ITEM 1. BUSINESS
Overview
Wintrust Financial Corporation, an Illinois corporation (“we,” “Wintrust” or “the Company”), which was incorporated in 1992, is a financial holding company based in Rosemont, Illinois, with total assets of approximately $22.9 billion as of December 31, 2015. We conduct our businesses through three segments: community banking, specialty finance and wealth management. All segment measurements discussed below are based on the reportable segments and do not reflect intersegment eliminations.
We provide community-oriented, personal and commercial banking services to customers located in the Chicago metropolitan area and in southern Wisconsin (“our market area”) through our fifteen wholly owned banking subsidiaries (collectively, the “banks”), as well as the origination and purchase of residential mortgages for sale into the secondary market through Wintrust Mortgage, a division of Barrington Bank and Trust Company, N.A. (“Barrington Bank”). For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the community banking segment had net revenues of $714 million, $621 million and $599 million, respectively, and net income of $102 million, $99 million and $88 million, respectively. The community banking segment had total assets of $19.3 billion, $16.7 billion and $15.1 billion as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The community banking segment accounted for approximately 77% of our consolidated net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015.
We provide specialty finance services, including financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums and life insurance premiums (“premium finance receivables”) on a national basis through our wholly owned subsidiary, First Insurance Funding Corporation (“FIFC”) and in Canada through our premium finance company, First Insurance Funding of Canada (“FIFC Canada”), and short-term accounts receivable financing and outsourced administrative services through our wholly owned subsidiary, Tricom, Inc. of Milwaukee (“Tricom”). For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the specialty finance segment had net revenues of $119 million, $115 million and $105 million, respectively, and net income of $42 million, $41 million and $38 million, respectively. The specialty finance segment had total assets of $3.1 billion, $2.8 billion and $2.5 billion as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The specialty finance segment accounted for 13% of our consolidated net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015.
We provide a full range of wealth management services primarily to customers in our market area through three separate subsidiaries, The Chicago Trust Company, N.A. (“CTC”), Wayne Hummer Investments, LLC (“WHI”) and Great Lakes Advisors, LLC (“Great Lakes Advisors”). For the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, the wealth management segment had net revenues of $93 million, $89 million and $80 million, respectively, and net income of $13 million, $12 million and $11 million, respectively. The wealth management segment had total assets of $549 million, $520 million and $494 million as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The wealth management segment accounted for 10% of our consolidated net revenues for the year ended December 31, 2015.
Our Business
Community Banking
Through our banks, we provide community-oriented, personal and commercial banking services to customers located in our market area. Our customers include individuals, small to mid-sized businesses, local governmental units and institutional clients residing primarily in the banks' local service areas. The banks have a strategy to provide comprehensive community-focused banking services. In keeping with this strategy, the banks provide highly personalized and responsive service, a characteristic of locally-owned and managed institutions. As such, the banks compete for deposits principally by offering depositors a variety of deposit programs, convenient office locations, hours and other services, and for loan originations primarily through the interest rates and loan fees they charge, the efficiency and quality of services they provide to borrowers and the variety of their loan and cash management products. Using our decentralized corporate structure to our advantage, we offer our MaxSafe® deposit accounts, which provide customers with expanded Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) insurance coverage by spreading a customer's deposit across our fifteen banks. This product differentiates our banks from many of our competitors that have consolidated their bank charters into branches. We also have a downtown Chicago office that works with each of our banks to capture commercial and industrial business. Our commercial and industrial lenders in our downtown office operate in close partnership with lenders at our community banks. By combining our expertise in the commercial and industrial sector with our high level of personal service and full suite of banking products, we believe we create another point of differentiation from both our larger and smaller competitors. Our banks also offer home equity, consumer, and real estate loans, safe deposit facilities, ATMs, internet banking and other innovative and traditional services specially tailored to meet the needs of customers in their market areas.
We developed our banking franchise through a combination of de novo organization and the purchase of existing bank franchises. The organizational efforts began in 1991, when a group of experienced bankers and local business people identified an unfilled niche in the Chicago metropolitan area retail banking market. As large banks acquired smaller ones and personal service was subjected to consolidation strategies, the opportunity increased for locally owned and operated, highly personal service-oriented banks. As a result, Lake Forest Bank and Trust Company (“Lake Forest Bank”) was founded in December 1991 to service the Lake Forest and Lake Bluff communities.
We now own fifteen banks, including nine Illinois-chartered banks: Lake Forest Bank, Hinsdale Bank and Trust Company (“Hinsdale Bank”), Wintrust Bank, Libertyville Bank and Trust Company (“Libertyville Bank”), Northbrook Bank & Trust Company (“Northbrook Bank”), Village Bank & Trust (“Village Bank”), Wheaton Bank & Trust Company (“Wheaton Bank”), State Bank of the Lakes and St. Charles Bank & Trust Company (“St. Charles Bank”). In addition, we have one Wisconsin-chartered bank, Town Bank, and five nationally chartered banks: Barrington Bank, Crystal Lake Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Crystal Lake Bank”), Schaumburg Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Schaumburg Bank”), Beverly Bank & Trust Company, N.A. (“Beverly Bank”) and Old Plank Trail Community Bank, N.A. (“Old Plank Trail Bank”). As of December 31, 2015, we had 152 banking locations.
Each bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by: (1) the Secretary of the Illinois Department of Financial and Professional Regulation (“Illinois Secretary”) and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (“Federal Reserve”) for Illinois-chartered banks; (2) the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (“OCC”) for nationally-chartered banks; or (3) the Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions (“Wisconsin Department”) and the Federal Reserve for Town Bank.
We also engage in the retail origination and correspondent purchase of residential mortgages through Wintrust Mortgage. Most originated and purchased loans sold into the secondary market are sold with servicing released. Certain originated loans are sold to the Company's banks with servicing remaining within Wintrust Mortgage operations. Wintrust Mortgage maintains retail mortgage offices in a number of states, with the largest concentration located in the Chicago, Minneapolis and Los Angeles metropolitan areas.
We also offer several niche lending products through several of the banks. These include Barrington Bank's Community Advantage program, which provides lending, deposit and cash management services to condominium, homeowner and community associations; Hinsdale Bank's mortgage warehouse lending program, which provides loan and deposit services to mortgage brokerage companies located predominantly in the Chicago metropolitan area; and Lake Forest Bank's franchise lending program, which provides lending to restaurant franchisees. Other niches offered throughout our banking franchise include Wintrust Commercial Finance, which offers direct leasing opportunities; Wintrust Business Credit, which specializes in asset-based lending for middle-market companies; Wintrust SBA Lending, which is dedicated to offering expertise in Small Business Administration loans; Wintrust Commercial Real Estate, which concentrates on real estate lending solutions including commercial mortgages and construction loans; and Wintrust Government, Non-Profit & Hospital, which focuses on financial solutions for mission-based organizations such as hospitals, non-profits, educational institutions and local government operations.
Specialty Finance
We conduct our specialty finance businesses through non-bank subsidiaries. Our wholly owned subsidiary, FIFC, engages in the premium finance receivables business, our most significant specialized lending niche, including commercial insurance premium finance and life insurance premium finance. We also engage in commercial insurance premium finance in Canada through our wholly owned subsidiary FIFC Canada.
In their commercial insurance premium finance operations, FIFC and FIFC Canada make loans to businesses to finance the insurance premiums they pay on their commercial insurance policies. Approved medium and large insurance agents and brokers located throughout the United States and Canada assist FIFC and FIFC Canada, respectively, in arranging each commercial premium finance loan between the borrower and FIFC or FIFC Canada, as the case may be. FIFC or FIFC Canada evaluates each loan request according to its own underwriting criteria including the amount of the down payment on the insurance policy, the term of the loan, the credit quality of the insurance company providing the financed insurance policy, the interest rate, the borrower's previous payment history, if any, and other factors deemed appropriate. Upon approval of the loan by FIFC or FIFC Canada, as the case may be, the borrower makes a down payment on the financed insurance policy, which is generally done by providing payment to the agent or broker, who then forwards it to the insurance company. FIFC or FIFC Canada may either forward the financed amount of the remaining policy premiums directly to the insurance carrier or to the agent or broker for remittance to the insurance carrier on FIFC's or FIFC Canada's behalf. In some cases the agent or broker may hold our collateral, in the form of the proceeds of the unearned insurance premium from the insurance company, and forward it to FIFC or FIFC Canada in the event of a default by the borrower. This lending involves relatively rapid turnover of the loan portfolio and high volume of loan originations. Because the agent or broker is the primary contact to the ultimate borrowers who are located nationwide and because proceeds and our collateral may be handled by the agent or brokers during the term of the loan, FIFC and FIFC Canada may be
more susceptible to third party (i.e., agent or broker) fraud. The Company performs various controls and procedures including ongoing credit and other reviews of the agents and brokers as well as performs various internal audit steps to mitigate against the risk of any fraud.
The commercial and property premium finance business is subject to regulation in the majority of states. Regulation typically governs notices to borrowers prior to cancellation of a policy, notices to insurance companies, maximum interest rates and late fees and approval of loan documentation. FIFC is licensed or otherwise qualified to provide financing of commercial insurance policies in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, and FIFC’s compliance department regularly monitors changes to regulations and updates policies and programs accordingly.
FIFC also finances life insurance policy premiums generally used for estate planning purposes of high net-worth borrowers. These loans are originated directly with the borrowers with assistance from life insurance carriers, independent insurance agents, financial advisors and legal counsel. The cash surrender value of the life insurance policy is the primary form of collateral. In addition, these loans often are secured with a letter of credit, marketable securities or certificates of deposit. In some cases, FIFC may make a loan that has a partially unsecured position.
The life insurance premium finance business is governed under banking regulations but is not subject to additional systemic regulation. FIFC's compliance department regularly monitors the regulatory environment and the company's compliance with existing regulations. FIFC maintains a policy prohibiting the knowing financing of stranger-originated life insurance and has established procedures to identify and prevent the company from financing such policies. While a carrier could potentially put at risk the cash surrender value of a policy, which serves as FIFC's primary collateral, by challenging the validity of the insurance contract for lack of an insurable interest, FIFC believes it has strong counterclaims against any such claims by carriers, in addition to recourse to borrowers and guarantors as well as to additional collateral in certain cases.
Premium finance loans made by FIFC and FIFC Canada are primarily secured by the insurance policies financed by the loans. These insurance policies are written by a large number of insurance companies geographically dispersed throughout the United States and Canada. Our premium finance receivables balances finance insurance policies that are spread among a large number of insurers, however one of the insurers represents approximately 14% of such balances and two additional insurers each represent approximately 5% of such balances. FIFC and FIFC Canada consistently monitor carrier ratings and financial performance of our carriers. In the event ratings fall below certain levels, most of FIFC's life insurance premium finance policies provide for an event of default and allow FIFC to have recourse to borrowers and guarantors as well as to additional collateral in certain cases. For the commercial premium finance business, the term of the loans is sufficiently short such that in the event of a decline in carrier ratings, FIFC or FIFC Canada, as the case may be, can restrict or eliminate additional loans to finance premiums to such carriers. The majority of premium finance receivables are purchased by the banks in order to more fully utilize their lending capacity as these loans generally provide the banks with higher yields than alternative investments.
Through our wholly owned subsidiary Tricom, we provide high-yielding, short-term accounts receivable financing and value-added, outsourced administrative services, such as data processing of payrolls, billing and cash management services to the temporary staffing industry. Tricom’s clients, located throughout the United States, provide staffing services to businesses in diversified industries. During 2015, Tricom processed payrolls with associated client billings of approximately $660 million and contributed approximately $10.6 million to our revenue, net of interest expense. Net revenue is based on our reportable segments and does not reflect intersegment eliminations.
In 2015, our commercial premium finance operations, life insurance premium finance operations and accounts receivable finance operations accounted for 58%, 33% and 9%, respectively, of the total revenues of our specialty finance business.
Wealth Management Activities
We offer a full range of wealth management services through three separate subsidiaries, trust and investment services, asset management and securities brokerage services. These subsidiaries are subject to regulation by the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "SEC") and the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority ("FINRA").
Great Lakes Advisors, our registered investment adviser with locations in downtown Chicago and Safety Harbor, Florida as well as in various banking offices of our fifteen banks, provides money management services and advisory services to individuals, institutions, and municipal and tax-exempt organizations. Great Lakes Advisors also provides portfolio management and financial supervision for a wide range of pension and profit-sharing plans as well as money management and advisory services to CTC. At December 31, 2015, the Company’s wealth management subsidiaries had approximately $21.2 billion of assets under administration, which includes $2.6 billion of assets owned by the Company and its subsidiary banks.
CTC, our trust subsidiary, offers trust and investment management services to clients through offices located in downtown Chicago and at various banking offices of our fifteen banks. CTC is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the OCC.
WHI, our registered broker/dealer subsidiary which has been operating since 1931, provides a full range of private client and securities brokerage services to clients located primarily in the Midwest. WHI is headquartered in downtown Chicago, operates an office in Appleton, Wisconsin, and has established branch locations in offices at a majority of our banks. WHI also provides a full range of investment services to clients through a network of relationships with community-based financial institutions primarily located in Illinois.
Strategy and Competition
Historically, we have executed a growth strategy through branch openings and de novo bank formations, expansion of our wealth management and premium finance business, development of specialized earning asset niches and acquisitions of other community-oriented banks or specialty finance companies. After we made a decision to slow our growth from 2006 until 2008 due to unfavorable credit spreads, loosened underwriting standards by many of our competitors, and intense price competition, we raised capital and began to increase our lending and deposits in late 2008. From 2009 through 2012, this capital as well as additional capital raised during that period allowed us to be in a position to take advantage of opportunities in a disrupted marketplace by:
•
Increasing our lending as other financial institutions pulled back;
•
Hiring quality lenders and other staff away from larger and smaller institutions that may have substantially deviated from a customer-focused approach or who may have substantially limited the ability of their staff to provide credit or other services to their customers;
•
Investing in dislocated assets such as the purchased life insurance premium finance portfolio, the Canadian commercial premium finance portfolio, trust and investment management companies and certain collateralized mortgage obligations; and
•
Purchasing banks and banking assets either directly or through the FDIC-assisted process in areas key to our geographic expansion.
The Company has employed certain strategies since 2013 to manage net income amid an environment characterized by low interest rates and increased competition. In general, the Company has taken a steady and measured approach to grow strategically and manage expenses. Specifically, the Company has:
•
Leveraged its internal loan pipeline and external growth opportunities to grow earnings assets to increase net interest income;
•
Continued efforts to reduce interest costs by improving our funding mix;
•
Written call option contracts on certain securities as an economic hedge to enhance the securities' overall return by using fees generated from these options and mitigate overall interest rate risk;
•
Entered into mirror-image swap transactions to both satisfy customer preferences and maintain variable rate exposure;
•
Purchased interest rate cap derivatives to offset margin compression caused by the repricing of variable rate liabilities and lack of repricing of fixed rate loans and securities in a potential rising rate environment;
•
Completed strategic acquisitions to expand presence in existing and complimentary markets;
•
Focused on cost control and leveraging our current infrastructure to grow without a commensurate increase in operating expenses;
•
Expanded the Wintrust Commercial Finance direct leasing niche in 2015; and
•
Further strengthened our capital position in 2015 and raised net proceeds of $120.8 million through the issuance and sale of non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock;
Our strategy and competitive position for each of our business segments is summarized in further detail, below.
Community Banking
We compete in the commercial banking industry through our banks in the communities they serve. The commercial banking industry is highly competitive and the banks face strong direct competition for deposits, loans and other financial related services. The banks compete with other commercial banks, thrifts, credit unions, stockbrokers, government-sponsored entities, mutual fund companies, insurance companies, factoring companies and other non-bank financial companies. Some of these competitors are local, while others are statewide or nationwide.
