/USDA”) lending and equipment finance businesses operate both in our geographic footprint and nationally. We offer a full range of retail, commercial and corporate banking services, including checking, savings and time deposit accounts, secured and unsecured loans, mortgage loans, payment services, wire transfers, brokerage and advisory services and other related financial services.

Our revenue is primarily derived from interest on and fees received in connection with the loans we make and from interest and dividends from our investment securities and short-term investments. The principal sources of funds for our lending activities are customer deposits, repayment of loans, and the sale and maturity of investment securities. Our principal expenses are interest paid on deposits and operating and general administrative expenses.

The most significant categories of our loans are those to finance owner occupied real estate, commercial income property, commercial and industrial equipment and operating loans, and consumer loans secured by personal residences. A majority of our loans are made on a secured basis.

Substantially all of our loans are to customers located in the immediate market areas of our banking locations in Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Tennessee, including customers who have a seasonal residence in United’s market areas. A portion of our SBA/USDA, franchise and equipment finance businesses originate loans on a national basis, with a significant amount of those loans to customers outside of our immediate market areas.

Our credit organization provides each lending officer with written guidelines for lending activities, and limited lending authority is delegated to lending officers. Loans in excess of individual officer credit authority must be approved by a senior officer with sufficient approval authority delegated by our credit organization or by our Senior Credit Committee.

Our Regional Credit Officers and Senior Credit Officers provide credit approval and portfolio administration support for our commercial lending operations as needed. Our Regional Credit Officers have lending authority set by our Chief Credit Officer based on characteristics of the markets they serve. For commercial loans less than $250,000, we use a centralized small business lending/underwriting department.

We have a centralized consumer credit center that provides underwriting, regulatory disclosure and document preparation for all consumer loan requests originated by our lenders. Applications are processed through an automated loan origination software platform and approved by credit center underwriters.

Our Loan Review Department reviews, or engages an independent third party to review, our loan portfolio on an ongoing basis to identify any weaknesses in the portfolio and to assess the general quality of credit underwriting. The results of such reviews are presented to our executive management and the Risk Committee of the Board of Directors.

Deposits are the major source of our funds for lending and other investment activities. We offer our customers a variety of deposit products, including checking accounts, savings accounts, money market accounts and other deposit accounts, through multiple channels, including our network of full-service branches and our online, mobile and telephone banking platforms. We consider the majority of our regular savings, demand, negotiable order of withdrawal (“NOW”) and money market deposit accounts to be core deposits. Generally, we attempt to maintain the rates paid on our deposits at a competitive level. We generate the majority of our deposits from customers in our local markets. For additional information regarding our deposit accounts, see the section captioned “Deposits” in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.”

We use our investment portfolio to provide for the investment of excess funds at acceptable risks levels while providing liquidity to fund loan demand or to offset fluctuations in deposits. Our portfolio consists primarily of residential and commercial mortgage-backed securities and U.S. Department of the Treasury (“U. S. Treasury”) and agency and municipal obligations. Most of the securities are classified by us as available-for-sale and recorded on our balance sheet at market value at each balance sheet date. Any change in market value on available-for-sale securities is recorded directly in our shareholders’ equity account and is not recognized in our income statement unless the security is sold or unless it is impaired and the impairment is other than temporary.

We own two captive insurance subsidiaries, United Community Risk Management Services, Inc., which provides risk management services for us and our subsidiaries, and NLFC Reinsurance Ltd., which provides reinsurance on a property insurance contract covering equipment financed by our equipment financing division.

We provide payment processing services for our commercial and small business customers through United Community Payment Systems, LLC (“UCPS”). UCPS is a joint venture between the Bank and Security Card Services, LLC, a merchant services provider headquartered in Oxford, Mississippi and owned by First Data Corporation.

We generate fee revenue through the sale of non-deposit investment products and insurance products, including life insurance, long-term care insurance and tax-deferred annuities, to our customers. Those products are sold by employees who are licensed financial advisors doing business as United Community Advisory Services. We have an affiliation with a third party broker/dealer, LPL Financial, to facilitate this line of business.

We compete in the highly competitive banking and financial services industry. Our profitability depends principally on our ability to effectively compete in the markets in which we conduct business.

We experience strong competition from both bank and non-bank competitors. Broadly speaking, we compete with national banks, super-regional banks, smaller community banks and non-traditional internet-based banks. In addition, we compete with other financial intermediaries and investment alternatives such as mortgage companies, credit card issuers, leasing companies, finance companies, money market mutual funds, brokerage firms, governmental and corporation bond issuers, and other securities firms. Many of these non-bank competitors are not subject to the same regulatory oversight, affording them a competitive advantage in some instances. In many cases, our competitors have substantially greater resources and offer certain services that we are unable to provide to our customers.

We encounter strong pricing competition in providing our services. Additionally, other banks offer different products or services from those that we provide. The larger national and super-regional banks may have significantly greater lending limits and may offer additional products than we are capable of providing. We attempt to compete successfully with our competitors, regardless of their size, by emphasizing customer service while continuing to provide a wide variety of services.

We expect competition in the industry to continue to increase mainly as a result of the improvement in financial technology used by both existing and new banking and financial services firms. Competition may further intensify as additional companies enter the markets where we conduct business, competitors combine to present more formidable challengers and we enter mature markets in accordance with our expansion strategy.

We look to expand into attractive markets where we believe our operating model will be successful. We have entered new markets and expanded our product offerings both by establishing new branches and service locations and selective acquisitions of existing market participants. We have developed a number of commercial lending businesses organically, which provide local commercial real estate, middle market, senior living, renewable energy, builder finance and asset-based lending services. We generally seek merger or acquisition partners that share a similar culture and commitment to customer service. Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and market values and some dilution to our tangible book value may occur. Our goal is to maintain a reasonable earn-back period of any dilution, using realistic assumptions as to growth and expense reductions, as well as to achieve a return on investment superior to that achieved through de novo expansion. Our ability to engage in any merger or acquisition will depend upon approval from various bank regulatory authorities, which will be subject to a variety of factors and considerations.

 

The following is an explanation of the supervision and regulation of United and the Bank as financial institutions. This explanation does not purport to describe state, federal or Nasdaq Stock Market supervision and regulation of general business corporations or Nasdaq listed companies.

General

Like all bank and bank holding companies, we are regulated extensively under state and federal banking laws. The regulatory framework is intended primarily for the protection of the depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole and not for the protection of the shareholders and creditors. Certain provisions of laws and regulations affecting financial services firms such as United are subject to further rulemaking, guidance and interpretation by the applicable federal regulators. United is subject to examination and reporting requirements of the Federal Reserve and the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance (the “DBF”). The Bank is subject to examination and reporting requirements of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”), the DBF and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”). United will continue to evaluate the impact of any new regulations so promulgated. The financial statements and information contained herein have not been reviewed, or confirmed for accuracy or relevance, by the FDIC or any other regulator.

Bank Holding Company Regulation

United is a registered bank holding company subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHC Act”). United is required to file annual and quarterly financial information with the Federal Reserve and is subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve. The BHC Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the Federal Reserve’s prior approval before (1) it may acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any bank that it does not already control; (2) it or any of its non-bank subsidiaries may acquire all or substantially all of the assets of a bank; and (3) it may merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. In addition, a bank holding company is generally prohibited from engaging in, or acquiring, direct or indirect control of the voting shares of any company engaged in non-banking

activities. This prohibition does not apply to activities listed in the BHC Act or found by the Federal Reserve, by order or regulation, to be closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto.

 

Some of the activities that the Federal Reserve has determined by regulation or order to be closely related to banking are:

 

Although the activities of bank holding companies have traditionally been limited to the business of banking and activities closely related or incidental to banking (as discussed above), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) relaxed the previous limitations and permitted bank holding companies to engage in a broader range of financial activities. Specifically, bank holding companies may elect to become financial holding companies which may affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are financial in nature.

 

United must also register with the DBF and file periodic information with the DBF. As part of such registration, the DBF requires information with respect to the financial condition, operations, management and intercompany relationship of United and the Bank and related matters. The DBF may also require such other information as is necessary to keep itself informed concerning compliance with Georgia law and the regulations and orders issued thereunder by the DBF, and the DBF may examine United and the Bank. Although the Bank operates branches in North Carolina, Tennessee and South Carolina; neither the North Carolina Banking Commission, the Tennessee Department of Financial Institutions, nor the South Carolina Commissioner of Banking examines or directly regulates out-of-state holding companies.