As a mid-size financial services company, we expect to benefit from greater access to financial and managerial resources than our smaller local competitors while maintaining our commitment to local decision-making and to our community banking philosophy. In particular, we are able to provide a wider product selection and larger credit facilities than many of our smaller competitors, and we believe our service offerings help us in recruiting talented staff. We continue to add lenders throughout the community banking organization, many of whom have joined us because of our ability to offer a range of products and level of services which compete effectively with both larger and smaller market participants. We have continued to expand our product delivery systems, including a wide variety of electronic banking options for our retail and commercial customers which allow us to provide a level
of service typically associated with much larger banking institutions. Consequently, management views technology as a great equalizer to offset some of the inherent advantages of its significantly larger competitors. Additionally, we have access to public capital markets whereas many of our local competitors are privately held and may have limited capital-raising capabilities.
We also believe we are positioned to compete effectively with other larger and more diversified banks, bank holding companies and other financial services companies due to the multi-chartered approach that pushes accountability for building a franchise and a high level of customer service down to each of our banking franchises. Additionally, we believe that we provide a relatively complete portfolio of products that is responsive to the majority of our customers' needs through the retail and commercial operations supplied by our banks, and through our mortgage and wealth management operations. The breadth of our product mix allows us to compete effectively with our larger competitors, while our multi-chartered approach with local and accountable management provides for what we believe is superior customer service relative to our larger and more centralized competitors.
Wintrust Mortgage competes with large mortgage brokers as well as other banking organizations. Consolidation, on-going investor push-backs, enhanced regulatory guidance and the promise of equal oversight for both banks and independent lenders have created challenges for small and medium-sized independent mortgage lenders. Wintrust Mortgage's size, bank affiliation, regulatory competency, branding, technology, business development tools and reputation make the firm well positioned to compete in this environment. In 2013, we expanded our mortgage banking business through the acquisition of certain assets and liabilities of Surety Financial Services of Sherman Oaks, California. Additionally, in 2015, we have increased the amount of loans sold with servicing retained, including those loans sold to the Company's banks with servicing remaining within Wintrust Mortgage operations. While earnings will fluctuate with the rise and fall of long-term interest rates, we expect that mortgage banking revenue will be a continuous source of revenue for us and our mortgage lending relationships will continue to provide franchise value to our other financial service businesses.
In 2015, we furthered our growth strategy by purchasing, through certain of our banking subsidiaries, additional banking locations. We acquired four new banking locations in southern Wisconsin and sixteen new banking locations in the Chicago metropolitan area. In addition, the Company opened six new branch locations in the Chicago metropolitan area. However, the Company closed fourteen banking locations in 2015 as part of the integration of operations and the identification of under-performing locations. We believe that strategic acquisitions and branch expansion will allow us to grow into contiguous markets that we currently do not service and expand our footprint.
Specialty Finance
FIFC encounters intense competition from numerous other firms, including a number of national commercial premium finance companies, companies affiliated with insurance carriers, independent insurance brokers who offer premium finance services and other lending institutions. Some of its competitors are larger and have greater financial and other resources. FIFC competes with these entities by emphasizing a high level of knowledge of the insurance industry, flexibility in structuring financing transactions, and the timely funding of qualifying contracts. We believe that our commitment to service also distinguishes us from our competitors. Additionally, we believe that FIFC's acquisition of a large life insurance premium finance portfolio and related assets in 2009 enhanced our ability to market and sell life insurance premium finance products. FIFC Canada competes with one national commercial premium finance company and a few regional providers. In 2014, FIFC Canada expanded its operations through the acquisition of two affiliated Canadian insurance premium funding and payment services companies.
Tricom competes with numerous other firms, including a small number of similar niche finance companies and payroll processing firms, as well as various finance companies, banks and other lending institutions. Tricom's management believes that its commitment to service distinguishes it from competitors.
Wealth Management Activities
Our wealth management companies (CTC, WHI and Great Lakes Advisors) compete with larger wealth management subsidiaries of other larger bank holding companies as well as with other trust companies, brokerage and other financial service companies, stockbrokers and financial advisors. We believe we can successfully compete for trust, asset management and brokerage business by offering personalized attention and customer service to small to midsize businesses and affluent individuals. We continue to recruit and hire experienced professionals from the larger Chicago area wealth management companies, which is expected to help in attracting new customer relationships.
Supervision and Regulation
General
Our business is subject to extensive regulation and supervision under federal and state laws and regulations. The Company is a bank holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “BHC Act”), subject to regulation,
supervision, and examination by the Federal Reserve. Our subsidiary banks are subject to regulation, supervision, and examination by the agency that granted their banking charters: (1) the OCC for Barrington Bank, Crystal Lake Bank, Schaumburg Bank, Beverly Bank and Old Plank Trail Bank; (2) the Illinois Secretary for Lake Forest Bank, Hinsdale Bank, Wintrust Bank, Libertyville Bank, Northbrook Bank, Village Bank, Wheaton Bank, State Bank of the Lakes and St. Charles Bank; and (3) the Wisconsin Department for Town Bank. Our Illinois and Wisconsin state-chartered bank subsidiaries are also members of the Federal Reserve System, subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve as their primary federal regulator. The deposits of all of our subsidiary banks are insured by the Deposit Insurance Fund (“DIF”) and, as such, the FDIC has additional oversight authority over the banks. The supervision, regulation and examination of banks and bank holding companies by bank regulatory agencies are intended primarily for the protection of depositors, the DIF, and the banking system as a whole, rather than shareholders of banks and bank holding companies, and in some instances may be contrary to their interests.
Our non-bank subsidiaries generally are subject to regulation by their functional regulators, including state finance and insurance agencies, the SEC, FINRA, the Chicago Stock Exchange, the OCC, as well as by the Federal Reserve.
These federal and state laws, and the regulations of the bank regulatory agencies issued under them, affect, among other things, the scope of business, the kinds and amounts of investments banks may make, reserve requirements, capital levels relative to operations, the nature and amount of collateral for loans, the establishment of branches, the ability to merge, consolidate and acquire, dealings with insiders and affiliates and the payment of dividends. The regulatory agencies generally have broad discretion to impose restrictions and limitations on the operations of a regulated entity where the agencies determine, among other things, that such operations are unsafe or unsound, fail to comply with applicable law or are otherwise inconsistent with laws and regulations or with the supervisory policies of these agencies
The following is a description of some of the laws and regulations that currently affect our business. By necessity, the descriptions below are summaries that do not purport to be complete, and that are qualified in their entirety by reference to those statutes and regulations discussed, and all regulatory interpretations thereof. In recent years, lawmakers and regulators have increased their focus on the financial services industry. Additional changes in applicable laws, regulations, or the interpretations thereof are possible, and could have a material adverse effect on our business or the business of our subsidiaries.
Bank Holding Company Regulation
The Company is a bank holding company that has elected to be treated by the Federal Reserve as a financial holding company for purposes of the BHC Act. The activities of bank holding companies generally are limited to the business of banking, managing or controlling banks, and other activities determined by the Federal Reserve, by regulation or order prior to November 11, 1999, to be so closely related to banking as to be a proper incident thereto. Impermissible activities for bank holding companies and their subsidiaries include activities that are related to commerce, such as retail sales of nonfinancial products or manufacturing.
As a financial holding company, we may engage in an expanded range of activities, including securities and insurance activities conducted as agent or principal that are considered to be financial in nature. Moreover, financial holding companies may engage in activities incidental or complementary to financial activities, if the Federal Reserve determines that such activities pose no substantial risk to the safety or soundness of depository institutions or the financial system in general. Maintaining our financial holding company status requires that our subsidiary banks remain “well-capitalized” and “well-managed” as defined by regulation, and maintain at least a “satisfactory” rating under the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”). In addition, under the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”), we must also remain well-capitalized and well-managed to maintain our financial holding company status. If we or our subsidiary banks fail to continue to meet these requirements, we could be subject to restrictions on new activities and acquisitions, and/or be required to cease and possibly divest of operations that conduct existing activities that are not permissible for a bank holding company that is not a financial holding company.
The BHC Act generally requires us to obtain prior approval from the Federal Reserve before acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of, or substantially all the assets of, a new bank, or to merge or consolidate with another bank holding company. As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, the BHC Act also now requires us to be well-capitalized and well-managed, as opposed to merely adequately capitalized and adequately managed as was previously required, in order to acquire a bank located outside of our home state. Additionally, subject to certain exceptions, the BHC Act generally prohibits us from acquiring direct or indirect ownership or control of voting shares of any company engaged in activities that are not permissible for us to engage in.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDIA”), as amended by the Dodd-Frank Act, and Federal Reserve regulations and policy require us to serve as a source of financial and managerial strength for our subsidiary banks, and to commit resources to support the banks. This support may be required even if doing so may adversely affect our ability to meet other obligations.
Acquisitions of Ownership
Acquisitions of the Company’s voting stock above certain thresholds may be subject to prior regulatory notice or approval under applicable federal and state banking laws. Investors are responsible for ensuring that they do not, directly or indirectly, acquire shares of our stock in excess of the amount that can be acquired without regulatory approval under the BHC Act, the Change in Bank Control Act, the Illinois Banking Act and Wisconsin banking laws.
Regulatory Reform
The Dodd-Frank Act strengthened the ability of the federal bank regulatory agencies to supervise and examine bank holding companies and their subsidiaries. The Dodd-Frank Act represents a sweeping reform of the United States supervisory and regulatory framework applicable to financial institutions and capital markets in the wake of the global financial crisis, certain aspects of which are described below in more detail. In particular, and among other things, the Dodd-Frank Act: created a Financial Stability Oversight Council as part of a regulatory structure for identifying emerging systemic risks and improving interagency cooperation; created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), which is authorized to regulate providers of consumer credit, savings, payment and other consumer financial products and services; narrowed the scope of federal preemption of state consumer laws enjoyed by national banks and federal savings associations and expanded the authority of state attorneys general to bring actions to enforce federal consumer protection legislation; imposed more stringent capital requirements on bank holding companies and subjected certain activities, including interstate mergers and acquisitions, to heightened capital conditions; with respect to mortgage lending, (1) significantly expanded requirements applicable to loans secured by 1-4 family residential real property, (2) imposed strict rules on mortgage servicing, and (3) required the originator of a securitized loan, or the sponsor of a securitization, to retain at least 5% of the credit risk of securitized exposures unless the underlying exposures are qualified residential mortgages or meet certain underwriting standards; repealed the prohibition on the payment of interest on business checking accounts; restricted the interchange fees payable on debit card transactions for issuers with $10 billion in assets or greater; subject to numerous exceptions, prohibited depository institutions and affiliates from certain investments in, and sponsorship of, hedge funds and private equity funds and from engaging in proprietary trading; provided for enhanced regulation of advisers to private funds and of the derivatives markets; enhanced oversight of credit rating agencies; and prohibited banking agency requirements tied to credit ratings. These statutory changes shifted the regulatory framework for financial institutions, impacted the way in which they do business and have the potential to constrain revenues.
Numerous provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act are required to be implemented through rulemaking by the appropriate federal regulatory agencies. A majority of the required regulations have been issued and others have been released for public comment or released in final form. Furthermore, while the reforms primarily target systemically important financial service providers, their influence is expected to filter down in varying degrees to smaller institutions over time. We will continue to evaluate the effect of the Dodd-Frank Act changes; however, in many respects, the ultimate impact of the Dodd-Frank Act will not be fully known for years, and no current assurance may be given that the Dodd-Frank Act, or any other new legislative changes, will not have a negative impact on the results of operations and financial condition of the Company and its subsidiaries. For further discussion of the most recent developments under the Dodd-Frank Act, see Item 7 “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview and Strategy - Financial Regulatory Reform.”
Volcker Rule
The Dodd-Frank Act added a new Section 13 to the BHC Act, known as the “Volcker Rule.” On December 10, 2013, five United States financial regulators, including the Federal Reserve, the FDIC and the OCC, adopted final rules implementing the Volcker Rule. The final rules prohibit banking entities from (1) engaging in short-term proprietary trading for their own accounts, and (2) having certain ownership interests in and relationships with hedge funds or private equity funds. Further, the final rules are intended to provide greater clarity with respect to both the extent of those primary prohibitions and of the related exemptions and exclusions. These rules also require each regulated entity to establish an internal compliance program that is consistent with the extent to which it engages in activities covered by the Volcker Rule, which must include (for the largest entities) making regular reports about those activities to regulators. Although the final rules provide some differences in compliance and reporting obligations based on size, the fundamental prohibitions of the Volcker Rule apply to banking entities of any size, including the Company and its bank subsidiaries. These rules were effective April 1, 2014, but the conformance period was extended from its statutory end date of July 21, 2014 until July 21, 2015 for proprietary trading and until July 2016 to divest private equity and hedge funds. We expect this date to be extended again until July 2017, which will be the final extension allowable under the Dodd-Frank Act.
We have evaluated the implications of these rules on our investments and determined that some of the securities in our investment portfolio will be subject to the Volcker Rule and, absent any further amendments to the Volcker Rule, will have to be divested or converted. In one instance, the need to divest that security at a fixed near-term date caused us to record an other-than-temporary
impairment of $3.3 million on that security in the fourth quarter of 2013. We do not believe that any other required divestitures or reporting requirements will have any material financial implications on the Company.
Capital Requirements
We are subject to various regulatory capital requirements both at the Company and at the subsidiary bank level. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could result in certain mandatory and possible additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have an adverse material effect on our financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action (described below), we must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of our assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting policies. Our capital amounts and classification are also subject to judgments by the regulators regarding qualitative components, risk weightings, and other factors. We have consistently maintained regulatory capital ratios at or above the well-capitalized standards. These capital rules have undergone significant changes with the adoption by the federal banking agencies of final rules that implement Basel III requirements, which are discussed below.
The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision has drafted frameworks for the regulation of capital and liquidity of internationally active banking organizations, the most recent of which is generally referred to as “Basel III.” In July 2013, the federal banking agencies jointly issued final rules establishing a new comprehensive capital framework for U.S. banking organizations that would implement the Basel III capital framework and certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The final rules seek to strengthen the components of regulatory capital, increase risk-based capital requirements, and make selected changes to the calculation of risk-weighted assets. The final rules, among other things:
•
revise minimum capital requirements and adjust prompt corrective action thresholds;
•
revise the components of regulatory capital and create a new capital measure called “Tier 1 Common Equity,” which must constitute at least 4.5% of risk-weighted assets;
•
specify that Tier 1 capital consists only of Tier 1 Common Equity and certain “Additional Tier 1 Capital” instruments meeting specified requirements;
•
increase the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio requirement from 4% to 6%;
•
retain the existing risk-based capital treatment for 1-4 family residential mortgage exposures;
•
permit most banking organizations, including the Company, to retain, through a one-time permanent election, the existing capital treatment for accumulated other comprehensive income;
•
implement a new capital conservation buffer of common equity Tier 1 capital equal to 2.5% of risk-weighted assets, which will be in addition to the 4.5% common equity Tier 1 capital ratio and be phased in over a three-year period beginning January 1, 2016, which buffer is generally required to make capital distributions and pay executive bonuses;
•
increase capital requirements for past-due loans, high volatility commercial real estate exposures, and certain short-term loan commitments;
•
require the deduction of mortgage servicing assets and deferred tax assets that exceed 10% of common equity Tier 1 capital in each category and 15% of common equity Tier 1 capital in the aggregate; and
•
remove references to credit ratings consistent with the Dodd-Frank Act and establish due diligence requirements for securitization exposures.
Under the final rules, compliance by the Company was required by January 1, 2015, subject to a transition period for several aspects of the final rules, including the new minimum capital ratio requirements, the capital conservation buffer, and the regulatory capital adjustments and deductions. Requirements to maintain higher levels of capital could adversely impact our return on equity. We believe that we will continue to exceed all estimated well-capitalized regulatory requirements on a fully phased-in basis.