 

The Holding Company is an “affiliate” of the Bank under the Federal Reserve Act, which imposes certain restrictions on (1) loans by the Bank to the Holding Company, (2) investments in the stock or securities of the Holding Company by the Bank, (3) the Bank taking the stock or securities of an “affiliate” as collateral for loans by the Bank to a borrower and (4) the purchase of assets from the Holding Company by the Bank. Further, a bank holding company and its subsidiaries are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with any extension of credit, lease or sale of property or furnishing of services.

 

The Bank and each of its subsidiaries are regularly examined by the FDIC. The Bank, as a state banking corporation organized under Georgia law, is subject to the supervision of, and is regularly examined by, the DBF. Both the FDIC and the DBF must grant prior approval of any merger, consolidation or other corporation reorganization involving the Bank.

 

The Holding Company is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. Most of the revenue of the Holding Company results from dividends paid to it by the Bank. There are statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the payment of dividends by the Bank, as well as by the Holding Company to its shareholders.

 

Under the regulations of the DBF, a state bank with an accumulated deficit (negative retained earnings) may declare dividends (reduction in capital) by first obtaining the written permission of the DBF and FDIC. If a state bank has positive retained earnings, it may declare a dividend without DBF approval if it meets all the following requirements:

 

The payment of dividends by the Holding Company and the Bank may also be affected or limited by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines. In addition, if, in the opinion of the applicable regulatory authority, a bank under its jurisdiction is engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice (which, depending upon the financial condition of the bank, could include the payment of dividends), such authority may require, after notice and hearing, that such bank cease and desist from such practice. The FDIC has issued a policy statement providing that insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings. In addition to the formal statutes and regulations, regulatory authorities

consider the adequacy of the Bank’s total capital in relation to its assets, deposits and other such items. Capital adequacy considerations could further limit the availability of dividends from the Bank.

 

Under the Federal Reserve’s Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review (“CCAR”) Rules, bank holding companies with $50 billion or more of total assets are required to submit annual capital plans to the Federal Reserve and generally may pay dividends and repurchase stock only under a capital plan as to which the Federal Reserve has not objected. The CCAR rules will not apply to United for so long as our total consolidated assets remain below $50 billion. However, it is anticipated that United’s capital ratios will be important factors considered by the Federal Reserve in evaluating whether proposed payments of dividends or stock repurchases may be an unsafe or unsound practice.

 

Due to its accumulated deficit in recent years, the Bank was required to receive pre-approval from the DBF and FDIC to pay cash dividends (reduction in capital) to the Holding Company. In 2018, 2017 and 2016, the Bank paid a cash dividend of $162 million, $103 million and $41.5 million, respectively, to the Holding Company after the approval of the DBF and FDIC. The dividends were paid out of capital surplus rather than the accumulated deficit. At December 31, 2018, the Bank no longer had an accumulated deficit. The Holding Company declared cash dividends on its common stock in 2018, 2017 and 2016 of 58 cents, 38 cents and 30 cents per share, respectively.

 

Banks and bank holding companies are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Capital adequacy guidelines involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities and certain off-balance-sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting and other factors.

 

The Federal Reserve and the FDIC have implemented substantially identical risk-based rules for assessing bank and bank holding company capital adequacy. These regulations establish minimum capital standards in relation to assets and off-balance sheet exposures as adjusted for credit risk. “Total capital” is composed of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital. “Tier 1 capital” includes common equity, retained earnings, qualifying non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, a limited amount of qualifying cumulative perpetual stock at the holding company level, minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, less goodwill, most intangible assets and certain other assets. “Tier 2 capital” includes, among other things, perpetual stock and related surplus not meeting the Tier 1 capital definition, qualifying mandatorily convertible debt securities, qualifying subordinated debt and allowances for possible loan and lease losses, subject to limitations. The Federal Reserve and the FDIC use the leverage ratio in tandem with the risk-based ratio to assess the capital adequacy of banks and bank holding companies. The Federal Reserve will require a bank holding company to maintain a leverage ratio well above minimum levels if it is experiencing or anticipating significant growth or is operating with less than well-diversified risks in the opinion of the Federal Reserve. The FDIC and the Federal Reserve also require banks to maintain capital well above minimum levels.

 

In July 2013, the Federal Reserve published the Basel III Capital Rules establishing a new comprehensive capital framework applicable to all depository institutions, bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $500 million or more and all and savings and loan holding companies except for those that are substantially engaged in insurance underwriting or commercial activities (collectively, “banking organizations”). The rules implement the December 2010 framework proposed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”), known as “Basel III”, for strengthening international capital standards as well as certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”).

 

The Basel III Capital Rules substantially revised the risk-based capital requirements applicable to bank holding companies and depository institutions, including United and the Bank, compared to the prior U.S. risk-based capital rules. The Basel III Capital Rules:

 

The Basel III Capital Rules became effective for United and the Bank on January 1, 2015, subject to a phase in period.

 

The Basel III Capital Rules require United and the Bank to maintain:

 

The phase in of the capital conservation buffer was completed as of January 1, 2019, resulting in a target minimum ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets of at least 7%, a target minimum ratio of Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 8.5% and a target minimum ratio of total capital to risk-weighted assets of at least 10.5% for United and the Bank beginning as of that date.

In addition, Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act implemented the prompt corrective action provisions that Congress enacted as a part of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (the “1991 Act”). The “prompt corrective action” provisions set forth five regulatory zones in which all banks are placed largely based on their capital positions. Regulators are permitted to take increasingly harsh action as a bank’s financial condition declines. The FDIC is required to resolve a bank when its ratio of tangible equity to total assets reaches 2%. Better capitalized institutions are generally subject to less onerous regulation and supervision than banks with lesser amounts of capital.

 

The FDIC has adopted regulations implementing the prompt corrective action provisions of the 1991 Act, as revised by the Basel III Capital Rules effective January 1, 2015, which place financial institutions in the following five categories based upon capitalization ratios: (1) a “well-capitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of at least 8%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of 6.5% and a leverage ratio of at least 5%; (2) an “adequately capitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of at least 6%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of 4.5% and a leverage ratio of at least 4%; (3) an “undercapitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of under 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of under 6%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of under 4.5% or a leverage ratio of under 4%; (4) a “significantly undercapitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of under 6%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of under 4%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of under 3% or a leverage ratio of under 3%; and (5) a “critically undercapitalized” institution has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets of 2% or less. Institutions in any of the three undercapitalized categories would be prohibited from declaring dividends or making capital distributions. The FDIC regulations also allow it to “downgrade” an institution to a lower capital category based on supervisory factors other than capital.

 

As of December 31, 2018, the FDIC categorized the Bank as “well-capitalized” under current regulations.

 

The Basel III Capital Rules provide for a number of deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1. Under prior capital standards, the effects of accumulated other comprehensive income items included in capital were excluded for the purposes of determining regulatory capital ratios. Under the Basel III Capital Rules, the effects of certain accumulated other comprehensive items are not excluded; however, certain banking organizations, including United and the Bank, may make a one-time permanent election to continue to exclude these items. United and the Bank made this election in first quarter 2015 in order to avoid significant variations in the level of capital depending upon the impact of interest rate fluctuations on the fair value of United’s available-for-sale securities portfolio. The Basel III Capital Rules also eliminate the inclusion of certain instruments, such as trust preferred securities, from Tier 1 capital of bank holding companies. Instruments issued prior to May 19, 2010 are grandfathered for bank holding companies with consolidated assets of $15 billion or less (subject to the 25% of Tier 1 capital limit).

 

The “capital conservation buffer” is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking organizations with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer (or below the combined capital conservation buffer and countercyclical capital buffer, when the latter is applied) will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases and discretionary bonus compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

 

Implementation of the deductions and other adjustments to CET1 began on January 1, 2015 and were phased-in over a four-year period (beginning at 40% on January 1, 2015 and an additional 20% per year thereafter). The implementation of the capital conservation

buffer began on January 1, 2016 at the 0.625% level and was phased in over a four-year period increasing by that amount on each subsequent January 1, until it reached 2.5% on January 1, 2019.

 

The Basel III Capital Rules prescribe a standardized approach for risk weightings that expand the risk-weighting categories from the current four Basel I-derived categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a much larger and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the assets, generally ranging from 0% for U.S. government and agency securities, to 600% for certain equity exposures, and resulting in higher risk weights for a variety of asset categories. Consistent with the Dodd-Frank Act, the Basel III Capital Rules replace the ratings-based approach to securitization exposures, which is based on external credit ratings, with the simplified supervisory formula approach in order to determine the appropriate risk weights for these exposures. Alternatively, banking organizations may use the existing gross-up approach to assign securitization exposures to a risk weight category or choose to assign such exposures a 1,250% risk weight. In addition, the Basel III Capital Rules provide more advantageous risk weights for derivatives and repurchase-style transactions cleared through a qualifying central counterparty and increase the scope of eligible guarantors and eligible collateral for purposes of credit risk mitigation.

 

In November 2017, the federal banking agencies adopted a final rule to extend the regulatory capital treatment applicable during 2017 under the capital rules for certain items, including regulatory capital deductions, risk weights and certain minority interest limitations. The relief provided under the final rule applies to banking organizations that are not subject to the capital rules’ advanced approaches, such as United. Specifically, the final rule extends the current regulatory capital treatment of mortgage servicing assets, deferred tax assets arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks, significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions in the form of common stock, non-significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions, significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions that are not in the form of common stock, and common equity tier 1 minority interest, tier 1 minority interest and total capital minority interest exceeding the capital rules’ minority interest limitations.

 

In December 2017, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published the last version of the Basel III accord, generally referred to as “Basel IV.” The Basel Committee stated that a key objective of the revisions incorporated into the framework is to reduce excessive variability of risk-weighted assets (“RWA”), which will be accomplished by enhancing the robustness and risk sensitivity of the standardized approaches for credit risk and operational risk, which will facilitate the comparability of banks’ capital ratios; constraining the use of internally modeled approaches; and complementing the risk-weighted capital ratio with a finalized leverage ratio and a revised and robust capital floor. Leadership of the federal banking agencies who are tasked with implementing Basel IV supported the revisions. Although it is uncertain at this time, we anticipate some, if not all, of the Basel IV accord may be incorporated into the capital requirements framework applicable to United.

 

In connection with its lending activities, the Bank is subject to a number of federal and state laws designed to protect borrowers and promote lending to various sectors of the economy and population. These laws include the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedure Act and their respective state law counterparts.

CFPB

The Dodd-Frank Act centralized responsibility for consumer financial protection by creating a new agency, the CFPB, and giving it the power to promulgate and enforce federal consumer protection laws. Depository institutions are subject to the CFPB’s rule writing authority, and existing federal bank regulatory agencies retain examination and enforcement authority for such institutions. The CFPB and United’s existing federal regulator, the FDIC, are focused on the following:

 

The CFPB and FDIC have authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive practices in connection with offering consumer financial products. The Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and standards that are more stringent than those adopted at the federal level and, in certain circumstances, permits states’ attorneys general to enforce compliance with both state and federal laws and regulations.

The Bank’s deposits are insured by the FDIC through the Deposit Insurance Fund and therefore the Bank is subject to deposit insurance assessments as determined by the FDIC. The FDIC imposes a risk-based deposit premium assessment system, which was amended pursuant to the Federal Deposit Insurance Reform Act of 2005 and further amended by the Dodd-Frank Act. Under the risk-based deposit premium assessment system, the assessment rates for an insured depository institution are calculated based on a number of factors to measure the risk each institution poses to the Deposit Insurance Fund. The assessment rate is applied to total average assets less tangible equity. Under the current system, premiums are assessed quarterly and could increase if, for example, criticized loans and/or other higher risk assets increase or balance sheet liquidity decreases.

 

Effective July 2016, the FDIC published final rules to increase the Deposit Insurance Fund to the statutorily required minimum level of 1.35% by imposing on financial institutions with at least $10 billion in assets a surcharge of 4.5 cents per $100 of their assessment base (after making certain adjustments), to be assessed over a period of eight quarters. As of December 31, 2016, United’s total assets exceeded $10 billion and, accordingly, the Bank became subject to this surcharge in the third quarter of 2017. If this surcharge is insufficient to increase the Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio to 1.35% by December 31, 2018, a one-time shortfall assessment will be imposed on financial institutions with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or more on March 31, 2019. The Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio exceeded the 1.35% target in 2018 and the surcharge was discontinued effective October 1, 2018.

 

In addition to ordinary assessments described above, the FDIC has the ability to impose special assessments in certain instances. The FDIC may also terminate deposit insurance upon a finding that the institution has engaged in unsafe and unsound practices, is in an unsafe or unsound condition to continue operations, or has violated any applicable law, regulation, rule, order or condition imposed by the FDIC.

Volcker Rule

The Dodd-Frank Act amended the BHC Act to require the federal bank regulatory agencies to adopt rules that prohibit banks and their affiliates from engaging in proprietary trading and investing in and sponsoring certain unregistered investment companies (defined as hedge funds and private equity funds). The statutory provision is commonly called the “Volcker Rule”. The Federal Reserve adopted final rules implementing the Volcker Rule on December 10, 2013. United became subject to the Volcker Rule in 2017 without a material effect on its operations and the operations of its subsidiaries, including the Bank, as United does not engage in businesses prohibited by the Volcker Rule. United may incur costs to adopt additional policies and systems to demonstrate compliance with the Volcker Rule.

 

The Dodd-Frank Act included provisions which restrict interchange fees, which are fees charged by banks to cover the cost of handling and exposure to credit and fraud-related risks inherent in bank credit or debit card transactions, to those which are “reasonable and proportionate” for certain debit card issuers and limits the ability of networks and issuers to restrict debit card transaction routing. This statutory provision is known as the “Durbin Amendment”. In the Federal Reserve’s final rules implementing the Durbin Amendment, interchange fees for debit card transactions were capped at $0.21 plus five basis points in order to be eligible for a safe harbor such that the fee is conclusively determined to be reasonable and proportionate. Another related rule also permits an additional $0.01 per transaction “fraud prevention adjustment” to the interchange fee if certain Federal Reserve standards are implemented, including an annual review of fraud prevention policies and procedures. With respect to network exclusivity and merchant routing restrictions, it is now required that all debit cards participate in at least two unaffiliated networks so that the transactions initiated using those debit cards will have at least two independent routing channels. The interchange fee restrictions contained in the Durbin Amendment, and the rules promulgated thereunder, apply to debit card issuers with $10 billion or more in total consolidated assets. United became subject to the interchange fee restrictions and other requirements contained in the Durbin Amendment on July 1, 2017.

 

Incentive Compensation

In addition to the potential restrictions on discretionary bonus compensation under the Basel III Capital rules, the federal bank regulatory agencies have issued guidance on incentive compensation policies (the “Incentive Compensation Guidance”) intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of financial institutions do not undermine the safety and soundness of such institutions by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The Incentive Compensation Guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an institution, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a financial institution’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the institution’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the institution’s board of directors.

 

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

 

The scope and content of federal bank regulatory agencies’ policies on executive compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect United’s ability to hire, retain and motivate its key employees.

 

Cybersecurity

Recent cyber-attacks against banks and other financial institutions that resulted in unauthorized access to confidential customer information have prompted the federal bank regulatory agencies to issue extensive guidance on cybersecurity. These agencies are likely to devote more resources to this part of their safety and soundness examination than they may have in the past.

Source of Strength Doctrine

Federal Reserve regulations and policy requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. Under this policy, the Holding Company is expected to commit resources to support the Bank.

Real Estate Lending

Inter-agency guidelines adopted by federal bank regulatory agencies mandate that financial institutions establish real estate lending policies with maximum allowable real estate loan-to-value limits, subject to an allowable amount of non-conforming loans as a percentage of capital. In addition, the federal bank regulatory agencies, including the FDIC, restrict concentrations in commercial real estate lending and have noted that increases in banks’ commercial real estate concentrations can create safety and soundness concerns. The regulatory guidance mandates certain minimal risk management practices and categorizes banks with defined levels of such concentrations as banks requiring elevated examiner scrutiny.