Under capital rules in effect for the year ended December 31, 2015, as a bank holding company, we were required to maintain a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-weighted assets of 8.0%, of which at least 6.0% must be in the form of Tier 1 capital (generally common equity, retained earnings and a limited amount of qualifying preferred stock, less goodwill and certain core deposit intangibles). The remainder may consist of Tier 2 capital, which, subject to certain conditions and limitations, consists of: the allowance for credit losses; perpetual preferred stock and related surplus; hybrid capital instruments; unrealized holding gains on marketable equity securities; perpetual debt and mandatory convertible debt securities; term subordinated debt and intermediate-term preferred stock. The Federal Reserve has stated that Tier 1 voting common equity should be the predominant form of capital. In addition, the Federal Reserve requires a minimum leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 3.0% for the most highly-rated bank holding companies, and 4% for all other bank holding companies. Our bank regulatory agencies uniformly encourage banks and bank holding companies to be “well-capitalized,” which, for the year ended December 31, 2015, required: a leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 5% or greater, a ratio of Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 8% or greater, a ratio of common equity Tier 1 capital to total risk-weighted assets of 6.5%, and a ratio of total capital to total risk-weighted assets of 10% or greater. As of December 31, 2015, the Company's total capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 12.2%,
its Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted asset ratio was 10.0%, its common equity Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio was 8.4%, and its Tier 1 leverage ratio was 9.1%.
Failure to meet minimum capital requirements could result in certain mandatory and possible additional discretionary actions by regulators that, if undertaken, could have an adverse material effect on our financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action (described below), we must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of our assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items, as calculated under regulatory accounting policies. Our capital amounts and classification are also subject to judgments by the regulators regarding qualitative components, risk weightings, and other factors.
For more information, see Item 7 “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview and Strategy - Financial Regulatory Reform.”
Liquidity Requirements
Historically, regulation and monitoring of bank and bank holding company liquidity has been addressed as a supervisory matter, without required formulaic measures. However, the Basel III liquidity framework requires banks and bank holding companies to measure their liquidity against specific liquidity tests that are similar in some respects to liquidity measures historically applied by banks and regulators for management and supervisory purposes. One such test, referred to as the Liquidity Coverage Ratio (“LCR”), is designed to ensure that the banking entity has an adequate stock of unencumbered high-quality liquid assets that can be converted easily and immediately in private markets into cash to meet liquidity needs for a 30-calendar day liquidity stress scenario. Another test, known as the Net Stable Funding Ratio (“NSFR”), is designed to promote more medium- and long-term funding of the assets and activities of financial institutions over a one-year horizon. These measures provide an incentive for banks and holding companies to increase their holdings in Treasury securities and other sovereign debt as a component of assets, increase the use of long-term debt as a funding source and rely on stable funding like core deposits (in lieu of brokered deposits).
The U.S. bank regulatory agencies implemented the LCR in September 2014, which requires large financial firms to hold levels of liquid assets sufficient to protect against constraints on their funding during times of financial turmoil. While the LCR only applies to the largest banking organizations in the country, certain elements are expected to filter down to all insured depository institutions, and we are reviewing our liquidity risk management policies in light of the LCR and NSFR regulations.
Capital Planning and Stress Testing Requirements
On October 12, 2012, the Federal Reserve published two final rules implementing the company-run stress test requirements mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act: one for U.S. bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $10 billion to $50 billion, and one for U.S. bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more. In 2014 and 2013, under the rule applicable to the Company, which became effective November 15, 2012, we were required to conduct annual company-run stress tests using data as of September 30th of each year and different scenarios provided by the Federal Reserve. Submissions were due to the Federal Reserve no later than March 31st of each following year. Each subsequent year, we have been required to use data as of December 31st with submissions due to the Federal Reserve no later than July 31st of each following year. For further discussion of capital planning and stress testing requirements, see Item 7 “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview and Strategy - Financial Regulatory Reform.”
Payment of Dividends and Share Repurchases
We are a legal entity separate and distinct from our banking and non-banking subsidiaries. Since our consolidated net income consists largely of net income of our bank and non-bank subsidiaries, our ability to pay dividends depends largely upon our receipt of dividends from our subsidiaries. There are various federal and state law limitations on the extent to which our banking subsidiaries can declare and pay dividends to us, including minimum regulatory capital requirements, federal and state banking law requirements concerning the payment of dividends out of net profits or surplus, and general regulatory oversight to prevent unsafe or unsound practices. No assurances can be given that the banks will, in any circumstances, pay dividends to the Company.
In general, applicable federal and state banking laws prohibit, without prior regulatory approval, insured depository institutions, such as our bank subsidiaries, from making dividend distributions if such distributions are not paid out of available earnings, or would cause the institution to fail to meet applicable minimum capital requirements. In addition, our right, and the right of our shareholders and creditors, to participate in any distribution of the assets or earnings of our bank and non-bank subsidiaries is further subject to the prior claims of creditors of our subsidiaries.
Our ability to declare and pay dividends to our shareholders is similarly limited by federal banking law and Federal Reserve regulations and policy. Federal Reserve policy provides that a bank holding company should not pay dividends unless (1) the bank holding company's net income over the last four quarters (net of dividends paid) is sufficient to fully fund the dividends,
(2) the prospective rate of earnings retention appears consistent with the capital needs, asset quality and overall financial condition of the bank holding company and its subsidiaries and (3) the bank holding company will continue to meet minimum required capital adequacy ratios. The policy also provides that a bank holding company should inform the Federal Reserve reasonably in advance of declaring or paying a dividend that exceeds earnings for the period for which the dividend is being paid or that could result in a material adverse change to the bank holding company's capital structure. Bank holding companies also are required to consult with the Federal Reserve before increasing dividends or redeeming or repurchasing capital instruments. Additionally, the Federal Reserve could prohibit or limit the payment of dividends by a bank holding company if it determines that payment of the dividend would constitute an unsafe or unsound practice.
In addition, under the Basel III Rule, institutions that seek the freedom to pay dividends will have to maintain 2.5% of risk-weighted assets in Common Equity Tier 1 attributable to the capital conservation buffer to be phased in over three years beginning in 2016. For more information on the capital conservation buffer, see Item 7 “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations - Overview and Strategy - Financial Regulatory Reform.”
FDICIA and Prompt Corrective Action
The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (“FDICIA”), among other things, requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to take “prompt corrective action” regarding FDIC-insured depository institutions that do not meet minimum capital requirements. Depository institutions are placed into one of five capital tiers: “well-capitalized,” “adequately capitalized,” “undercapitalized,” “significantly undercapitalized” and “critically undercapitalized.” An institution that fails to remain well-capitalized will be subject to a series of restrictions that increase as its capital condition worsens. For example, institutions that are less than well-capitalized are barred from soliciting, taking or rolling over brokered deposits. FDICIA generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distribution (including payment of a dividend) if the depository institution would be undercapitalized thereafter. Undercapitalized depository institutions are subject to growth limitations and must submit a capital restoration plan, which must be guaranteed by the institution's holding company. In addition, an undercapitalized institution is subject to increased monitoring and asset growth restrictions and is subject to greater regulatory approval requirements. The FDICIA also provides for enhanced supervisory authority over undercapitalized institutions, including authority for the appointment of a conservator or receiver for the institution. Guidance from the federal banking agencies also indicates that a holding company may be required to provide assurances that a subsidiary bank will comply with any requirements imposed on it under prompt corrective action.
As a result of the Dodd-Frank Act, bank holding companies will be subject to an “early remediation” regime that is substantially similar to the prompt corrective action regime applicable to banks. The remedial actions also increase as the condition of the holding company deteriorates, although the proposed holding company regime would use several forward-looking triggers to identify when a holding company is in troubled condition, beyond just the capital ratios used under the prompt corrective action regime.
As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, each of the Company's banks was categorized as “well-capitalized.” In order to maintain the Company's designation as a financial holding company, the Company and each of the banks is required to maintain capital ratios at or above the “well-capitalized” levels. Management is committed to maintaining the Company's capital levels above the “well-capitalized” levels established by the Federal Reserve for bank holding companies.
Enforcement Authority
The federal bank regulatory agencies have broad authority to issue orders to depository institutions and their holding companies prohibiting activities that constitute violations of law, rule, regulation, or administrative order, or that represent unsafe or unsound banking practices, as determined by the federal banking agencies. The federal banking agencies also are empowered to require affirmative actions to correct any violation or practice; issue administrative orders that can be judicially enforced; direct increases in capital; limit dividends and distributions; restrict growth; assess civil money penalties against institutions or individuals who violate any laws, regulations, orders, or written agreements with the agencies; order termination of certain activities of holding companies or their non-bank subsidiaries; remove officers and directors; order divestiture of ownership or control of a non-banking subsidiary by a holding company; or terminate deposit insurance and appoint a conservator or receiver.
FDIA and Safety and Soundness
The FDIA imposes various requirements on insured depository institutions, including our subsidiary banks. Among other things, the FDIA includes requirements applicable to the closure of branches; merger or consolidation by or with another insured bank; additional disclosures to depositors with respect to terms and interest rates applicable to deposit accounts; uniform regulations for extensions of credit secured by real estate; restrictions on activities of and investments by state-chartered banks; and increased reporting requirements on agricultural loans and loans to small businesses. Under the “cross-guarantee” provision of the FDIA, insured depository institutions such as the subsidiary banks may be liable to the FDIC for any losses incurred, or reasonably
expected to be incurred, by the FDIC resulting from the default of, or FDIC assistance to, any other commonly controlled insured depository institution. All of our subsidiary banks are commonly controlled within the meaning of the cross-guarantee provision.
The FDIA also requires the federal bank regulatory agencies to prescribe standards of safety and soundness, by regulations or guidelines, relating generally to operations and management, asset growth, asset quality, earnings, stock valuation and compensation. The federal bank regulatory agencies have adopted a set of guidelines prescribing safety and soundness standards pursuant to the FDIA. The guidelines establish general standards relating to internal controls and information systems, informational security, internal audit systems, loan documentation, credit underwriting, interest rate exposure, asset growth, and compensation, fees and benefits. The guidelines prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice, and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal shareholder.
During the past decade, properly managing risks has been identified as critical to the conduct of safe and sound banking activities and has become even more important as new technologies, product innovation, and the size and speed of financial transactions have changed the nature of banking markets. The agencies have identified a spectrum of risks facing banking institutions including, but not limited to, credit, market, liquidity, operational, legal, and reputational risk. In particular, recent regulatory pronouncements have focused on operational risk, which arises from the potential that inadequate information systems, operational problems, breaches in internal controls, fraud, or unforeseen catastrophes will result in unexpected losses. New products and services, third-party risk management and cybersecurity are critical sources of operational risk that financial institutions are expected to address in the current environment. The subsidiary banks are expected to have active board and senior management oversight; adequate policies, procedures, and limits; adequate risk measurement, monitoring, and management information systems; and comprehensive and effective internal controls.
Risk Committee Requirement
On March 27, 2014, the Federal Reserve published final rules to implement certain "enhanced prudential standards" mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act. Many of these enhanced prudential standards apply only to bank holding companies and foreign banking organizations with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more, and do not apply to the Company. However, the Federal Reserve's enhanced prudential standards require that, beginning in 2015, publicly traded bank holding companies with total consolidated assets of greater than $10 billion and less than $50 billion must establish and maintain risk committees for their boards of directors to oversee the bank holding companies' risk management frameworks. Our Board has had a separate risk committee since 1998; we believe that our risk committee and corresponding risk management framework is in compliance with all applicable requirements.
Insurance of Deposit Accounts
The deposits of each of our subsidiary banks are insured by the DIF up to the standard maximum deposit insurance amount of $250,000 per depositor. Each of our subsidiary banks is subject to deposit insurance assessments based on the risk it poses to the DIF, as determined by the capital category and supervisory category to which it is assigned. The FDIC has authority to raise or lower assessment rates on insured deposits in order to achieve statutorily required reserve ratios in the DIF and to impose special additional assessments. In light of the significant increase in depository institution failures in 2008-2010 and the increase of deposit insurance limits, the DIF incurred substantial losses during recent years. To bolster reserves in the DIF, the Dodd-Frank Act increased the minimum reserve ratio of the DIF to 1.35% of insured deposits and deleted the statutory cap for the reserve ratio. In December 2010, the FDIC set the designated reserve ratio at 2%, 65 basis points above the statutory minimum. In April 2011, the FDIC implemented changes required by the Dodd-Frank Act to revise the definition of the assessment base for calculating deposit insurance premiums from the amount of insured deposits held by an institution to the institution's average total consolidated assets less average tangible equity. The FDIC also changed the assessment rates, providing that they will initially range from 2.5 basis points to 45 basis points. The FDIC has indicated that these changes generally will not require an increase in the level of assessments for depository institutions with less than $10 billion in assets, such as each of our bank subsidiaries, and may result in decreased assessments for such institutions. However, there is a risk that the banks' deposit insurance premiums will again increase if failures of insured depository institutions continue to deplete the DIF.
In addition, the Deposit Insurance Fund Act of 1996 authorizes the Financing Corporation (“FICO”) to impose assessments on DIF assessable deposits in order to service the interest on FICO's bond obligations. The FICO assessment rate is adjusted quarterly and for the fourth quarter of 2015 was approximately 0.600 basis points (60 cents per $10,000 of assessable deposits).
Limits on Loans to One Borrower and Loans to Insiders
Federal and state banking laws impose limits on the amount of credit a bank can extend to any one person (or group of related persons). The Dodd-Frank Act expanded the scope of these restrictions for national banks under federal law to include credit
exposure arising from derivative transactions, repurchase agreements, and securities lending and borrowing transactions. Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act also amended the FDIA to prohibit state-chartered banks (including certain of our banking subsidiaries) from engaging in derivative transactions unless the state lending limit laws take into account credit exposure to such transactions.
Applicable banking laws and regulations also place restrictions on loans by FDIC-insured banks and their affiliates to their directors, executive officers and principal shareholders.
Additional Provisions Regarding Deposit Accounts
The Dodd-Frank Act eliminated prohibitions under federal law against the payment of interest on demand deposits, thus allowing businesses to have interest-bearing checking accounts. Depending upon the market response, this change could have an adverse impact on our interest expense.
Federal Reserve regulations require depository institutions to maintain reserves against their transaction accounts (primarily NOW and regular checking accounts). For 2016, the first $15.2 million of otherwise reservable balances are exempt from the reserve requirements; for transaction accounts aggregating more than $15.2 million to $110.2 million, the reserve requirement is 3% of total transaction accounts; and for net transaction accounts in excess of $110.2 million, the reserve requirement is 10% of the aggregate amount of total transaction accounts in excess of $110.2 million. These reserve requirements are subject to annual adjustment by the Federal Reserve. Our banks are in compliance with the foregoing requirements.
De Novo Branching
The Dodd-Frank Act amended the FDIA and the National Bank Act to allow national banks and state banks, with the approval of their regulators, to establish de novo branches in states other than the bank's home state as if such state was the bank's home state.
In 2009, the FDIC adopted enhanced supervisory procedures for de novo banks, which extended the special supervisory period for such banks from three to seven years. Throughout the de novo period, newly chartered banks will be subject to higher capital requirements, more frequent examinations and other requirements.
Anti-Tying Provisions
Under the anti-tying provisions of the BHC Act, among other things, each of our subsidiary banks is prohibited from conditioning the availability of any product or service, or varying the price for any product or service, on the requirement that the customer obtain some additional product or service from the bank or any of its affiliates, other than loans, deposits and trust services.
Transactions with Affiliates
Certain “covered” transactions between a bank and its holding company or other non-bank affiliates are subject to various restrictions imposed by state and federal law and regulation. Such “covered transactions” include loans and other extensions of credit by the bank to the affiliate, investments in securities issued by the affiliate, purchases of assets from the affiliate, payments of fees or other distributions to the affiliate, certain derivative transactions that create a credit exposure to an affiliate, the acceptance of securities issued by the affiliate as collateral for a loan, and the issuance of a guarantee, acceptance or letter of credit on behalf of the affiliate. In general, these affiliate transaction rules limit the amount of covered transactions between an institution and a single affiliate, as well as the aggregate amount of covered transactions between an institution and all of its affiliates. In addition, covered transactions that are credit transactions must be secured by acceptable collateral, and all covered transactions must be on terms that are at least as favorable to the institution as then-prevailing in the market for comparable transactions with unaffiliated entities. Transactions between affiliated banks may be subject to certain exemptions under applicable federal law.
Community Reinvestment Act
Under the CRA, a financial institution has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with the safe and sound operation of such institution, to help meet the credit needs of its entire community, including low and moderate-income neighborhoods. The CRA does not establish specific lending requirements or programs for financial institutions nor does it limit an institution's discretion to develop the types of products and services that it believes are best suited to its particular community, consistent with the CRA. However, institutions are rated on their performance in meeting the needs of their communities. The CRA requires each federal banking agency to take an institution's CRA record into account when evaluating certain applications by the institution, including applications for charters, branches and other deposit facilities, relocations, mergers, consolidations, acquisitions of assets or assumptions of liabilities, and bank and savings association acquisitions. An unsatisfactory record of performance may be the basis for denying or conditioning approval of an application by a financial institution or its holding company. The CRA also requires that all institutions publicly disclose their CRA ratings. Each of our subsidiary banks received a “satisfactory” or better rating from the Federal Reserve or the OCC on their most recent CRA performance evaluations.
Compliance with Consumer Protection Laws
Our banks and some other operating subsidiaries are also subject to many federal consumer protection statutes and regulations, including the Truth in Lending Act, the Truth in Savings Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, the Electronic Fund Transfer Act, the Consumer Financial Protection Act, the Federal Trade Commission Act and analogous state statutes, the Fair Housing Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the Servicemembers Civil Relief Act and the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. Wintrust Mortgage must also comply with many of these consumer protection statutes and regulations. Violation of these statutes can lead to significant potential liability for damages and penalties, in litigation by consumers as well as enforcement actions by regulators. Some of the key requirements of these laws:
•
require specific disclosures of the terms of credit, and regulate underwriting and other practices for mortgage loans and other types of credit;
•
require specific disclosures about deposit account terms, and the electronic transfers that can be made to or from accounts at the banks;
•
provide limited consumer liability for unauthorized transactions;
•
prohibit discrimination against an applicant in any consumer or business credit transaction;
•
require notifications about the approval or decline of credit applications, the reasons for a decline, and the credit scores used to make credit decisions;
•
prohibit unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices;
•
require mortgage lenders to collect and report applicant and borrower data regarding loans for home purchases or improvement projects;
•
require lenders to provide borrowers with information regarding the nature and cost of real estate settlements;
•
forbid the payment of referral fees for any settlement service as part of a real estate transaction;
•
prohibit certain lending practices and limit escrow amounts with respect to real estate transactions;
•
provide interest rate reductions and other protections for servicemembers called to active duty; and
•
prescribe possible penalties for violations of the requirements of consumer protection statutes and regulations.
During the past several years, Congress has amended these laws and federal regulators have proposed and finalized a number of significant amendments to the regulations implementing these laws. Among other things, the Federal Reserve, the FDIC and the OCC have adopted new rules applicable to the banks (and in some cases, Wintrust Mortgage) that govern consumer credit practices and disclosures, as well as rules that govern overdraft practices and disclosures. These rules may affect the profitability of our consumer banking activities.
As described above, the Dodd-Frank Act established the CFPB. The law transferred to the CFPB existing regulatory authority with respect to many of these consumer related regulations, and gave the CFPB new authority under the Consumer Financial Protection Act. In July 2011, many of the consumer financial protection functions previously assigned to other federal agencies shifted to the CFPB. The CFPB now has broad rulemaking authority over a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to banks and other providers of financial products and services, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive practices,” to ensure that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial products and services, and to ensure that such markets are fair, transparent and competitive. The Dodd-Frank Act also required the CFPB to adopt a number of new specific regulatory requirements. These new rules may increase the costs of engaging in these activities for all market participants, including our subsidiaries. In addition to the CFPB, other federal and state regulators have issued, and may in the future issue, regulations and guidance affecting aspects of our business. The developments may impose additional burdens on us and our subsidiaries. The CFPB has broad supervisory, examination and enforcement authority. Although we and our subsidiary banks are not subject to CFPB examination, the actions taken by the CFPB, including from its rulemaking authority, may influence enforcement actions and positions taken by other federal and state regulators, including those with jurisdiction over us and our subsidiaries. Finally, the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes state attorneys general and other state officials to enforce consumer protection rules issued by the CFPB.
Mortgage Related Rule Changes Generally
The Dodd-Frank Act amended the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act to impose a number of new requirements regarding the origination and servicing of residential mortgage loans. These amendments created a variety of new consumer protections. First, it significantly expands underwriting requirements applicable to loans secured by 1-4 family residential real property and augments federal law combating predatory lending practices. In addition to numerous new disclosure requirements, the Dodd-Frank Act imposes new standards for mortgage loan originations on all lenders, including banks and savings associations, in an effort to strongly encourage lenders to verify a borrower’s ability to repay, while also establishing a presumption of compliance for certain “qualified mortgages.” In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act generally requires lenders or securitizers to retain an economic interest in the credit risk relating to loans that the lender sells, and other asset-backed securities
that the securitizer issues, if the loans have not complied with the ability-to-repay standards. The risk retention requirement generally will be 5%, but could be increased or decreased by regulation.
Ability to Repay Rule
On January 10, 2013, the CFPB issued a final rule implementing the Dodd-Frank Act’s ability-to-repay requirements. Under the final rule, lenders, in assessing a borrower’s ability to repay a mortgage-related obligation, must consider eight underwriting factors: (1) current or reasonably expected income or assets; (2) current employment status; (3) monthly payment on the subject transaction; (4) monthly payment on any simultaneous loan; (5) monthly payment for all mortgage-related obligations; (6) current debt obligations, alimony, and child support; (7) monthly debt-to-income ratio or residual income; and (8) credit history. The final rule also includes guidance regarding the application of, and methodology for evaluating, these factors.
Further, the final rule clarified that qualified mortgages do not include “no-doc” loans and loans with negative amortization, interest-only payments, balloon payments, terms in excess of 30 years, or points and fees paid by the borrower that exceed 3% of the loan amount, subject to certain exceptions. In addition, for qualified mortgages, the rule mandated that the monthly payment be calculated on the highest payment that will occur in the first five years of the loan, and required that the borrower’s total debt-to-income ratio generally may not be more than 43%. The final rule also provided that certain mortgages that satisfy the general product feature requirements for qualified mortgages and that also satisfy the underwriting requirements of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac (while they operate under federal conservatorship or receivership), or the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Department of Veterans Affairs, or Department of Agriculture or Rural Housing Service, are also considered to be qualified mortgages. This second category of qualified mortgages will phase out as the aforementioned federal agencies issue their own rules regarding qualified mortgages, the conservatorship of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac ends, and, in any event, after seven years.
As set forth in the Dodd-Frank Act, subprime (or higher-priced) mortgage loans are subject to the ability-to-repay requirement, and the final rule provided for a rebuttable presumption of lender compliance for those loans. The final rule also applied the ability-to-repay requirement to prime loans, while also providing a conclusive presumption of compliance (i.e., a safe harbor) for prime loans that are also qualified mortgages. Additionally, the final rule generally prohibited prepayment penalties (subject to certain exceptions) and set forth a 3-year record retention period with respect to documenting and demonstrating the ability-to-repay requirement and other provisions.
Changes to Mortgage Loan Originator Compensation
Previously existing regulations concerning the compensation of mortgage loan originators have been amended. As a result of these amendments, mortgage loan originators may not receive compensation based on a mortgage transaction’s terms or conditions other than the amount of credit extended under the mortgage loan. Further, the new standards limit the total points and fees that a bank and/or a broker may charge on conforming and jumbo loans to 3% of the total loan amount. Mortgage loan originators may receive compensation from a consumer or from a lender, but not both. These rules contain requirements designed to prohibit mortgage loan originators from “steering” consumers to loans that provide mortgage loan originators with greater compensation. In addition, the rules contain other requirements concerning recordkeeping.
Mortgage Loan Servicing
On January 17, 2013, the CFPB announced rules to implement certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act relating to mortgage servicing. The new servicing rules require servicers to meet certain benchmarks for loan servicing and customer service in general. Servicers must provide periodic billing statements and certain required notices and acknowledgments, promptly credit borrowers’ accounts for payments received and promptly investigate complaints by borrowers and are required to take additional steps before purchasing insurance to protect the lender’s interest in the property. The new servicing rules also call for additional notice, review and timing requirements with respect to delinquent borrowers. The new servicing rules took effect on January 10, 2014.
In order to ensure compliance with the Dodd-Frank Act mortgage-related rules the Company consolidated its consumer mortgage loan origination and loan servicing operations within Wintrust Mortgage. All consumer mortgage applications are taken through Wintrust Mortgage which has extensively trained loan originators located at each of our branches. While in certain limited cases our banks may offer specialized consumer mortgages to our customers, we expect that on a going forward basis, consumer mortgages for all of our banks will be originated and closed by Wintrust Mortgage. Wintrust Mortgage then sells loans to third parties or to our banks. To the extent that we retain consumer mortgage loans in our bank portfolios, our banks have engaged Wintrust Mortgage to provide loan servicing. We believe that by centralizing loan origination and servicing operations we will not only meet the new compliance requirements, but reduce costs associated with such compliance.
TILA-RESPA Integrated Disclosure
On December 31, 2013, the CFPB published final rules and forms that combine certain disclosures that consumers receive in connection with applying for and closing on a mortgage loan under the Truth in Lending Act and the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act. The two new forms developed by the CFPB are the Loan Estimate and the Closing Disclosure. The Loan Estimate replaces the Good Faith Estimate ("GFE") and the Early Truth in Lending Disclosure ("TIL") and adds additional disclosure language as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. The creditor must give the form to the consumer no later than three business days after the consumer applies for a mortgage loan. Consistent with current law, the creditor generally cannot charge the consumer any fees until after the consumer has been given the Loan Estimate form and the consumer has communicated intent to proceed with the transaction. Creditors may provide consumers with written estimates prior to application so long as there is a disclaimer to prevent confusion with the Loan Estimate form. The second disclosure, the Closing Disclosure form, replaces the HUD-1 and the Final TIL and adds additional disclosure language as required by Dodd Frank. The creditor must give the form to the consumer at least three business days before the consumer closes the loan. The rule became effective October 3, 2015. Wintrust Mortgage and the charter banks are both impacted by the rule, and have implemented procedures to comply with this regulation.
Expansion of the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act
The CFPB has published a lengthy amendment related to the reporting requirements under the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act. The CFPB claims the proposed rule aims to: 1) improve market information, data access, and the electronic reporting process; 2) monitor access to credit; 3) standardize the reporting threshold; 4) ease reporting requirements for some small banks; and 5) align reporting requirements with industry data standards. The proposed rule requires several new items of data be collected and reported to the FFIEC during annual reporting. A majority of the provisions of the rule become effective January 1, 2018. We expect to be fully compliant at that time.
Federal Preemption
The Dodd-Frank Act also amended the laws governing federal preemption of state laws as applied to national banks, and eliminated federal preemption for subsidiaries of national banks. These changes may subject the Company's national banks and their divisions, including Wintrust Mortgage, to additional state regulation and enforcement.
Debit Interchange
The Dodd-Frank Act added a new statutory requirement that interchange fees for electronic debit transactions that are paid to or charged by payment card issuers (including our bank subsidiaries) be reasonable and proportional to the cost incurred by the issuer. The Dodd-Frank Act also gave the Federal Reserve the authority to establish rules regarding these interchange fees. The Federal Reserve issued final regulations that were effective in October 2011, and that limit interchange fees for electronic debit transactions to 21 cents plus .05% of the transaction, plus an additional one cent per transaction fraud adjustment. The rule also imposes requirements regarding routing and exclusivity of electronic debit transactions, and generally requires that debit cards be usable in at least two unaffiliated networks.
Anti-Money Laundering Programs
The Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) and USA PATRIOT Act of 2001 contain anti-money laundering (“AML”) and financial transparency provisions intended to detect, and prevent the use of the U.S. financial system for, money laundering and terrorist financing activities. The BSA, as amended by the USA PATRIOT Act, requires depository institutions and their holding companies to undertake activities including maintaining an AML program, verifying the identity of clients, monitoring for and reporting suspicious transactions, reporting on cash transactions exceeding specified thresholds, and responding to requests for information by regulatory authorities and law enforcement agencies. Each of our subsidiary banks is subject to the BSA and, therefore, is required to provide its employees with AML training, designate an AML compliance officer and undergo an annual, independent audit to assess the effectiveness of its AML program. We have implemented policies, procedures and internal controls that are designed to comply with these AML requirements. In 2014, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (“FinCEN”), which is a unit of the Treasury Department that drafts regulations implementing the USA PATRIOT Act and other AML and BSA legislation, proposed a rule that would contain explicit customer due diligence requirements and impose a new regulatory requirement on financial institutions to obtain beneficial ownership information with respect to all legal entity customers with which such institutions conduct business. The scope and compliance requirements of such a rule have yet to be finalized. Bank regulators are focusing their examinations on anti-money laundering compliance, and we will continue to monitor and augment, where necessary, our AML compliance programs.
Office of Foreign Assets Control Regulation
The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets Control, or "OFAC," is responsible for administering economic sanctions that affect transactions with designated foreign countries, nationals and others, as defined by various Executive Orders and Acts of Congress. OFAC-administered sanctions take many different forms. For example, sanctions may include: (1) restrictions on trade with or investment in a sanctioned country, including prohibitions against direct or indirect imports from and exports to a sanctioned country and prohibitions on U.S. persons engaging in financial transactions relating to, making investments in, or providing investment-related advice or assistance to, a sanctioned country; and (2) a blocking of assets in which the government or "specially designated nationals" of the sanctioned country have an interest, by prohibiting transfers of property subject to U.S. jurisdiction (including property in the possession or control of U.S. persons). OFAC also publishes lists of persons, organizations, and countries suspected of aiding, harboring or engaging in terrorist acts, known as Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons. Blocked assets (e.g., property and bank deposits) cannot be paid out, withdrawn, set off or transferred in any manner without a license from OFAC. Failure to comply with these sanctions could have serious legal and reputational consequences.
Protection of Client Information
Legal requirements concerning the use and protection of client information affect many aspects of the Company's business, and are continuing to evolve. Current legal requirements include the privacy and information safeguarding provisions of the GLB Act, the Fair Credit Reporting Act (“FCRA”) and the amendments adopted by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act of 2003 (the “FACT Act”), as well as state law requirements. The GLB Act requires a financial institution to disclose its privacy policy to certain customers, and requires the financial institution to allow those customers to opt-out of some sharing of the customers' nonpublic personal information with nonaffiliated third persons. In accordance with these requirements, we and each of our banks and operating subsidiaries provide a written privacy to each affected customer when the customer relationship begins and an annual basis. As described in the privacy notice, we protect the security of information about our customers, educate our employees about the importance of protecting customer privacy, and allow affected customers to opt out of certain types of information sharing. We and our subsidiaries also require business partners with which we share information to have adequate security safeguards and to follow the requirements of the GLB Act. The GLB Act, as interpreted by the federal banking regulators, and state laws require us to take certain actions, including possible notice to affected customers, in the event that sensitive customer information is comprised. We and/or each of the banks and operating subsidiaries may need to amend our privacy policies and adapt our internal procedures in the event that these legal requirements, or the regulators' interpretation of them, change, or if new requirements are added.