 

Transactions with Affiliates

Under federal law, all transactions between and among a state nonmember bank and its affiliates, which include holding companies, are subject to Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W promulgated thereunder. Generally, these requirements limit these transactions to a percentage of the bank’s capital and require all of them to be on terms at least as favorable to the bank as transactions with non-affiliates. In addition, a bank may not lend to any affiliate engaged in non-banking activities not permissible for a bank holding company or acquire shares of any affiliate that is not a subsidiary. The FDIC is authorized to impose additional restrictions on transactions with affiliates if necessary to protect the safety and soundness of a bank. The regulations also set forth various reporting requirements relating to transactions with affiliates.

In accordance with the GLB Act, federal banking regulatory agencies adopted rules that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to nonaffiliated third parties. These limitations require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to a nonaffiliated third party. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial companies and conveyed to outside vendors.

 

Anti-Money Laundering Initiatives, the USA Patriot Act and the Office of Foreign Asset Control

A major focus of governmental policy on financial institutions in recent years has been aimed at combating terrorist financing, money laundering and other criminal acts. This has generally been accomplished by amending existing anti-money laundering laws and regulations. The USA Patriot Act of 2001 (the “Patriot Act”) amended the Currency Consumer Financial Protection and Foreign Transactions Reporting Act of 1970, commonly referred to as the “Bank Secrecy Act”, or “BSA”, to strengthen regulation of money laundering and financing of terrorism. The U.S. Department of the Treasury, in cooperation with the FDIC and the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), has issued a number of implementing regulations which apply various requirements of the Patriot

Act to the Bank. These regulations impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering, terrorist financing and other criminal acts and to verify the identity of their customers. In addition, the Office of Foreign Asset Control (“OFAC”), a division of the U.S. Treasury Department charged with administering and enforcing economic and trade sanctions by the U.S. government, publishes lists of persons with which the Bank is prohibited from engaging in business. Over the past several years, federal banking regulators, FinCEN and OFAC have increased supervisory and enforcement attention on U.S. anti-money laundering and sanctions laws, as evidenced by a significant increase in enforcement activity, including several high profile enforcement actions. Several of these actions have addressed violations of the BSA, U.S. sanctions or both, resulting in the imposition of substantial civil monetary penalties. Enforcement actions have increasingly focused on publicly identifying individuals and holding those individuals, including compliance officers, accountable for deficiencies in compliance programs. State attorneys general and the U. S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have also pursued enforcement actions against banking entities alleged to have willfully violated the BSA and U.S. sanctions laws. Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution.

 

Future Legislation

Various legislation affecting financial institutions and the financial industry is from time to time introduced in Congress. Such legislation may change banking statutes and the operating environment of United and its subsidiaries in substantial and unpredictable ways, and could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance depending upon whether any of this potential legislation will be enacted, and if enacted, the effect that it or any implementing regulations would have on the financial condition or results of operations of United or any of its subsidiaries. The nature and extent of future legislative and regulatory changes affecting financial institutions is not known at this time.

 

The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017

On December 22, 2017, The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 (“the Tax Act”) was signed into law. The Tax Act includes a number of provisions that affect United, including the following:

 

The foregoing description of the impact of the Tax Act on us should be read in conjunction with Note 16 to United’s consolidated financial statements.

Available Information

We file reports with the SEC, including annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K, all of which are available to the public on the Internet site maintained by the SEC at http://www.sec.gov. Our website address is www.ucbi.com. Please note that our website address is provided as an inactive textual reference only. We make available free of charge through our website, the annual report on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K, and all amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. The information provided on our website is not part of this report, and is therefore not incorporated by reference unless such information is otherwise specifically referenced elsewhere in this report.

We have also posted our Corporate Code of Ethics, Shareholder Nomination and Communication Procedures, and the charters of our Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, Executive Committee, Risk Committee and Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee of our board of directors on the Corporate Governance section of our website at www.ucbi.com. We will make any legally required disclosures regarding amendments to, or waivers of, provisions of our Code of Ethics or current committee charters on our website. Our corporate governance materials also are available free of charge upon request to our Corporate Secretary, United Community Banks, Inc., 125 Highway 515 East, Blairsville, Georgia 30512.

 

Senior executives of United are elected by the Board of Directors annually and serve at the pleasure of the Board of Directors.

 

The senior executive officers of United, and their ages, positions with United, past five year employment history and terms of office as of February 1, 2019, are as follows:

 

 

None of the above officers are related and there are no arrangements or understandings between them and any other person pursuant to which any of them was elected as an officer, other than arrangements or understandings with directors or officers of United acting solely in their capacities as such.

 

 

An investment in United’s common stock involves risk. Investors should carefully consider the risks described below and all other information contained in this Form 10-K and the documents incorporated by reference before deciding to purchase common stock. Additional risks and uncertainties that management is not aware of or focused on or that management currently deems immaterial may also impair our business operations. This report is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors.

 

Risks Related To Our Business

 

Our success depends significantly upon local, national and global economic and political conditions, as well as governmental monetary policies and trade relations. Our financial performance generally, and in particular the ability of borrowers to pay interest on and repay principal of outstanding loans and the value of collateral securing those loans, as well as demand for loans and other products and services we offer, is highly dependent upon the business environment in the markets where we operate and in the United States as a whole. Adverse changes in business and economic conditions generally or specifically in the markets in which we operate could adversely impact our business, including causing one or more of the following negative developments:

 

Our success is influenced heavily by the growth in population, income levels, loans and deposits and on stability in real estate values in our markets. If the communities in which we operate do not grow or if prevailing economic conditions locally or nationally weaken significantly, our business may be adversely affected. If market and economic conditions deteriorate, this may lead to valuation adjustments on our loan portfolio and losses on defaulted loans and on the sale of other real estate owned. Additionally, such adverse economic conditions in our market areas, specifically decreases in real estate property values due to the nature of our loan portfolio, approximately 74% of which is secured by real estate at December 31, 2018, could reduce our growth rate, affect the ability of our customers to repay their loans and generally affect our financial condition and results of operations. We are less able than larger institutions to spread the risks of unfavorable local economic conditions across a larger number of more diverse economies.

 

There are inherent risks associated with our lending activities. These risks include, among other things, the quality of our underwriting, the impact of changes in interest rates and changes in the economic conditions in the markets where we operate as well across the United States. Increases in interest rates and/or weakening economic conditions could adversely impact the ability of borrowers to repay outstanding loans or the value of the collateral securing these loans. We are also subject to various laws and regulations that affect our lending activities. Failure to comply with applicable laws and regulations could subject us to regulatory enforcement action that could result in the assessment of significant penalties against us.

Our loans are also heavily concentrated in our primary markets of Georgia, South Carolina, North Carolina and Tennessee. These markets may have different or weaker performance than other areas of the country and our portfolio may be more negatively impacted than a financial services company with wider geographic diversity.

See the section captioned “Loans” in the “Balance Sheet Review” section of “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” located elsewhere in this report for further discussion related to commercial and industrial, energy, construction and commercial real estate loans.

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

If loan customers with significant loan balances fail to repay their loans, our results of operations, financial condition and capital levels will suffer. We maintain an allowance for loan losses, which is a reserve established through a provision for loan losses charged to expense, which represents management’s best estimate of inherent losses that have been incurred within the existing portfolio of loans. The allowance, in the judgment of management, is necessary to reserve for estimated loan losses and risks inherent in the loan portfolio. The level of the allowance reflects management’s continuing evaluation of factors including the volume and types of loans; industry concentrations; specific credit risks; internal loan classifications; trends in classifications; volume and trends in delinquencies, non-accruals and charge-offs; present economic, political and regulatory conditions; industry and peer bank loan quality indications; and unidentified losses inherent in the current loan portfolio. The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses inherently involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires us to make significant estimates of current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material changes or vary from our historical experience. Deterioration in economic conditions affecting borrowers, new information regarding existing loans, identification of additional problem loans and other factors, both within and outside of our control, may require an increase in the allowance for loan losses. In addition, bank regulatory agencies periodically review our allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in the provision for loan losses or the recognition of further loan charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of management. Furthermore, if charge-offs in future periods exceed the allowance for loan losses, we will need additional provisions to increase the allowance for loan losses. Any increases in the allowance for loan losses will result in a decrease in net income and, possibly, capital, and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

We expect to implement CECL for our fiscal year beginning January 1, 2020. The implementation of CECL may require additional reserves and may result in increased reserves during or in advance of an economic downturn. However, the magnitude of the increase of our allowance for loan losses at the adoption date will depend upon the nature and characteristics of the portfolio at the adoption date, as well as macroeconomic conditions and forecasts at that date. It is possible that CECL implementation may increase the cost of lending in the industry and result in slower loan growth and lower levels of net income.