Like other lenders, the banks and several of our operating subsidiaries utilize credit bureau data in their underwriting activities. Use of such data is regulated under the FCRA, and the FCRA also regulates reporting information to credit bureaus, prescreening individuals for credit offers, sharing of information between affiliates, and using affiliate data for marketing purposes. Similar state laws may impose additional requirements on us, the banks and our operating subsidiaries.
Violation of these legal requirements may expose us to regulatory action and private litigation, including claims for damages and penalties. In addition, a security incident can cause substantial reputational harm.
Broker-Dealer and Investment Adviser Regulation
WHI and Great Lakes Advisors are subject to extensive regulation under federal and state securities laws. WHI is registered as a broker-dealer with the SEC and in all 50 states, the District of Columbia and the U.S. Virgin Islands. Both WHI and Great Lakes Advisors are registered as investment advisers with the SEC. In addition, WHI is a member of several self-regulatory organizations (“SROs”), including FINRA and the Chicago Stock Exchange. Although WHI is required to be registered with the SEC, much of its regulation has been delegated to SROs that the SEC oversees, including FINRA and the national securities exchanges. In addition to SEC rules and regulations, the SROs adopt rules, subject to approval of the SEC, that govern all aspects of business in the securities industry and conduct periodic examinations of member firms. WHI is also subject to regulation by state securities commissions in states in which it conducts business. WHI and Great Lakes Advisors are registered only with the SEC as investment advisers, but certain of their advisory personnel are subject to regulation by state securities regulatory agencies.
As a result of federal and state registrations and SRO memberships, WHI is subject to overlapping schemes of regulation that cover all aspects of its securities businesses. Such regulations cover, among other things, uses and safekeeping of clients' funds; record-keeping and reporting requirements; supervisory and organizational procedures intended to assure compliance with securities laws and to prevent improper trading on material nonpublic information; personnel-related matters, including qualification and licensing of supervisory and sales personnel; limitations on extensions of credit in securities transactions; clearance and settlement procedures; “suitability” determinations as to certain customer transactions; limitations on the amounts and types of fees and commissions that may be charged to customers; and regulation of proprietary trading activities and affiliate transactions.
Violations of the laws and regulations governing a broker-dealer's actions can result in censures, fines, the issuance of cease-and-desist orders, revocation of licenses or registrations, the suspension or expulsion from the securities industry of a broker-dealer or its officers or employees, or other similar actions by both federal and state securities administrators, as well as the SROs.
As a registered broker-dealer, WHI is subject to the SEC's net capital rule as well as the net capital requirements of the SROs of which it is a member. Net capital rules, which specify minimum capital requirements, are generally designed to measure general financial integrity and liquidity and require that at least a minimum amount of net assets be kept in relatively liquid form. Rules of FINRA and other SROs also impose limitations and requirements on the transfer of member organizations' assets. Compliance with net capital requirements may limit the Company's operations requiring the intensive use of capital. These requirements restrict the Company's ability to withdraw capital from WHI, which in turn may limit the Company's ability to pay dividends, repay debt or redeem or purchase shares of the Company's own outstanding stock. WHI is a member of the Securities Investor Protection Corporation (“SIPC”), which subject to certain limitations, serves to oversee the liquidation of a member brokerage firm, and to return missing cash, stock and other securities owed to the firm's brokerage customers, in the event a member broker-dealer fails. The general SIPC protection for customers' securities accounts held by a member broker-dealer is up to $500,000 for each eligible customer, including a maximum of $250,000 for cash claims. SIPC does not protect brokerage customers against investment losses.
WHI in its capacity as an investment adviser is subject to regulations covering matters such as transactions between clients, transactions between the adviser and clients, custody of client assets and management of mutual funds and other client accounts. The principal purpose of regulation and discipline of investment firms is the protection of customers, clients and the securities markets rather than the protection of creditors and shareholders of investment firms. Sanctions that may be imposed for failure to comply with laws or regulations governing investment advisers include the suspension of individual employees, limitations on an adviser's engaging in various asset management activities for specified periods of time, the revocation of registrations, other censures and fines.
Employees
At December 31, 2015, the Company and its subsidiaries employed a total of 3,770 full-time-equivalent employees. The Company provides its employees with comprehensive medical and dental benefit plans, life insurance plans, 401(k) plans and an employee stock purchase plan. The Company considers its relationship with its employees to be good.
Available Information
The Company’s Internet address is www.wintrust.com. The Company makes available at this address, under the "Investor Relations" tab, free of charge, its Annual Report on Form 10-K, its annual reports to shareholders, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") as soon as reasonably practicable after such material is electronically filed with, or furnished to, the SEC.
Supplemental Statistical Data
The following statistical information is provided in accordance with the requirements of The Securities Act Industry Guide 3, Statistical Disclosure by Bank Holding Companies, which is part of Regulation S-K as promulgated by the SEC. This data should be read in conjunction with the Company’s Consolidated Financial Statements and notes thereto, and Management’s Discussion and Analysis which are contained in Item 7 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Investment Securities Portfolio
The following table presents the amortized cost and fair value of the Company’s investment securities portfolios, by investment category, as of December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:
(1) Consisting entirely of residential mortgage-backed securities, none of which are subprime.
Tables presenting the carrying amounts and gross unrealized gains and losses for securities available-for-sale at December 31, 2015 and 2014 are included by reference to Note 3 to the Consolidated Financial Statements presented under Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The following table presents the carrying value of the investment securities portfolios as of December 31, 2015, by maturity distribution.
(1) Consisting entirely of residential mortgage-backed securities, none of which are subprime.
The weighted average yield for each range of maturities of securities, on a tax-equivalent basis, is shown below as of December 31, 2015:
(1) Consisting entirely of residential mortgage-backed securities, none of which are subprime.
An investment in our securities is subject to risks inherent to our business. Certain material risks and uncertainties that management believes affect Wintrust are described below. Before making an investment decision, you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information included or incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in our other filings with the SEC. Additional risks and uncertainties that management is not aware of or that management currently deems immaterial may also impair Wintrust's business operations. This Annual Report on Form 10-K is qualified in its entirety by these risk factors. If any of the following risks actually occur, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. If this were to happen, the value of our securities could decline significantly, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
Risks Related to Our Business and Operating Environment
Difficult economic conditions have adversely affected our company and the financial services industry in general and further deterioration in economic conditions may materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
The U.S. economy was in a recession from the third quarter of 2008 to the second quarter of 2009, and economic activity continues to be restrained. The housing and real estate markets have also been experiencing extraordinary volatility since 2007. Additionally, unemployment rates remained historically high during these periods. These factors have had a significant negative effect on us and other companies in the financial services industry. As a lending institution, our business is directly affected by the ability of our borrowers to repay their loans , as well as by the value of collateral, such as real estate, that secures many of our loans. Market turmoil led to an increase in charge-offs and has negatively impacted consumer confidence and the level of business activity. However, net charge-offs, excluding covered loans, decreased to $19.2 million in 2015 from $27.2 million in 2014. Our balance of non-performing loans, excluding covered loans, and other real estate owned (“OREO”), excluding covered other real estate owned, was $84.1 million and $43.9 million, respectively, at December 31, 2015 compared to $78.7 million and $45.6 million, respectively, at December 31, 2014. Continued weakness or resumed deterioration in the economy, real estate markets or unemployment rates, particularly in the markets in which we operate, will likely diminish the ability of our borrowers to repay loans that we have given them, the value of any collateral securing such loans and may cause increases in delinquencies, problem assets, charge-offs and provision for credit losses, all of which could materially adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. Further, the underwriting and credit monitoring policies and procedures that we have adopted may not prevent losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Since our business is concentrated in the Chicago metropolitan and southern Wisconsin market areas, further declines in the economy of this region could adversely affect our business.
Except for our premium finance business and certain other niche businesses, our success depends primarily on the general economic conditions of the specific local markets in which we operate. Unlike larger national or other regional banks that are more geographically diversified, we provide banking and financial services to customers primarily in the Chicago metropolitan and southern Wisconsin market areas. The local economic conditions in these areas significantly impact the demand for our products and services as well as the ability of our customers to repay loans, the value of the collateral securing loans and the stability of our deposit funding sources. Specifically, many of the loans in our portfolio are secured by real estate located in the Chicago metropolitan area. Like many areas, our local market area has experienced significant volatility in real estate values in recent years. Further declines in economic conditions, including inflation, recession, unemployment, changes in securities markets or other factors impacting these local markets could, in turn, have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Deterioration in the real estate markets where collateral for our mortgage loans is located could adversely affect the borrower's ability to repay the loan and the value of the collateral securing the loan, and in turn the value of our assets.
In addition, the State of Illinois has experienced significant financial difficulty and is facing pension funding shortfalls. To the extent that these issues impact the economic vitality of the state and the businesses operating in Illinois, encourage businesses to leave the state or discourage new employers to start or move businesses to Illinois, it could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
If our allowance for loan losses is not sufficient to absorb losses that may occur in our loan portfolio, our financial condition and liquidity could suffer.
We maintain an allowance for loan losses that is intended to absorb credit losses that we expect to incur in our loan portfolio. At each balance sheet date, our management determines the amount of the allowance for loan losses based on our estimate of probable and reasonably estimable losses in our loan portfolio, taking into account probable losses that have been identified relating to
specific borrowing relationships, as well as probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio and credit undertakings that are not specifically identified.
Because our allowance for loan losses represents an estimate of probable losses, there is no certainty that it will be adequate over time to cover credit losses in the portfolio, particularly if there is deterioration in general economic or market conditions or events that adversely affect specific customers. In 2015, we charged off $19.2 million in loans, excluding covered loans, (net of recoveries) and increased our allowance for loan losses, excluding the allowance for covered loans, from $91.7 million at December 31, 2014 to $105.4 million at December 31, 2015. The increase in allowance in 2015 was primarily the result of significant loan growth during the period. Our allowance for loan losses, excluding the allowance for covered loans, represents 0.62% of total loans, excluding covered loans outstanding at December 31, 2015, compared to 0.64% at December 31, 2014.
Although we believe our loan loss allowance is adequate to absorb probable and reasonably estimable losses in our loan portfolio, if our estimates are inaccurate and our actual loan losses exceed the amount that is anticipated, or if the loss assumptions we used in calculating our reserves are significantly different from those we actually experience, our financial condition and liquidity could be materially adversely affected.
For more information regarding our allowance for loan losses, see “Loan Portfolio and Asset Quality” under Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations in Item 7.
A significant portion of our loan portfolio is comprised of commercial loans, the repayment of which is largely dependent upon the financial success and economic viability of the borrower.
The repayment of our commercial loans is dependent upon the financial success and viability of the borrower. If the economy remains weak for a prolonged period or experiences further deterioration or if the industry or market in which the borrower operates weakens, our borrowers may experience depressed or dramatic and sudden decreases in revenues that could hinder their ability to repay their loans. Our commercial loan portfolio totaled $4.7 billion or 27% of our total loan portfolio, at December 31, 2015, compared to $3.9 billion, or 26% of our total loan portfolio, at December 31, 2014.
Commercial loans are secured by different types of collateral related to the underlying business, such as accounts receivable, inventory and equipment. Should a commercial loan require us to foreclose on the underlying collateral, the unique nature of the collateral may make it more difficult and costly to liquidate, thereby increasing the risk to us of not recovering the principal amount of the loan. Accordingly, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be materially adversely affected by defaults in this portfolio.
A substantial portion of our loan portfolio is secured by real estate, in particular commercial real estate. Deterioration in the real estate markets could lead to additional losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
As of both December 31, 2015 and 2014, approximately 43% of our total loan portfolio was secured by real estate, the majority of which is commercial real estate. The commercial and residential real estate market continues to experience a variety of difficulties, including the Chicago metropolitan area and southern Wisconsin, in which a majority of our real estate loans are concentrated. Increases in commercial and consumer delinquency levels or declines in real estate market values would require increased net charge-offs and increases in the allowance for loan and lease losses, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Any inaccurate assumptions in our analytical and forecasting models could cause us to miscalculate our projected revenue or losses, which could adversely affect our financial condition.
We use analytical and forecasting models to estimate the effects of economic conditions on our loan portfolio and probable loan performance. Those models reflect certain assumptions about market forces, including interest rates and consumer behavior that may be incorrect. If our analytical and forecasting models’ underlying assumptions are incorrect, improperly applied, or otherwise inadequate, we may suffer deleterious effects such as higher than expected loan losses, lower than expected net interest income, or unanticipated charge-offs, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Unanticipated changes in prevailing interest rates and the effects of changing regulation could adversely affect our net interest income, which is our largest source of income.
Wintrust is exposed to interest rate risk in its core banking activities of lending and deposit taking, since changes in prevailing interest rates affect the value of our assets and liabilities. Such changes may adversely affect our net interest income, which is the difference between interest income and interest expense. Our net interest income is affected by the fact that assets and liabilities reprice at different times and by different amounts as interest rates change. Net interest income represents our largest component of net income, and was $641.5 million and $598.6 million for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
Each of our businesses may be affected differently by a given change in interest rates. For example, we expect that the results of our mortgage banking business in selling loans into the secondary market would be negatively impacted during periods of rising interest rates, whereas falling interest rates could have a negative impact on the net interest spread earned on deposits as we would be unable to lower the rates on many interest bearing deposit accounts of our customers to the same extent as many of our higher yielding asset classes.
Additionally, increases in interest rates may adversely influence the growth rate of loans and deposits, the quality of our loan portfolio, loan and deposit pricing, the volume of loan originations in our mortgage banking business and the value that we can recognize on the sale of mortgage loans in the secondary market.
We seek to mitigate our interest rate risk through several strategies, which may not be successful. With the relatively low interest rates that prevailed in recent years, we were able to augment the total return of our investment securities portfolio by selling call options on fixed-income securities that we own. We recorded fee income of approximately $15.4 million, $7.9 million and $4.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. We also mitigate our interest rate risk by entering into interest rate swaps and other interest rate derivative contracts from time to time with counterparties. To the extent that the market value of any derivative contract moves to a negative market value, we are subject to loss if the counterparty defaults. In the future, there can be no assurance that such mitigation strategies will be available or successful.
Our liquidity position may be negatively impacted if economic conditions continue to suffer.
Liquidity is a measure of whether our cash flows and liquid assets are sufficient to satisfy current and future financial obligations, such as demand for loans, deposit withdrawals and operating costs. Our liquidity position is affected by a number of factors, including the amount of cash and other liquid assets on hand, payment of interest and dividends on debt and equity instruments that we have issued, capital we inject into our bank subsidiaries, proceeds we raise through the issuance of securities, our ability to draw upon our revolving credit facility and dividends received from our banking subsidiaries. Our future liquidity position may be adversely affected by multiple factors, including:
•
if our banking subsidiaries report net losses or their earnings are weak relative to our cash flow needs;
•
if it is necessary for us to make capital injections to our banking subsidiaries;
•
if changes in regulations require us to maintain a greater level of capital, as more fully described below;
•
if we are unable to access our revolving credit facility due to a failure to satisfy financial and other covenants; or
•
if we are unable to raise additional capital on terms that are satisfactory to us.
Weakness or worsening of the economy, real estate markets or unemployment levels may increase the likelihood that one or more of these events will occur. If our liquidity is adversely affected, it may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
The financial services industry is very competitive, and if we are not able to compete effectively, we may lose market share and our business could suffer.
We face competition in attracting and retaining deposits, making loans, and providing other financial services (including wealth management services) throughout our market area. Our competitors include national, regional and other community banks, and a wide range of other financial institutions such as credit unions, government-sponsored enterprises, mutual fund companies, insurance companies, factoring companies and other non-bank financial companies. Many of these competitors have substantially greater resources and market presence than Wintrust and, as a result of their size, may be able to offer a broader range of products and services, better pricing for those products and services, or newer technologies to deliver those products and services than we can. Several of our local competitors have experienced improvements in their financial condition over the few years and are better positioned to compete for loans, acquisitions and personnel. The financial services industry could become even more competitive as a result of legislative, regulatory and technological changes and continued consolidation. Also, technology has lowered barriers to entry and made it possible for non-banks to offer products and services traditionally provided by banks, such as automatic transfer and payment systems, and for banks that do not have a physical presence in our markets to compete for deposits.
Our ability to compete successfully depends on a number of factors, including, among other things:
•
the ability to develop, maintain and build upon long-term customer relationships based on top quality service and high ethical standards;
•
the scope, relevance and pricing of products and services offered to meet customer needs and demands;
•
the ability to expand our market position;
•
the ability to uphold our reputation in the marketplace;
•
the rate at which we introduce new products and services relative to our competitors;
•
customer satisfaction with our level of service; and
•
industry and general economic trends.
If we are unable to compete effectively, we will lose market share and income from deposits, loans and other products may be reduced. This could adversely affect our profitability and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If we are unable to continue to identify favorable acquisitions or successfully integrate our acquisitions, our growth may be limited and our results of operations could suffer.
In the past several years, we have completed numerous acquisitions of banks, other financial service related companies and financial service related assets, including acquisitions of troubled financial institutions, as more fully described below. We expect to continue to make such acquisitions in the future. Wintrust seeks merger or acquisition partners that are culturally similar, have experienced management, possess either significant market presence or have potential for improved profitability through financial management, economies of scale or expanded services. Failure to successfully identify and complete acquisitions likely will result in Wintrust achieving slower growth. Acquiring other banks, businesses or branches involves various risks commonly associated with acquisitions, including, among other things:
•
potential exposure to unknown or contingent liabilities or asset quality issues of the target company;
•
failure to adequately estimate the level of loan losses at the target company;
•
difficulty and expense of integrating the operations and personnel of the target company;
•
potential disruption to our business, including diversion of our management's time and attention;
•
the possible loss of key employees and customers of the target company;
•
difficulty in estimating the value of the target company; and
•
potential changes in banking or tax laws or regulations that may affect the target company.
Acquisitions typically involve the payment of a premium over book and market values, and, therefore, some dilution of Wintrust's tangible book value and net income per common share may occur as a result of any future transaction. In addition, certain acquisitions may expose us to additional regulatory risks, including from foreign governments. Our ability to comply with any such regulations will impact the success of any such acquisitions. Furthermore, failure to realize the expected revenue increases, cost savings, increases in geographic or product presence, and/or other projected benefits from an acquisition could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
Our participation in FDIC-assisted acquisitions may present additional risks to our financial condition and results of operations.
As part of our growth strategy, we have made opportunistic partial acquisitions of troubled financial institutions in transactions facilitated by the FDIC through our bank subsidiaries. These acquisitions, and any future FDIC-assisted transactions we may undertake, involve greater risk than traditional acquisitions because they are typically conducted on an accelerated basis, allowing less time for us to prepare for and evaluate possible transactions, or to prepare for integration of an acquired institution. These transactions also present risks of customer loss, strain on management resources related to collection and management of problem loans and problems related to the integration of operations and personnel of the acquired financial institutions. As a result, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully integrate the financial institutions we acquire, or that we will realize the anticipated benefits of the acquisitions. Additionally, while the FDIC may agree to assume certain losses in transactions that it facilitates, there can be no assurances that we would not be required to raise additional capital as a condition to, or as a result of, participation in an FDIC-assisted transaction. Any such transactions and related issuances of stock may have dilutive effect on earnings per share. Furthermore, we may face competition from other financial institutions with respect to proposed FDIC-assisted transactions.
We are also subject to certain risks relating to our loss sharing agreements with the FDIC. Under a loss sharing agreement, the FDIC generally agrees to reimburse the acquiring bank for a portion of any losses relating to covered assets of the acquired financial institution. This is an important financial term of any FDIC-assisted transaction, as troubled financial institutions often have poorer asset quality. As a condition to reimbursement, however, the FDIC requires the acquiring bank to follow certain servicing procedures. A failure to follow servicing procedures or any other breach of a loss sharing agreement by us could result in the loss of FDIC reimbursement. While we have established a group dedicated to servicing the loans covered by the FDIC loss sharing agreements, there can be no assurance that we will be able to comply with the FDIC servicing procedures. In addition, reimbursable losses and recoveries under loss sharing agreements are based on the book value of the relevant loans and other assets as determined
by the FDIC as of the effective dates of the acquisitions. The amount that the acquiring banks realize on these assets could differ materially from the carrying value that will be reflected in our financial statements, based upon the timing and amount of collections on the covered loans in future periods. Any failure to receive reimbursement, or any material differences between the amount of reimbursements that we do receive and the carrying value reflected in our financial statements, could have a material negative effect on our financial condition and results of operations.
An actual or perceived reduction in our financial strength may cause others to reduce or cease doing business with us, which could result in a decrease in our net interest income and fee revenues.
Our customers rely upon our financial strength and stability and evaluate the risks of doing business with us. If we experience diminished financial strength or stability, actual or perceived, including due to market or regulatory developments, announced or rumored business developments or results of operations, or a decline in stock price, customers may withdraw their deposits or otherwise seek services from other banking institutions and prospective customers may select other service providers. The risk that we may be perceived as less creditworthy relative to other market participants is increased in the current market environment, where the consolidation of financial institutions, including major global financial institutions, is resulting in a smaller number of much larger counterparties and competitors. As our community banks become more closely identified with the Wintrust name, the impact of any perceived weakness or creditworthiness at either the holding company or our community banks may be greater than in prior periods. If customers reduce their deposits with us or select other service providers for all or a portion of the services that we provide them, net interest income and fee revenues will decrease accordingly, and could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.
If our growth requires us to raise additional capital, that capital may not be available when it is needed or the cost of that capital may be very high.
We are required by regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations (see “-Risks Related to Our Regulatory Environment-If we fail to meet our regulatory capital ratios, we may be forced to raise capital or sell assets”) and as we grow, internally and through acquisitions, the amount of capital required to support our operations grows as well. We may need to raise additional capital to support continued growth both internally and through acquisitions. Any capital we obtain may result in the dilution of the interests of existing holders of our common stock.
Our ability to raise additional capital, if needed, will depend on conditions in the capital markets at that time which are outside our control and on our financial condition and performance. If we cannot raise additional capital when needed, or on terms acceptable to us, our ability to further expand our operations through internal growth and acquisitions could be materially impaired and our financial condition and liquidity could be materially and negatively affected.
Disruption in the financial markets could result in lower fair values for our investment securities portfolio.
The Company's available-for-sale and trading securities are carried at fair value. Major disruptions in the capital markets experienced in recent years have impacted investor demand for all classes of securities and resulted in volatility in the fair values of the Company's investment securities.
Accounting standards require the Company to categorize these securities according to a fair value hierarchy. As of December 31, 2015, approximately 95% of the Company's available-for-sale securities were categorized in level 2 of the fair value hierarchy (meaning that their fair values were determined by quoted prices for similar assets or other observable inputs). Significant prolonged reduced investor demand could manifest itself in lower fair values for these securities and may result in recognition of an other-than-temporary or permanent impairment of these assets, which could lead to accounting charges and have a material adverse effect on the Company's financial condition and results of operations.
The remaining securities in our available-for-sale securities portfolio were categorized as level 3 (meaning that their fair values were determined by inputs that are unobservable in the market and therefore require a greater degree of management judgment). The determination of fair value for securities categorized in level 3 involves significant judgment due to the complexity of factors contributing to the valuation, many of which are not readily observable in the market. Recent market disruptions make valuation of such securities even more difficult and subjective. In addition, the nature of the business of the third party source that is valuing the securities at any given time could impact the valuation of the securities. Consequently, the ultimate sales price for any of these securities could vary significantly from the recorded fair value at December 31, 2015, especially if the security is sold during a period of illiquidity or market disruption or as part of a large block of securities under a forced transaction.
There can be no assurance that decline in market value associated with these disruptions will not result in other-than-temporary or permanent impairments of these assets, which would lead to accounting charges which could have a material negative effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Our controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented.
Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls over financial reporting, disclosure controls and procedures and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well-designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurances that the objectives of the system are met. Any circumvention of our controls and procedures or failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.
New lines of business and new products and services are essential to our ability to compete but may subject us to additional risks.
We continually implement new lines of business and offer new products and services within existing lines of business to offer our customers a competitive array of products and services. 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 can increase efficiency and enable financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. However, some new technologies needed to compete effectively result in incremental operating 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 operations. Many of our competitors, because of their larger size and available capital, 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 cause a loss of customers and have a material adverse effect on our business.
At the same time, there can be substantial risks and uncertainties associated with these efforts, particularly in instances where the markets for such services are still developing. In developing and marketing new lines of business and/or new products or services, we may invest significant time and resources. Initial timetables for the introduction and development of new lines of business and/or new products or services may not be achieved, and price and profitability targets may not prove feasible. External factors, such as compliance with regulations, competitive alternatives, and shifting market preferences, may also impact the successful implementation of a new line of business or a new product or service. Furthermore, any new line of business and/or new product or service could have a significant impact on the effectiveness of our system of internal controls. Failure to successfully manage these risks in the development and implementation of new lines of business or new products or services could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Failures of our information technology systems may adversely affect our operations.
We are increasingly dependent upon computer and other information technology systems to manage our business. We rely upon information technology systems to process, record, monitor and disseminate information about our operations. In some cases, we depend on third parties to provide or maintain these systems. While we perform a review of controls instituted by our critical vendors in accordance with industry standards, we must rely on the continued maintenance of these controls by the outside party, including safeguards over the security of customer data. Additionally, we must rely on our employees to safeguard access to our information technology systems and avoid inadvertent complicity with external security threats. Although we take protective measures and endeavor to modify them 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 cyber attacks that could have a security impact. If one or more of these events occur, or if any of our financial, accounting or other data processing systems fail or have other significant shortcomings, this could jeopardize our or our customers’ confidential and other information processed and stored in, and transmitted through, our computer systems and networks or otherwise cause interruptions or malfunctions in our operations or the operations of our customers or counterparties. We may be required to expend significant additional resources to modify our protective measures or to investigate and remediate vulnerabilities or other exposures, and we may be subject to litigation and financial losses that are either not insured against or not fully covered through any insurance maintained by us. Security breaches in our online banking systems could also have an adverse effect on our reputation. Our systems may also be affected by events that are beyond our control, which may include, for example, electrical or telecommunications outages or other damage to our property or assets. Although we take precautions against malfunctions and security breaches, our efforts may not be adequate to prevent problems that could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Failures by or of our vendors may adversely affect our operations.
We use and rely upon many external vendors to provide us with day-to-day products and services essential to our operations. We are thus exposed to risk that such vendors will not perform as contracted or at agreed-upon service levels. The failure of our vendors to perform as contracted or at necessary service levels for any reason could disrupt our operations, which could adversely affect our business. In addition, if any of our vendors experience insolvency or other business failure, such failure could affect our ability to obtain necessary products or services from a substitute vendor in a timely and cost-effective manner or prevent us from effectively
pursuing certain business objectives entirely. Our failure to implement business objectives due to vendor nonperformance could adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
We issue debit cards, and debit card transactions pose a particular cybersecurity risk that is outside of our control.
Debit card numbers are susceptible to theft at the point of sale via the physical terminal through which transactions are processed and by other means of hacking. The security and integrity of these transactions are dependent upon retailers’ vigilance and willingness to invest in technology and upgrades. Despite third-party security risks that are beyond our control, we offer our customers protection against fraud and attendant losses for unauthorized use of debit cards in order to stay competitive in the marketplace. Offering such protection to our customers exposes us to potential losses which, in the event of a data breach at one or more retailers of considerable magnitude, may adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We depend on the accuracy and completeness of information we receive about our customers and counterparties to make credit decisions.
We rely on information furnished by or on behalf of customers and counterparties in deciding whether to extend credit or enter into other transactions. This information could include financial statements, credit reports, and other financial information. We also rely on representations of those customers, counterparties, or other third parties, such as independent auditors, as to the accuracy and completeness of that information. Reliance on inaccurate or misleading financial statements, credit reports, or other financial information could have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
If we are unable to attract and retain experienced and qualified personnel, our ability to provide high quality service will be diminished, we may lose key customer relationships, and our results of operations may suffer.
We believe that our future success depends, in part, on our ability to attract and retain experienced personnel, including our senior management and other key personnel. Our business model is dependent upon our ability to provide high quality and personal service. In addition, as a holding company that conducts its operations through our subsidiaries, we are focused on providing entrepreneurial-based compensation to the chief executives of each our business units. As a Company with start-up and growth oriented operations, we are cognizant that to attract and retain the managerial talent necessary to operate and grow our businesses we often have to compensate our executives with a view to the business we expect them to manage, rather than the size of the business they currently manage. Accordingly, any executive compensation restrictions may negatively impact our ability to retain and attract senior management. The departure of a senior manager or other key personnel may damage relationships with certain customers, or certain customers may choose to follow such personnel to a competitor. The loss of any of our senior managers or other key personnel, or our inability to identify, recruit and retain such personnel, could materially and adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.
We are subject to environmental liability risk associated with lending activities.
A significant portion of the Company's loan portfolio is secured by real property. In the ordinary course of business, the Company may foreclose on and take title to properties securing certain loans. In doing so, there is a risk that hazardous or toxic substances could be found on these properties. If hazardous or toxic substances are found, the Company may be liable for remediation costs, as well as for personal injury and property damage. In addition, we own and operate a number of properties that may be subject to similar environmental liability risks.
Environmental laws may require the Company to incur substantial expenses and could materially reduce the affected property's value or limit the Company's ability to use or sell the affected property. The costs associated with investigation and remediation activities could be substantial. In addition, if we are the owner or former owner of a contaminated site, we may be subject to common law claims by third parties based on damages and costs resulting from environmental contamination emanating from the property. Although the Company has policies and procedures to perform an environmental review before initiating any foreclosure action on real property, these reviews may not be sufficient to detect all potential environmental hazards. The remediation costs and any other financial liabilities associated with an environmental hazard could have a material adverse effect on the Company's business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to claims and legal actions which could negatively affect our results of operations or financial condition.
Periodically, as a result of our normal course of business, we are involved in claims and related litigation from our customers or employees. These claims and legal actions, whether meritorious or not, as well as reviews, investigations and proceedings by governmental and self-regulatory agencies could involve large monetary claims and significant legal expense. In addition, such actions may negatively impact our reputation in the marketplace and lessen customer demand. If such claims and legal actions are not decided in Wintrust's favor, our results of operations and financial condition could be adversely impacted.
Losses incurred in connection with actual or projected repurchases and indemnification payments related to mortgages that we have sold into the secondary market may exceed our financial statement reserves and we may be required to increase such reserves in the future. Increases to our reserves and losses incurred in connection with actual loan repurchases and indemnification payments could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
We engage in the origination and purchase of residential mortgages for sale into the secondary market. In connection with such sales, we make certain representations and warranties, which, if breached, may require us to repurchase such loans, substitute other loans or indemnify the purchasers of such loans for actual losses incurred in respect of such loans. Due, in part, to increased mortgage payment delinquency rates and declining housing prices during the post 2007 period, we have been receiving such requests for loan repurchases and indemnification payments relating to the representations and warranties with respect to such loans. We have been able to reach settlements with a number of purchasers, and believe that we have established appropriate reserves with respect to indemnification requests. It is possible that the number of such requests will increase or that we will not be able to reach settlements with respect to such requests in the future. Accordingly, it is possible that losses incurred in connection with loan repurchases and indemnification payments may be in excess of our financial statement reserves, and we may be required to increase such reserves and may sustain additional losses associated with such loan repurchases and indemnification payments in the future. Increases to our reserves and losses incurred by us in connection with actual loan repurchases and indemnification payments in excess of our reserves could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flows.