See the section captioned “Allowance for Credit Losses” in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” located elsewhere in this report for further discussion related to our process for determining the appropriate level of the allowance for loan losses.

Our profitability is dependent to a large extent on net interest income, which is the difference between interest income earned on loans, leases and investment securities and interest expense paid on deposits, other borrowings, senior debt and subordinated notes. The absolute level of interest rates as well as changes in interest rates, including changes to the shape of the yield curve, may affect our level of interest income, the primary component of our gross revenue, as well as the level of our interest expense. In a period of changing interest rates, interest expense may increase at different rates than the interest earned on assets, impacting our net interest income. Interest rate fluctuations are caused by many factors which, for the most part, are not under our control. For example, national monetary policy implemented by the Federal Reserve plays a significant role in the determination of interest rates. Additionally, competitor pricing and the resulting negotiations that occur with our customers also impact the rates we collect on loans and the rates we pay on deposits. In addition, changes in the method of determining the London Interbank Offered Rate (“LIBOR”) or other reference rates, or uncertainty related to such potential changes, may adversely affect the value of reference rate-linked debt securities that we hold or issue, which could further impact our interest rate spread.

Changes in the level of interest rates also may negatively affect demand for, and thus our ability to originate, loans, the value of our assets and our ability to realize gains from the sale of our assets, all of which ultimately affect our results of operations and financial condition. A decline in the market value of our assets may limit our ability to borrow additional funds. As a result, we could be required to sell some of our loans and investments under adverse market conditions, upon terms that are not favorable to us, in order to maintain our liquidity. If those sales are made at prices lower than the amortized costs of the investments, we will incur losses.

Because of significant competitive pressures in our markets and the negative impact of these pressures on our deposit and loan pricing, coupled with the fact that a significant portion of our loan portfolio has variable rate pricing that moves in concert with changes to the Federal Reserve’s federal funds rate or LIBOR (both of which are at relatively low levels as a result of macroeconomic conditions), our net interest margin may be negatively impacted if these short-term rates remain at their low levels. However, if short-term interest rates continue to rise, our results of operations may also be negatively impacted if we are unable to increase the rates we charge on loans or earn on our investment securities in excess of the increases we must pay on deposits and our other funding sources. As interest rates change, we expect that we will periodically experience “gaps” in the interest rate sensitivities of our assets and liabilities, meaning that either our interest-bearing liabilities (usually deposits and borrowings) will be more sensitive to changes in market interest rates than our interest-earning assets (usually loans and investment securities), or vice versa. In either event, if market interest rates should move contrary to our position, this “gap” may work against us, and our results of operations and financial condition may be negatively affected.

We have historically entered into certain hedging transactions including interest rate swaps, which are designed to lessen elements of our interest rate exposure. In the event that interest rates do not change in the manner anticipated, such transactions may not be effective and our results of operations may be adversely affected.

 

The banking business is highly competitive and we experience competition in each of our markets from many other financial institutions. We compete with banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations, mortgage banking firms, securities brokerage firms, insurance companies, money market funds and other mutual funds, as well as community, super-regional, national and international financial institutions that operate offices in our market areas and elsewhere. We compete with these institutions both in attracting deposits and in making loans. Many of our competitors are well-established, larger financial institutions that are able to operate profitably with a narrower net interest margin and have a more diverse revenue base. We may face a competitive disadvantage as a result of our smaller size, more limited geographic diversification and inability to spread costs across broader markets. Although we compete by concentrating marketing efforts in our primary markets with local advertisements, personal contacts and greater flexibility and responsiveness in working with local customers, customer loyalty can be easily influenced by a competitor’s new products and our strategy may or may not continue to be successful. We may also be affected by the marketplace loosening of credit underwriting standards and structures.

 

We expect to continue to expand in our current markets and in select attractive growth markets through additional branches and also may consider expansion within these markets through additional acquisitions of all or part of other financial institutions. These types of expansions involve various risks, including:

Failure to successfully address these and other issues related to our expansion could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations, and could adversely affect our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. Also, if our growth occurs more slowly than anticipated or declines, our results of operations and financial condition could be materially adversely affected.

Liquidity represents an institution’s ability to provide funds to satisfy demands from depositors, borrowers and other creditors by either converting assets into cash or accessing new or existing sources of incremental funds. Liquidity risk arises from the possibility that we may be unable to satisfy current or future funding requirements and needs.

The objective of managing liquidity risk is to ensure that our cash flow requirements resulting from depositor, borrower and other creditor demands as well as our operating cash needs, are met, and that our cost of funding such requirements and needs is reasonable. We maintain an asset/liability and interest rate risk policy and a liquidity and funds management policy, including a contingency funding plan that, among other things, include procedures for managing and monitoring liquidity risk. Generally we rely on deposits, repayments of loans and leases and cash flows from our investment securities as our primary sources of funds. Our principal deposit sources include consumer, commercial and public funds customers in our markets. We have used these funds, together with wholesale deposit sources such as brokered deposits, along with Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta (“FHLB”) advances, federal funds purchased and other sources of short-term and long-term borrowings, to make loans and leases, acquire investment securities and other assets and to fund continuing operations.

An inability to maintain or raise funds in amounts necessary to meet our liquidity needs could have a substantial negative effect, individually or collectively, on our and the Bank’s liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities, or on terms attractive to us, could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry in general. For example, factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity due to a market downturn or adverse regulatory action against us, a reduction in our credit rating, any damage to our reputation or any other decrease in depositor or investor confidence in our creditworthiness and business. Our access to liquidity could also be impaired by factors that are

not specific to us, such as severe volatility or disruption of the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry as a whole. Any such event or failure to manage our liquidity effectively could affect our competitive position, increase our borrowing costs and the interest rates we pay on deposits, limit our access to the capital markets and have a material adverse effect on our results of operations or financial condition.

Deposit levels may be affected by a number of factors, including rates paid by competitors, general interest rate levels, returns available to customers on alternative investments, general economic and market conditions and other factors. Loan and lease repayments are a relatively stable source of funds but are subject to the borrowers’ and lessees’ ability to repay loans and leases, which can be adversely affected by a number of factors including changes in general economic conditions, adverse trends or events affecting business industry groups or specific businesses, declines in real estate values or markets, business closings or lay-offs, inclement weather, natural disasters and other factors. Furthermore, loans and leases generally are not readily convertible to cash. Accordingly, we may be required from time to time to rely on secondary sources of liquidity to meet growth in loans and leases, deposit withdrawal demands or otherwise fund operations. Such secondary sources include FHLB advances, brokered deposits, secured and unsecured federal funds lines of credit from correspondent banks, Federal Reserve borrowings and/or accessing the equity or debt capital markets.

The availability of these secondary funding sources is subject to broad economic conditions, to regulation and to investor assessment of our financial strength and, as such, the cost of funds may fluctuate significantly and/or the availability of such funds may be restricted, thus impacting our net interest income, our immediate liquidity and/or our access to additional liquidity. If we fail to remain “well capitalized” our ability to utilize brokered deposits may be restricted. We have somewhat similar risks to the extent high balance core deposits exceed the amount of deposit insurance coverage available.

We anticipate we will continue to rely primarily on deposits, loan and lease repayments, and cash flows from our investment securities to provide liquidity. Additionally, where necessary, the secondary sources of borrowed funds described above will be used to augment our primary funding sources. If we are unable to access any of these secondary funding sources when needed, we might be unable to meet our customers’ or creditors’ needs, which would adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and liquidity.

Federal and state bank regulators require United and the Bank to maintain adequate levels of capital to support operations. At December 31, 2018, United’s and the Bank’s regulatory capital ratios were above “well-capitalized” levels under regulatory guidelines. However, our business strategy calls for continued growth in our existing banking markets and targeted expansion in new markets. Growth in assets at rates in excess of the rate at which our capital is increased through retained earnings will reduce our capital ratios unless we continue to increase capital. Failure by us to meet applicable capital guidelines or to satisfy certain other regulatory requirements could subject us to a variety of enforcement remedies available to the federal regulatory authorities and would negatively impact our ability to pursue acquisitions or other expansion opportunities.

We may need to raise additional capital (including through the issuance of common stock) in the future to provide us with sufficient capital resources to meet our commitments and business needs or in connection with acquisitions. Our ability to maintain capital levels could be impacted by negative perceptions of our business or prospects, changes in the capital markets and deteriorating economic and market conditions. The Bank’s ability to pay dividends is described under “Supervision and Regulation - Payment of Dividends” in Part I, Item 1. Any restriction on the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to the Holding Company could impact United’s ability to continue to pay dividends on its common stock or its ability to pay interest on its indebtedness.

We cannot assure you that access to capital will be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. Any occurrence that may limit our access to the capital markets may materially and adversely affect our capital costs and our ability to raise capital and/or debt and, in turn, our liquidity. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, our ability to expand through internal growth or acquisitions or to continue operations could be impaired, and we may need to finance or liquidate unencumbered assets to meet maturing liabilities. We may be unable to do so or have to do so on terms which are unfavorable, which could adversely affect our results of operations and financial condition.

In July 2013, the Federal Reserve and the FDIC approved final rules that substantially amended the regulatory risk-based capital rules. The final rules, which were phased in beginning January 1, 2016 and became fully effective on January 1, 2019, implement the Basel III regulatory capital reforms and changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act.

Under these rules, the leverage and risk-based capital ratios of bank holding companies may not be lower than the leverage and risk-based capital ratios for insured depository institutions. The final rules include new minimum risk-based capital and leverage ratios. Moreover, these rules refine the definition of what constitutes “capital” for purposes of calculating those ratios, including the definitions of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital. The minimum capital level requirements now applicable to bank holding companies and banks subject to the rules are: (i) a common equity Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 7%; (ii) a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 8.5%; (iii) a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.5%; and (iv) a Tier 1 leverage ratio of 4% for all institutions.

We will be subject to limitations on paying dividends, engaging in share repurchases and paying discretionary bonuses if our capital levels fall below these minimums. These limitations establish a maximum percentage of eligible retained income that could be utilized for such actions.

Under these rules, Tier 1 capital generally consists of common stock (plus related surplus) and retained earnings, limited amounts of minority interest in the form of additional Tier 1 capital instruments, and non-cumulative preferred stock and related surplus, subject to certain eligibility standards, less goodwill and other specified intangible assets and other regulatory deductions. Common equity Tier 1 capital generally consists of common stock (plus related surplus) and retained earnings plus limited amounts of minority interest in the form of common stock, less goodwill and other specified intangible assets and other regulatory deductions. Tier 2 capital generally consists of subordinated debt, other preferred stock and a limited amount of loan loss reserves. The total amount of Tier 2 capital is limited to 100% of Tier 1 capital. Cumulative preferred stock and trust preferred securities issued after May 19, 2010, no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital, but such securities issued prior to May 19, 2010, including in the case of bank holding companies with less than $15.0 billion in total assets at that date, trust preferred securities issued prior to that date, continue to count as Tier 1 capital subject to certain limitations. If our total assets exceeded $15.0 billion in the future, the subordinated debentures we, and companies we have acquired, issued in connection with prior trust preferred securities offerings will no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital under applicable banking regulations. Though these trust preferred securities may no longer qualify as Tier 1 capital, we believe they would continue to qualify as Tier 2 capital, subject to applicable limitations. We may need to increase the level of Tier 1 capital we maintain through issuance of common stock or noncumulative perpetual preferred stock, which could cause dilution to our existing common shareholders.

The final rules allow banks and their holding companies with less than $250 billion in assets a one-time opportunity to opt-out of a requirement to include unrealized gains and losses in accumulated other comprehensive income in their capital calculation. We opted-out of this requirement.

The application of more stringent capital requirements, like those adopted to implement the Basel III reforms, could, among other things, result in lower returns on invested capital, require the raising of additional capital, particularly in the form of common stock, make it more difficult for us to receive regulatory approvals related to our growth initiatives and result in regulatory actions if we were to be unable to comply with such requirements. Furthermore, the imposition of liquidity requirements in connection with the implementation of Basel III either because we became subject to those requirements directly or because our regulators seek to propose additional on-balance sheet liquidity requirements on us, could result in our having to lengthen the term of our funding, restructure our business models and/or increase our holdings of liquid assets, which could adversely impact our results of operations.

Implementation of changes to asset risk weightings for risk based capital calculations, items included or deducted in calculating regulatory capital and/or additional capital conservation buffers could result in management modifying its business strategy and could limit our ability to make distributions, including paying dividends or buying back shares.

 

Our accounting and reporting policies are fundamental to the methods by which we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. Management must make significant assumptions and estimates and exercise significant judgment in selecting and applying many of these accounting and reporting policies so they comply with GAAP and reflect management’s judgment of the most appropriate manner to report our financial condition and results. In some cases, management must select a policy from two or more alternatives, any of which may be reasonable under the circumstances, which may result in reporting materially different results than would have been reported under a different alternative.

 

Certain accounting policies are critical to presenting United’s financial condition and results. They require management to make difficult, subjective and complex assumptions, estimates and judgments about matters that are uncertain. Materially different amounts could be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions and estimates. These critical accounting policies relate to the allowance for loan losses, fair value measurement and income taxes. Because of the uncertainty of assumptions and estimates involved in these matters, United may be required to do one or more of the following: significantly increase the allowance for loan losses and/or sustain credit losses that are significantly higher than the reserve provided; significantly decrease the carrying value of loans, foreclosed property

or other assets or liabilities to reflect a reduction in their fair value; or, significantly increase or decrease accrued taxes and the value of our deferred tax assets.

 

 

When we make loans to individuals or entities, we rely upon information supplied by borrowers and other third parties, including information contained in the applicant’s loan application, property appraisal reports, title information and the borrower’s net worth, liquidity and cash flow information. While we attempt to verify information provided through available sources, we cannot be certain all such information is correct or complete. Our reliance on incorrect or incomplete information could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.

 

We are heavily regulated by federal and state authorities. This regulation is designed primarily to protect depositors, federal deposit insurance funds and the banking system as a whole, but not shareholders. Congress and state legislatures and federal and state regulatory authorities continually review banking laws, regulations and policies for possible changes. Changes to statutes, regulations or regulatory policies, including interpretation and implementation of statutes, regulations or policies could affect us in substantial and unpredictable ways, including limiting the types of financial services and products we may offer or increasing the ability of non-banks to offer competing financial services and products. Any regulatory changes or scrutiny could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand our permissible activities, or affect the competitive balance among banks, credit unions, savings and loan associations and other institutions. We cannot predict whether new legislation will be enacted and, if enacted, the effect that it, or any regulations, would have on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

 

Federal and state regulators have the ability to impose or request that we consent to substantial sanctions, restrictions and requirements on our bank and nonbank subsidiaries if they determine, upon examination or otherwise, violations of laws, rules or regulations with which we or our subsidiaries must comply, or weaknesses or failures with respect to general standards of safety and soundness. Such enforcement may be formal or informal and can include directors’ resolutions, memoranda of understanding, cease and desist or consent orders, civil money penalties and termination of deposit insurance and bank closures. Enforcement actions may be taken regardless of the capital level of the institution. In particular, institutions that are not sufficiently capitalized in accordance with regulatory standards may also face capital directives or prompt corrective action. Enforcement actions may require certain corrective steps (including staff additions or changes), impose limits on activities (such as lending, deposit taking, acquisitions or branching), prescribe lending parameters (such as loan types, volumes and terms) and require additional capital to be raised, any of which could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Enforcement actions, including the imposition of monetary penalties, may have a material impact on our financial condition or results of operations, damage our reputation, and result in the loss of our holding company status. In addition, compliance with any such action could distract management’s attention from our operations, cause us to incur significant expenses, restrict us from engaging in potentially profitable activities and limit our ability to raise capital. Closure of the Bank would result in a total loss of your investment.