Consumers may decide not to use banks to complete their financial transactions, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations.
Technology and other changes are allowing parties to complete financial transactions that historically have involved banks through alternative methods. For example, consumers can now maintain funds that would have historically been held as bank deposits in brokerage accounts or mutual funds. Consumers can also complete transactions such as paying bills and transferring funds directly without the assistance of banks. The process of eliminating banks as intermediaries could result in the loss of fee income, as well as the loss of customer deposits and the related income generated from those deposits. The loss of these revenue streams and the lower cost deposits as a source of funds could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We may be adversely impacted by the soundness of other financial institutions.
Financial services institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing, counterparty or other relationships. We have exposure to many different industries and counterparties and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry, including the Federal Home Loan Bank ("FHLB"), commercial banks, brokers and dealers, investment banks and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of a default by a counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when collateral held by us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount due to us. Any such losses could have material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
De novo operations often involve significant expenses and delayed returns and may negatively impact Wintrust's profitability.
Our financial results have been and will continue to be impacted by our strategy of branch openings and de novo bank formations. We expect to increase the opening of additional branches as market conditions improve and, if the interest rate environment and economic climate and regulatory conditions become favorable, may resume de novo bank formations. Based on our experience, we believe that it generally takes over 13 months for de novo banks to first achieve operational profitability, depending on the number of banking facilities opened, the impact of organizational and overhead expenses, the start-up phase of generating deposits and the time lag typically involved in redeploying deposits into attractively priced loans and other higher yielding earning assets. However, it may take longer than expected or more than the amount of time Wintrust has historically experienced for new banks and/or banking facilities to reach profitability, and there can be no guarantee that these branches or banks will ever be profitable. Moreover, the FDIC's extension of the enhanced supervisory period for de novo banks from three to seven years, including higher capital requirements during this period, could also delay a new bank's ability to contribute to the Company's earnings and impact the Company's willingness to expand through de novo bank formation. To the extent we undertake additional de novo bank, branch and business formations, our level of reported net income, return on average equity and return on average assets will be impacted by startup costs associated with such operations, and it is likely to continue to experience the effects of higher expenses relative to operating income from the new operations. These expenses may be higher than we expected or than our experience has shown, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We are subject to examinations and challenges by tax authorities, and changes in federal and state tax laws and changes in interpretation of existing laws can impact our financial results.
In the normal course of business, we, as well as our subsidiaries, are routinely subject to examinations from federal and state tax authorities regarding the amount of taxes due in connection with investments we have made and the businesses in which we have engaged. Recently, federal and state tax authorities have become increasingly aggressive in challenging tax positions taken by financial institutions. These tax positions may relate to among other things tax compliance, sales and use, franchise, gross receipts, payroll, property and income tax issues, including tax base, apportionment and tax credit planning. The challenges made by tax authorities may result in adjustments to the timing or amount of taxable income or deductions or the allocation of income among tax jurisdictions. If any such challenges are made and are not resolved in our favor, they could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. Given the current economic and political environment and ongoing budgetary pressures, the enactment of new federal or state tax legislation may occur. The enactment of such legislation, or changes in the interpretation of existing law, including provisions impacting tax rates, apportionment, consolidation or combination, income, expenses and credits may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in accounting policies or accounting standards could materially adversely affect how we report our financial results and financial condition.
Our accounting policies are fundamental to understanding our financial results and financial condition. Some of these policies require use of estimates and assumptions that affect the value of our assets or liabilities and financial results. Some of our accounting policies are critical because they require management to make difficult, subjective and complex judgments about matters that are inherently uncertain and because it is likely that materially different amounts would be reported under different conditions or using different assumptions. If such estimates or assumptions underlying our financial statements are incorrect, we may experience material losses. From time to time, the Financial Accounting Standards Board ("FASB") and the SEC change the financial accounting and reporting standards that govern the preparation of our financial statements. These changes can be hard to predict and can materially impact how we record and report our financial condition and results of operations. In some cases, we could be required to apply a new or revised standard retroactively, resulting in the restatement of prior period financial statements.
We are a bank holding company, and our sources of funds, including to pay dividends, are limited.
We are a bank holding company and our operations are primarily conducted by and through our 15 operating banks, which are subject to significant federal and state regulation. Cash available to pay dividends to our shareholders, repurchase our shares or repay our indebtedness is derived primarily from dividends received from our banks and our ability to receive dividends from our subsidiaries is restricted. Various statutory provisions restrict the amount of dividends our banks can pay to us without regulatory approval. The banks may not pay cash dividends if that payment could reduce the amount of their capital below that necessary to meet the “adequately capitalized” level in accordance with regulatory capital requirements. It is also possible that, depending upon the financial condition of the banks and other factors, regulatory authorities could conclude that payment of dividends or other payments, including payments to us, is an unsafe or unsound practice and impose restrictions or prohibit such payments. Our inability to receive dividends from our banks could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Anti-takeover provisions could negatively impact our shareholders.
Certain provisions of our articles of incorporation, by-laws and Illinois law may have the effect of impeding the acquisition of control of Wintrust by means of a tender offer, a proxy fight, open-market purchases or otherwise in a transaction not approved by our board of directors. For example, our board of directors may issue additional authorized shares of our capital stock to deter future attempts to gain control of Wintrust, including the authority to determine the terms of any one or more series of preferred stock, such as voting rights, conversion rates and liquidation preferences. As a result of the ability to fix voting rights for a series of preferred stock, the board has the power, to the extent consistent with its fiduciary duty, to issue a series of preferred stock to persons friendly to management in order to attempt to block a merger or other transaction by which a third party seeks control, and thereby assist the incumbent board of directors and management to retain their respective positions. In addition, our articles of incorporation expressly elect to be governed by the provisions of Section 7.85 of the Illinois Business Corporation Act, which would make it more difficult for another party to acquire us without the approval of our board of directors.
The ability of a third party to acquire us is also limited under applicable banking regulations. The BHC Act requires any “bank holding company” (as defined in the BHC Act) to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve prior to acquiring more than 5% of our outstanding common stock. Any person other than a bank holding company is required to obtain prior approval of the Federal Reserve to acquire 10% or more of our outstanding common stock under the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978. Any holder of 25% or more of our outstanding common stock, other than an individual, is subject to regulation as a "bank holding company" under the BHC Act. For purposes of calculating ownership thresholds under these banking regulations, bank regulators would likely at least take the position that the minimum number of shares, and could take the position that the maximum number of shares, of Wintrust common stock that a holder is entitled to receive pursuant to securities convertible into or settled in Wintrust
common stock, including pursuant to Wintrust's warrants to purchase Wintrust common stock held by such holder, must be taken into account in calculating a shareholder's aggregate holdings of Wintrust common stock.
These provisions may have the effect of discouraging a future takeover attempt that is not approved by our board of directors but which our individual shareholders may deem to be in their best interests or in which our shareholders may receive a substantial premium for their shares over then-current market prices. As a result, shareholders who might desire to participate in such a transaction may not have an opportunity to do so. Such provisions will also render the removal of our current board of directors or management more difficult.
Risks Related to Our Regulatory Environment
If we fail to meet our regulatory capital ratios, we may be forced to raise capital or sell assets.
As a banking institution, we are subject to regulations that require us to maintain certain capital ratios, such as the ratio of our Tier 1 capital to our risk-based assets. If our regulatory capital ratios decline, as a result of decreases in the value of our loan portfolio or otherwise, we will be required to improve such ratios by either raising additional capital or by disposing of assets. If we choose to dispose of assets, we cannot be certain that we will be able to do so at prices that we believe to be appropriate, and our future operating results could be negatively affected. If we choose to raise additional capital, we may accomplish this by selling additional shares of common stock, or securities convertible into or exchangeable for common stock, which could significantly dilute the ownership percentage of holders of our common stock and cause the market price of our common stock to decline. Additionally, events or circumstances in the capital markets generally may increase our capital costs and impair our ability to raise capital at any given time.
If our credit rating is lowered, our financing costs could increase.
We have been rated by Fitch Ratings as BBB.
Our creditworthiness is not fixed and should be expected to change over time as a result of company performance and industry conditions. We cannot give any assurances that our credit ratings will remain at current levels, and it is possible that our ratings could be lowered or withdrawn by Fitch Ratings. Any actual or threatened downgrade or withdrawal of our credit rating could affect our perception in the marketplace and ability to raise capital, and could increase our debt financing costs.
Changes in the United States’ monetary policy may restrict our ability to conduct our business in a profitable manner.
Our ability to profitably operate is dependent, in part, upon federal fiscal policies that cannot be predicted. We are particularly affected by the monetary policies of the Federal Reserve Board, which influence money supply in the United States. Any change in the United States’ monetary policy, or worsening federal budgetary pressures, could affect our access to capital. Additionally, any trend toward inflation, economic decline, destabilizing of financial markets, or other factors beyond our control may significantly affect consumer demand for our products and consumers’ ability to repay loans, reducing our results of operations.
Legislative and regulatory actions taken now or in the future regarding the financial services industry may significantly increase our costs or limit our ability to conduct our business in a profitable manner.
We are already subject to extensive federal and state regulation and supervision. The cost of compliance with such laws and regulations can be substantial and adversely affect our ability to operate profitably. While we are unable to predict the scope or impact of any potential legislation or regulatory action until it becomes final, it is possible that changes in applicable laws, regulations or interpretations hereof could significantly increase our regulatory compliance costs, impede the efficiency of our internal business processes, negatively impact the recoverability of certain of our recorded assets, require us to increase our regulatory capital, interfere with our executive compensation plans, or limit our ability to pursue business opportunities in an efficient manner including our plan for de novo growth and growth through acquisitions.
The Dodd-Frank Act significantly changed the bank regulatory structure and affects the lending, deposit, investment, trading and operating activities of financial institutions and their holding companies. The Dodd-Frank Act requires various federal agencies to adopt a broad range of new rules and regulations, including heightened capital requirements, and to prepare numerous studies and reports for Congress. The Dodd-Frank Act amended the laws governing federal preemption of state laws as applied to national banks, and eliminated federal preemption for subsidiaries of national banks. These changes may subject our national banks and their subsidiaries and divisions, including Wintrust Mortgage, to additional state regulation. With regard to mortgage lending, the Dodd-Frank Act imposed new requirements regarding the origination and servicing of residential mortgage loans. The law created a variety of new consumer protections, including limitations on the manner by which loan originators may be compensated and an obligation of the part of lenders to assess and verify a borrower's “ability to repay” a residential mortgage loan.
The Dodd-Frank Act also enhanced provisions relating to affiliate and insider lending restrictions and loans-to-one-borrower limitations. Federal and state banking laws impose limits on the amount of credit a bank can extend to any one person (or group of related persons). The Dodd-Frank Act expanded the scope of these restrictions for national banks under federal law to include credit exposure arising from derivative transactions, repurchase agreements, and securities lending and borrowing transactions.
Provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act also amended the FDIA to prohibit state-chartered banks (including certain of our banking subsidiaries) from engaging in derivative transactions unless the state lending limit laws take into account credit exposure to such transactions.
Additional discussion of the Dodd-Frank Act may be found in this Annual Report on Form 10-K under “Business - Supervision and Regulation” and “Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Overview and Strategy-Financial Regulatory Reform” in Item 7.
Given the uncertainty associated with the manner in which many provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act will be implemented by the various regulatory agencies, the full extent of the impact that its requirements will have on our operations is unclear. However, its requirements may, individually or in the aggregate, have a material adverse effect upon the Company's business, results of operations, cash flows and financial position.
Financial reform legislation and increased regulatory rigor around mortgage-related issues may reduce our ability to market our products to consumers and may limit our ability to profitably operate our mortgage business.
The Dodd-Frank Act also established the CFPB within the Federal Reserve, which now regulates consumer financial products and services. On July 21, 2011, many of the consumer financial protection functions previously assigned to other federal agencies shifted to the CFPB. The CFPB now has broad rulemaking authority over a wide range of consumer protection laws that apply to banks and other providers of consumer financial services, including the authority to prohibit “unfair, deceptive or abusive acts or practices,” and to enact regulations to ensure that all consumers have access to markets for consumer financial products and services, and that such markets are fair, transparent and competitive. The Dodd-Frank Act also required the CFPB to adopt a number of new specific regulatory requirements. These new rules may increase the costs of engaging in these activities for all market participants, including our subsidiaries. Additionally, the CFPB has broad supervisory, examination and enforcement authority. Although we and our subsidiary banks are not subject to CFPB examination, the actions taken by the CFPB may influence enforcement actions and positions taken by other federal and state regulators, including those with jurisdiction over us and our subsidiaries. In addition, in the wake of the mortgage crisis of the last few years, federal and state banking regulators are closely examining the mortgage and mortgage servicing activities of depository financial institutions. Should the regulatory agencies have serious concerns with respect to our operations in this regard, the effect of such concerns could have a material adverse effect on our profits. Finally, the Dodd-Frank Act authorizes state attorneys general and other state officials to enforce certain consumer protection rules issued by the CFPB.
Federal, state and local consumer lending laws may restrict our ability to originate certain mortgage loans or increase our risk of liability with respect to such loans and could increase our cost of doing business.
Federal, state and local laws have been adopted that are intended to eliminate certain lending practices considered "predatory." These laws prohibit practices such as steering borrowers away from more affordable products, selling unnecessary insurance to borrowers, repeatedly refinancing loans and making loans without a reasonable expectation that the borrowers will be able to repay the loans irrespective of the value of the underlying property. Over the course of 2013 and 2014, the CFPB issued several rules on mortgage lending, notably a rule requiring all home mortgage lenders to determine a borrower's ability to repay the loan. Loans with certain terms and conditions and that otherwise meet the definition of a "qualified mortgage" may be protected from liability to a borrower for failing to make the necessary determinations. In either case, we may find it necessary to tighten our mortgage loan underwriting standards in response to the CFPB rules, which may constrain our ability to make loans consistent with our business strategies. It is our policy not to make predatory loans and to determine borrowers' ability to repay, but the law and related rules create the potential for increased liability with respect to our lending and loan investment activities. They increase our cost of doing business and, ultimately, may prevent us from making certain loans and cause us to reduce the average percentage rate or the points and fees on loans that we do make. In addition, regulation related to redlining, fair lending, Community Re-Investment Act compliance and Bank Secrecy Act compliance create significant burdens which necessitate increased costs. Any failure to comply with any of these regulations could have a significant impact on our ability to operate, our ability to acquire or open new banks and/or result in meaningful fines.
Regulatory initiatives regarding bank capital requirements may require heightened capital.
Both the Dodd-Frank Act, which reformed the regulation of financial institutions in a comprehensive manner, and the Basel III regulatory capital reforms, which increase both the amount and quality of capital that financial institutions must hold will impact our capital requirements. Specifically, in July 2013, the U.S. federal banking authorities approved the implementation of the Basel III Rule. The Basel III Rule is applicable to all U.S. banks that are subject to minimum capital requirements as well as to bank and saving and loan holding companies, other than “small bank holding companies” (generally bank holding companies with consolidated assets of less than $500 million). The Basel III Rule not only increases most of the required minimum regulatory capital ratios, it introduces a new Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio and the concept of a capital conservation buffer. The Basel III Rule also expands the current definition of capital by establishing additional criteria that capital instruments must meet to be considered Additional Tier 1 capital (i.e., Tier 1 capital in addition to Common Equity) and Tier 2 capital. A number of instruments that now generally qualify as Tier 1 capital will not qualify or their qualifications will change when the Basel III Rule is fully
implemented. The Basel III Rule has maintained the general structure of the current prompt corrective action thresholds while incorporating the increased requirements, including the Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio. In order to be a “well-capitalized” depository institution under the new regime, an institution must maintain a Common Equity Tier 1 capital ratio of 6.5% or more, a Tier 1 capital ratio of 8% or more, a total capital ratio of 10% or more, and a leverage ratio of 5% or more. Institutions must also maintain a capital conservation buffer consisting of Common Equity Tier 1 capital. Financial institutions became subject to the Basel III Rule on January 1, 2015 with a phase-in period through 2019 for many of the changes.