 

In addition to other banking regulations, the federal Bank Secrecy Act, the Patriot Act and other laws and regulations require financial institutions, among other duties, to institute and maintain effective anti-money laundering programs and file suspicious activity and currency transaction reports as appropriate. The federal FinCEN, established by the Treasury to administer the Bank Secrecy Act, is authorized to impose significant civil money penalties for violations of those requirements and has recently engaged in coordinated enforcement efforts with the individual federal bank regulatory agencies, as well as the DOJ, Drug Enforcement Administration and Internal Revenue Service. Federal bank regulatory agencies and state bank regulators also have begun to focus on compliance with Bank Secrecy Act and anti-money laundering regulations. If our policies, procedures and systems are deemed deficient, we would be subject to liability, including fines and regulatory actions such as restrictions on our ability to pay dividends and the necessity to obtain regulatory approvals to proceed with certain aspects of our business plan, which would negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in other laws and regulations not specific to banking or financial services could also negatively impact our business, financial condition and results of operations. Changes in bankruptcy law, zoning or land use laws and regulations or environmental laws, rules, regulation and enforcement or other statutes, ordinances, rules or administrative or judicial interpretations that affect our customers’ businesses could negatively impact our business.

Our floating-rate funding, certain hedging transactions and certain of the products that we offer, such as floating-rate loans and mortgages, determine their applicable interest rate or payment amount by reference to a benchmark rate, such as LIBOR, the prime rate or the federal funds rate. LIBOR and certain other benchmark rates are the subject of recent national, international and other regulatory guidance and proposals for reform. In July 2017, the Chief Executive of the United Kingdom’s Financial Conduct Authority (the “FCA”) announced that the FCA intends to stop persuading or compelling banks to submit rates for the calculation of LIBOR after 2021. This announcement indicates that the continuation of LIBOR on the current basis cannot and will not be guaranteed after 2021. Consequently, at this time, it is not possible to predict whether and to what extent banks will continue to provide submissions for the calculation of LIBOR. Similarly, it is not possible to predict whether LIBOR will continue to be viewed as an acceptable market benchmark, what rate or rates may become accepted alternatives to LIBOR, or what the effect of any such changes in views or alternatives may be on the markets for LIBOR-linked financial instruments. Although we are currently unable to assess what the ultimate impact of the transition from LIBOR will be, failure to adequately manage the transition could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Our operations rely on the secure processing, storage and transmission of confidential and other information in our computer systems and networks. Although we take protective measures and endeavor to modify these systems as circumstances warrant, the security of our computer systems, software and networks may be vulnerable to breaches, unauthorized access, misuse, computer viruses or other malicious code and other events that could have a security impact. We provide our customers the ability to bank remotely, including over the Internet or through their mobile device. The secure transmission of confidential information is a critical element of remote and mobile banking.

Our network, and the systems of parties with whom we contract, could be vulnerable to unauthorized access, computer viruses, phishing schemes, spam attacks, human error, natural disasters, power loss and other security breaches. We may be required to spend significant capital and other resources to protect against the threat of security breaches and computer viruses, or to alleviate problems caused by security breaches or viruses. To the extent that our activities or the activities of our customers involve the storage and transmission of confidential information, security breaches (including breaches of security of customer systems and networks) and viruses could expose us to claims, litigation and other possible liabilities. Any inability to prevent security breaches or computer viruses could also cause existing customers to lose confidence in our systems and could adversely affect our reputation, results of operations and ability to attract and maintain customers and businesses. In addition, a security breach could also subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny, expose us to civil litigation and possible financial liability and cause reputational damage.

In addition, we outsource many of our major systems, such as data processing, loan servicing and deposit processing systems. While we have selected these vendors carefully, we do not control their actions. The failure of these systems, or the termination of a third-party software license or service agreement on which any of these systems is based, could interrupt our operations. Financial or operational difficulties of a vendor could also hurt our operations if those difficulties interfere with the vendor’s ability to serve us. Furthermore, our vendors could also be sources of operational and information security risk to us, including from breakdowns or failures of their own systems or capacity constraints. Replacing these third party vendors could also create significant delay and expense. Because our information technology and telecommunications systems interface with and depend on third-party systems, we could experience service denials if demand for such services exceeds capacity or such third-party systems fail or experience interruptions. If sustained or repeated, a system failure or service denial could result in a deterioration of our ability to process new and renewal loans, gather deposits and provide customer service, compromise our ability to operate effectively, damage our reputation, result in a loss of customer business and/or subject us to additional regulatory scrutiny and possible financial liability, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

The financial services industry is continually undergoing rapid technological change with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success depends, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our customers by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy customer demands, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers. Failure to successfully keep pace with technological change affecting the financial services industry could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

 

We compute our income tax provision based on enacted tax rates in the jurisdictions in which we operate. Any change in enacted tax laws, rules or regulatory or judicial interpretations, any adverse outcome in connection with tax audits in any jurisdiction or any change in the pronouncements relating to accounting for income taxes could adversely affect our effective tax rate, tax payments and results of operations. In addition, changes in enacted tax laws, such as adoption of a lower income tax rate in any of the jurisdictions in which we operate, could impact our ability to obtain the future tax benefits represented by our deferred tax assets.

 

Reputation risk, or the risk to our earnings, liquidity and capital from negative public opinion, is inherent in our business. Negative public opinion could adversely affect our ability to keep and attract customers and expose us to adverse legal and regulatory consequences. Negative public opinion could result from our actual or alleged conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, regulatory compliance, securities compliance, mergers and acquisitions, and disclosure, from sharing or inadequate protection of customer information and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to that conduct. Negative public opinion could also result from adverse news or publicity that impairs the reputation of the financial services industry generally. Because we conduct most of our business under the “United” brand, negative public opinion about one business could affect our other businesses.

We have assembled a management team which has substantial background and experience in banking and financial services in our markets. Moreover, much of our organic loan growth in recent years (like the growth that we are seeking going forward) was the result of our ability to attract experienced financial services professionals who have been able to attract customers from other financial institutions. We anticipate deploying a similar hiring strategy in the future. Operating our technology systems requires employees with specialized skills that are not readily available in the general employee candidate pool. Inability to retain these key personnel (including key personnel of the businesses we have acquired) or to continue to attract experienced lenders with established books of business could negatively impact our growth because of the loss of these individuals’ skills and customer relationships and/or the potential difficulty of promptly replacing them. Moreover, the higher costs we have to pay to hire and retain these experienced individuals could cause our noninterest expense levels to rise and negatively impact our results of operations.

We are from time to time subject to certain litigation in the ordinary course of our business. As we hire new revenue producing associates we, and the associates we hire, may also periodically be the subject of litigation and threatened litigation with these associates’ former employers. We may also be subject to claims related to our loan servicing programs, particularly those involving servicing of commercial real estate loans. From time to time, and particularly during periods of economic stress, customers, including real estate developers and consumer borrowers, may make claims or otherwise take legal action pertaining to performance of our responsibilities. These claims are often referred to as “lender liability” claims and are sometimes brought in an effort to produce or increase leverage against us in workout negotiations or debt collection proceedings. Lender liability claims frequently assert one or more of the following allegations: breach of fiduciary duties, fraud, economic duress, breach of contract, breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and similar claims.

These and other claims and legal actions, as well as supervisory and enforcement actions by our regulators, including the CFPB or other regulatory agencies with which we deal, including those with oversight of our loan servicing programs, could involve large monetary claims, capital directives, agreements with federal regulators, cease and desist orders and significant defense costs. The outcome of any such cases or actions is uncertain. Substantial legal liability or significant regulatory action against us could have material adverse financial effects or cause significant reputational harm to us, which in turn could seriously harm our business prospects.

We have implemented a risk management framework to identify and manage our risk exposure. This framework is comprised of various processes, systems and strategies, and is designed to manage the types of risk to which we are subject, including, among others, credit, market, liquidity, operational, capital, compliance, strategic and reputational risks. Our framework also includes financial, analytical, forecasting, or other modeling methodologies, which involves management assumptions and judgment. In addition, our board of directors, in consultation with management, has adopted a risk appetite statement, which sets forth certain thresholds and limits to govern our

overall risk profile. However, there is no assurance that our risk management framework, including the risk metrics under our risk appetite statement, will be effective under all circumstances or that it will adequately identify, manage or mitigate any risk or loss to us. If our risk management framework is not effective, we could suffer unexpected losses and become subject to regulatory consequences, as a result of which our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially adversely affected.

Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by the actions and financial stability of other financial institutions. Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to various counterparties, including brokers and dealers, commercial and correspondent banks, and others. As a result, defaults by, or rumors or questions about, one or more financial services institutions, or the financial services industry generally, may result in market-wide liquidity problems and could lead to losses or defaults by such other institutions. Such occurrences could expose us to credit risk in the event of default of one or more counterparties and could have a material adverse effect on our financial position, results of operations and liquidity.

Our operations and customer base are located in markets where natural disasters, including tornadoes, severe storms, fires, floods, hurricanes and earthquakes have occurred. Such natural disasters could significantly impact the local population and economies and our business, and could pose physical risks to our properties. Although our banking offices are geographically dispersed throughout portions of the southeastern United States and we maintain insurance coverages for such events, a significant natural disaster in or near one or more of our markets could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Certain of our operations and customers are dependent on the regular operation of the federal or state government or programs they administer. For example, our SBA lending program depends on reviews and approvals by the SBA, an independent agency of the federal government. During a lapse in funding, such as has occurred during previous federal government “shutdowns”, the SBA may not be able to conduct such reviews and issue the necessary approvals. Similarly, loans we make through USDA lending programs may be delayed or adversely affected by lapses in funding for the USDA. In addition, customers who depend directly or indirectly on providing goods and services to federal or state governments or their agencies may reduce their business with us or delay repayment of loans due to lost or delayed revenue from those relationships. If funding for these lending programs or federal spending generally is reduced as part of the appropriations process or by administrative decision, demand for our services may be reduced. Any of these developments could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations or liquidity.

Risks Related to Common Stock

Stock price volatility may make it more difficult for you to resell your common stock when you want and at prices you find attractive. Our stock price can fluctuate significantly in response to a variety of factors including, among other things:

General market fluctuations, including real or anticipated changes in the strength of the local economy; industry factors and general economic and political conditions and events, such as economic slowdowns or recessions; interest rate changes, oil price volatility or credit loss trends could also cause our stock price to decrease regardless of operating results.

Although our common stock is listed for trading on the Nasdaq, the trading volume in our common stock is less than that of other, larger financial services companies. A public trading market having the desired characteristics of depth, liquidity and orderliness depends on the presence in the marketplace of willing buyers and sellers of our common stock at any given time. This presence depends on the individual decisions of investors and general economic and market conditions over which we have no control. Given the lower trading volume of our common stock, significant sales of our common stock, or the expectation of these sales, could cause our stock price to fall.

The trading volume in our common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market has been relatively low when compared with larger companies listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market or other stock exchanges. For 2018, our average daily trading volume was 460,152 shares. Although we have experienced increased liquidity in our stock, we cannot say with any certainty that a more active and liquid trading market for our common stock will continue to develop. Because of this, it may be more difficult for shareholders to sell a substantial number of shares for the same price at which shareholders could sell a smaller number of shares.

We cannot predict the effect, if any, that future sales of our common stock in the market, or the availability of shares of common stock for sale in the market, will have on the market price of our common stock. We can give no assurance that sales of substantial amounts of common stock in the market, or the potential for large amounts of sales in the market, would not cause the price of our common stock to decline or impair our future ability to raise capital through sales of our common stock.

The market price of our common stock has fluctuated significantly and may fluctuate in the future. These fluctuations may be unrelated to our performance. General market or industry price declines or overall market volatility in the future could adversely affect the price of our common stock, and the current market price may not be indicative of future market prices.

At December 31, 2018, we had outstanding securitized notes payable, senior debentures, subordinated debentures and trust preferred securities and accompanying subordinated debentures totaling $267 million. Payments of the principal and interest on the securitized notes payable, senior debentures, subordinated debentures and the subordinated debentures accompanying the trust preferred securities are senior to payments with respect to shares of our common stock. We also conditionally guarantee payments of the principal and interest on the trust preferred securities. As a result, we must make payments on these debt instruments (including the related trust preferred securities) before any dividends can be paid on common stock and, in the event of bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the debt must be satisfied before any distributions can be made on our common stock. We have the right to defer distributions on the subordinated debentures related to the trust preferred securities (and the related guarantee of payments on the trust preferred securities) for up to five years, during which time no dividends may be paid on its common stock. If our financial condition deteriorates or if we do not receive required regulatory approvals, we may be required to defer distributions on the subordinated debentures related to the trust preferred securities (and the related guarantee of payments on the trust preferred securities).

We may from time to time issue additional senior or subordinated indebtedness that would have to be repaid before our shareholders would be entitled to receive any of our assets.

While our board of directors has approved the payment of a quarterly cash dividend on our common stock since the fourth quarter of 2013, there can be no assurance of whether or when we may pay dividends on our common stock in the future. Future dividends, if any, will be declared and paid at the discretion of our board of directors and will depend on a number of factors. Our principal source of funds used to pay cash dividends on our common stock will be dividends that we receive from the Bank. Although the Bank’s asset quality, earnings performance, liquidity and capital requirements will be taken into account before we declare or pay any future dividends on our common stock, our board of directors will also consider our liquidity and capital requirements and our board of directors could determine to declare and pay dividends without relying on dividend payments from the Bank.

Federal and state banking laws and regulations and state corporate laws restrict the amount of dividends we may declare and pay and that the Bank may declare and pay to us. For example, Federal Reserve regulations implementing the capital rules required under Basel III do not permit dividends unless capital levels exceed certain higher levels applying capital conservation buffers that apply beginning January 1, 2019.

In addition, the terms of our debentures prohibit us from paying dividends on our common stock until we have made required payments under the debentures or if we have deferred payments under the terms of such debentures.

In order to maintain our or the Bank’s capital at desired or regulatory-required levels, we may issue additional shares of common stock, or securities convertible into, exchangeable for or representing rights to acquire shares of common stock. We may sell these shares at prices below the current market price of shares, and the sale of these shares may significantly dilute shareholder ownership. We could also issue additional shares in connection with acquisitions of other financial institutions or other investments, which could also dilute shareholder ownership.

Maintaining and adapting our internal controls over financial reporting, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, is expensive and requires significant management attention. Moreover, as we continue to grow, our internal controls may become more complex and require additional resources to ensure they remain effective amid dynamic regulatory and other guidance. Failure to implement effective controls or difficulties encountered in the process may harm our results of operations and financial condition or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. If we or our independent registered accounting firm identify material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting or are otherwise required to restate our financial statements, we could be required to implement expensive and time-consuming remedial measures and could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports. We may also face regulatory enforcement or other actions, including the potential delisting of our securities from the Nasdaq Global Select Market. This could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations, as well as the trading price of our securities, and could potentially subject us to litigation.

Our amended and restated articles of incorporation, as amended, and bylaws, as amended, contain various provisions that could have an anti-takeover effect and may delay, discourage or prevent an attempted acquisition or change of control of United. These provisions include:

Additionally, our amended and restated charter, as amended, authorizes the board of directors to issue shares of our preferred stock without shareholder approval and upon such terms as the board of directors may determine. The issuance of our preferred stock, while providing desirable flexibility in connection with possible acquisitions, financings and other corporate purposes, could have the effect of making it more difficult for a third party to acquire, or of discouraging a third party from acquiring, a controlling interest in us.

Our common stock is not a bank deposit and, therefore, is not insured against loss by the FDIC, any other deposit insurance fund or by any other public or private entity. Investment in our common stock is inherently risky for the reasons described herein and our shareholders will bear the risk of loss if the value or market price of our common stock is adversely affected.

 

None.

 

 

The executive offices of United are located at 125 Highway 515 East, Blairsville, Georgia. United owns this property. The Bank provides services or performs operational functions at 184 locations, of which 144 are owned and 40 are leased under operating leases. We believe the terms of the various leases are consistent with market standards and were arrived at through arm’s-length bargaining. We consider our properties to be suitable and adequate for operating our banking business. Note 8 to United’s consolidated financial statements includes additional information regarding amounts invested in premises and equipment.

 

 

In the ordinary course of operations, United and the Bank are parties to various legal proceedings and periodic regulatory examinations and investigations. There are no material pending legal proceedings to which United or any of its subsidiaries is a party or of which any of its property is subject.

 

 

Not applicable.

 

 

 

 

Additional information regarding dividends is included in Note 19 to the consolidated financial statements, under the heading of “Supervision and Regulation” in Part I of this report and in “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Capital Resources and Dividends.”

 

 

  

 

 

UNITED COMMUNITY BANKS, INC.

Item 6. Selected Financial Data, continued