The implementation of these provisions, as well as any other aspects of current or proposed regulatory or legislative changes to laws applicable to the financial industry, will impact the profitability of our business activities and may change certain of our business practices, including the ability to offer new products, obtain financing, attract deposits, make loans, and achieve satisfactory interest spreads, and could expose us to additional costs, including increased compliance costs. These changes also may require us to invest significant management attention and resources to make any necessary changes to operations in order to comply, and could therefore also materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. Our management is actively reviewing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and the Basel III Rule, many of which are to be phased-in over the next several months and years, and assessing the probable impact on our operations. However, the ultimate effect of these changes on the financial services industry in general, and us in particular, is uncertain at this time.
In October 2012, the Federal Reserve published a final rule implementing the stress test requirements under the Dodd-Frank Act, which are designed to evaluate the sufficiency of a banking organization's capital to support its operations during periods of stress. As a bank holding company with between $10 billion and $50 billion in total consolidated assets, we were required to conduct annual stress tests based on scenarios provided by the Federal Reserve, beginning in the fall of 2013, and will be required to publicly disclose the results of our stress tests going forward. This stress test requirement has increased our compliance costs. We anticipate that our pro forma capital ratios, as reflected in the stress test calculations under the required stress test scenarios, will be an important factor considered by the Federal Reserve Board in evaluating whether proposed payments of dividends or stock repurchases are consistent with its prudential expectations. Requirements to maintain higher levels of capital or liquidity to address potential adverse stress scenarios could adversely impact our net income and our return on equity.
Our FDIC insurance premiums may increase, which could negatively impact our results of operations.
Recent insured institution failures, as well as deterioration in banking and economic conditions, have significantly increased FDIC loss provisions, resulting in a decline of its deposit insurance fund to historical lows. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act made permanent a temporary increase in the limit on FDIC coverage to $250,000 per depositor. These developments have caused our FDIC insurance premiums to increase, and may cause additional increases. Certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act may further affect our FDIC insurance premiums. The Dodd-Frank Act includes provisions that change the assessment base for federal deposit insurance from the amount of insured deposits to average total consolidated assets less average tangible capital, eliminate the maximum size of the DIF, eliminate the requirement that the FDIC pay dividends to depository institutions when the reserve ratio exceeds certain thresholds, and increase the minimum reserve ratio of the DIF from 1.15% to 1.35%. Beginning in late 2010, the FDIC issued regulations implementing some of these changes. There is a risk that the banks' deposit insurance premiums will continue to increase if failures of insured depository institutions continue to deplete the DIF. Any such increase may negatively impact our financial condition and results of operations.
Non-compliance with the USA PATRIOT Act, Bank Secrecy Act or other laws and regulations could result in fines or sanctions.
The USA PATRIOT Act and the Bank Secrecy Act require financial institutions to develop programs to prevent financial institutions from being used for money laundering or the funding of terrorist activities. If such activities are detected, financial institutions are obligated to file suspicious activity reports with FinCEN. These rules require certain financial institutions to establish procedures for identifying and verifying the identity of customers seeking to open new accounts. Failure to comply with these regulations could result in fines or sanctions. Several banking institutions have received large fines for non-compliance with these laws and regulations. Although we have developed policies and procedures designed to assist in compliance with these laws and regulations, no assurance can be given that these policies and procedures will be effective in preventing violations of these laws and regulations.
Risks Related to Our Niche Businesses
Our premium finance business may involve a higher risk of delinquency or collection than our other lending operations, and could expose us to losses.
We provide financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums and life insurance premiums on a national basis through our wholly owned subsidiary, FIFC, and financing for the payment of commercial insurance premiums in Canada through our wholly owned subsidiary, FIFC Canada. Commercial insurance premium finance loans involve a different, and possibly higher, risk of delinquency or collection than life insurance premium finance loans and the loan portfolios of our bank subsidiaries because these loans are issued primarily through relationships with a large number of unaffiliated insurance agents and because the borrowers are located nationwide. As a result, risk management and general supervisory oversight may be difficult. As of December 31, 2015, we had $2.4 billion of commercial insurance premium finance loans outstanding, of which $2.1 billion were originated in the U.S. by FIFC and $278.3 million were originated in Canada by FIFC Canada. Together, these loans represented 14% of our total loan portfolio as of such date.
FIFC and FIFC Canada may also be more susceptible to third party fraud with respect to commercial insurance premium finance loans because these loans are originated and many times funded through relationships with unaffiliated insurance agents and brokers. In the second quarter of 2010, fraud perpetrated against a number of premium finance companies in the industry, including the property and casualty division of FIFC, increased both the Company's net charge-offs and provision for credit losses by $15.7 million. Acts of fraud are difficult to detect and deter, and we cannot assure investors that our risk management procedures and controls will prevent losses from fraudulent activity.
FIFC may be exposed to the risk of loss in our life insurance premium finance business because of fraud. While FIFC maintains a policy prohibiting the knowing financing of stranger-originated life insurance and has established procedures to identify and prevent the company from financing such policies, FIFC cannot be certain that it will never provide loans with respect to such a policy. In the event such policies were financed, a carrier could potentially put at risk the cash surrender value of a policy, which serves as FIFC's primary collateral, by challenging the validity of the insurance contract for lack of an insurable interest.
See the below risk factor “Widespread financial difficulties or credit downgrades among commercial and life insurance providers could lessen the value of the collateral securing our premium finance loans and impair the financial condition and liquidity of FIFC and FIFC Canada” for a discussion of further risks associated with our insurance premium finance activities.
While FIFC is licensed as required and carefully monitors compliance with regulation of each of its businesses, there can be no assurance that FIFC will not be negatively impacted by material changes in the regulatory environment. FIFC Canada is not required to be licensed in most provinces of Canada, but there can be no assurance that future regulations which impact the business of FIFC Canada will not be enacted.
Additionally, to the extent that affiliates of insurance carriers, banks, and other lending institutions add greater service and flexibility to their financing practices in the future, our competitive position and results of operations could be adversely affected. FIFC's life insurance premium finance business could be materially negatively impacted by changes in the federal or state estate tax provisions. There can be no assurance that FIFC will be able to continue to compete successfully in its markets.
Widespread financial difficulties or credit downgrades among commercial and life insurance providers could lessen the value of the collateral securing our premium finance loans and impair the financial condition and liquidity of FIFC and FIFC Canada.
FIFC and FIFC Canada's premium finance loans are primarily secured by the insurance policies financed by the loans. These insurance policies are written by a large number of insurance companies geographically dispersed throughout the country. Our premium finance receivables balances finance insurance policies which are spread among a large number of insurers; however, one of the insurers represents approximately 14% of such balances and two additional insurers each of which represents approximately 5% of such balances. FIFC and FIFC Canada consistently monitor carrier ratings and financial performance of our carriers. While FIFC and FIFC Canada can mitigate its risks as a result of this monitoring to the extent that commercial or life insurance providers experience widespread difficulties or credit downgrades, the value of our collateral will be reduced. FIFC and FIFC Canada are also subject to the possibility of insolvency of insurance carriers in the commercial and life insurance businesses that are in possession of our collateral. If one or more large nationwide insurers were to fail, the value of our portfolio could be significantly negatively impacted. A significant downgrade in the value of the collateral supporting our premium finance business could impair our ability to create liquidity for this business, which, in turn could negatively impact our ability to expand.
Proposed regulatory changes could significantly reduce loan volume and impair the financial condition of FIFC.
FinCEN has proposed additional AML rules that would require banks to gather and verify additional customer information, including beneficial ownership of borrowers. These requirements, if imposed on FIFC, would likely impose delays in processing premium finance loan applications and may result in transition of loan transaction volume to premium finance companies that are not subject to these AML rules, i.e., premium finance companies that are not affiliated with banks. A material reduction in loan
transaction volume would likely impair the financial condition of FIFC. There can be no assurance that the proposed additional AML rules will be issued by FinCEN in final form, when they might become effective, or whether they will apply to FIFC.
Our wealth management business in general, and WHI's brokerage operation, in particular, exposes us to certain risks associated with the securities industry.
Our wealth management business in general, and WHI's brokerage operations in particular, present special risks not borne by community banks that focus exclusively on community banking. For example, the brokerage industry is subject to fluctuations in the stock market that may have a significant adverse impact on transaction fees, customer activity and investment portfolio gains and losses. Likewise, additional or modified regulations may adversely affect our wealth management operations. Each of our wealth management operations is dependent on a small number of professionals whose departure could result in the loss of a significant number of customer accounts. A significant decline in fees and commissions or trading losses suffered in the investment portfolio could adversely affect our results of operations. In addition, we are subject to claim arbitration risk arising from customers who claim their investments were not suitable or that their portfolios were inappropriately traded. These risks increase when the market, as a whole, declines. The risks associated with retail brokerage may not be supported by the income generated by our wealth management operations.
ITEM 1B. UNRESOLVED STAFF COMMENTS
None.
ITEM 2. PROPERTIES
The Company’s executive offices are located at 9700 W. Higgins Road, Rosemont, Illinois. The Company also leases office locations and retail space at 231 S. LaSalle Street in downtown Chicago. The Company’s banks operate through 152 banking facilities, the majority of which are owned. The Company owns 224 automatic teller machines, the majority of which are housed at banking locations. The banking facilities are located in communities throughout the Chicago metropolitan area and southern Wisconsin. Excess space in certain properties is leased to third parties.
The Company’s wealth management subsidiaries have one location in downtown Chicago, one in Appleton, Wisconsin, and one in Safety Harbor, Florida, all of which are leased, as well as office locations at several of our banks. Wintrust Mortgage is headquartered in our corporate headquarters in Rosemont, Illinois and has 55 locations in 12 states, all of which are leased, as well as office locations at several of our banks. FIFC has one location in Northbrook, Illinois which is owned and locations in Jersey City, New Jersey and Long Island, New York which are leased. FIFC Canada has three locations in Canada that are leased, located in Toronto, Ontario, Mississauga, Ontario and Vancouver, British Columbia. Tricom has one location in Menomonee Falls, Wisconsin which is owned. In addition, the Company owns other real estate acquired for further expansion that, when considered in the aggregate, is not material to the Company’s financial position.
ITEM 3. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
The Company and its subsidiaries, from time to time, are subject to pending and threatened legal action and proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business.
In accordance with applicable accounting principles, the Company establishes an accrued liability for litigation and threatened litigation actions and proceedings when those actions present loss contingencies which are both probable and estimable. In actions for which a loss is reasonably possible in future periods, the Company determines whether it can estimate a loss or range of possible loss. To determine whether a possible loss is estimable, the Company reviews and evaluates its material litigation on an ongoing basis, in conjunction with any outside counsel handling the matter, in light of potentially relevant factual and legal developments. This review may include information learned through the discovery process, rulings on substantive or dispositive motions, and settlement discussions.
On March 15, 2012, a former mortgage loan originator employed by Wintrust Mortgage Company, named Wintrust, Barrington Bank and its subsidiary, Wintrust Mortgage Company, as defendants in a Fair Labor Standards Act class action lawsuit filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois. The suit asserts that Wintrust Mortgage Company violated the federal Fair Labor Standards Act and challenges the manner in which Wintrust Mortgage Company classified its loan originators and compensated them for their work. The suit also seeks to assert these claims as a class. On September 30, 2013, the Court entered an order conditionally certifying an “opt-in” class in this case. Notice to the potential class members was sent on or about October 22, 2013, primarily informing the putative class of the right to opt-into the class and setting a deadline for same. Approximately 15% of the notice recipients joined the class. On September 26, 2014, the Court stayed actions by opt-in plaintiffs with arbitration agreements, which reduced the class size by more than 40%. The Court also denied the opt-in plaintiffs’ motion for equitable tolling, which the Company anticipates will reduce the class size by an additional 15%. On April 30, 2015, the parties settled the dispute for an immaterial amount and the Court approved the settlement on June 17, 2015.
On January 15, 2015, Lehman Brothers Holdings, Inc. ("Lehman Holdings") sent a demand letter asserting that Wintrust Mortgage must indemnify it for losses arising from loans sold by Wintrust Mortgage to Lehman Brothers Bank, FSB under a Loan Purchase Agreement between Wintrust Mortgage, as successor to SGB Corporation, and Lehman Brothers Bank. The demand was the precursor for triggering the alternative dispute resolution process mandated by the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Lehman Holdings triggered the mandatory alternative dispute resolution process on October 16, 2015. On February 3, 2016, following a ruling by the federal Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit that was adverse to Lehman Holdings on the statute of limitations that is applicable to similar loan purchase claims, Lehman Holdings filed a complaint against Wintrust Mortgage and 150 other entities from which it had purchased loans in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York. Wintrust Mortgage has not been served with the new complaint. The mandatory mediation is scheduled for March 16, 2016.
The Company has reserved an amount for the Lehman Holdings demand that is immaterial to its results of operations or financial condition. Such litigation and threatened litigation actions necessarily involve substantial uncertainty and it is not possible at this time to predict the ultimate resolution or to determine whether, or to what extent, any loss with respect to these legal proceedings may exceed the amounts reserved by the Company.
On August 28, 2015, Wintrust Mortgage received a demand from RFC Liquidating Trust asserting that that Wintrust Mortgage is liable to it for losses arising from loans sold by Wintrust Mortgage or its predecessors to Residential Funding Company LLC and/or related entities. No litigation has been initiated and the range of liability is not reasonably estimable at this time and it is not foreseeable when sufficient information will become available to provide a basis for recording a reserve, should a reserve ultimately be required.
On August 13, 2015, BMO Harris Financial Advisors (“BHFA”) filed an arbitration demand with the FINRA seeking damages and a permanent injunction and a complaint with the Circuit Court for Cook County, Illinois seeking a temporary restraining order against one of its former financial advisors and a current financial advisor with WHI. A narrow and limited temporary injunction was entered and the matter was referred to FINRA for arbitration. In November 2015, BHFA added WHI as a co-defendant in the arbitration action, alleging that WHI tortiously interfered with BHFA’s contract with its former financial advisor. As discovery is still in the preliminary stages, the range of liability is not reasonably estimable at this time and it is not foreseeable when sufficient information will become available to provide a basis for recording a reserve, should a reserve ultimately be required. A hearing on the merits has been set for September 12 - 15, 2016.
Based on information currently available and upon consultation with counsel, management believes that the eventual outcome of any pending or threatened legal actions and proceedings will not have a material adverse effect on the operations or financial condition of the Company. However, it is possible that the ultimate resolution of these matters, if unfavorable, may be material to the results of operations or financial condition for a particular period.
ITEM 4. MINE SAFETY DISCLOSURES
Not applicable.
PART II
ITEM 5.
MARKET FOR REGISTRANT’S COMMON EQUITY, RELATED STOCKHOLDER MATTERS AND ISSUER PURCHASES OF EQUITY SECURITIES
The Company’s common stock is traded on The NASDAQ Global Select Stock Market under the symbol WTFC. The following table sets forth the high and low sales prices reported on NASDAQ for the common stock by fiscal quarter during 2015 and 2014.
Performance Graph
The following performance graph compares the five-year percentage change in the Company’s cumulative shareholder return on common stock compared with the cumulative total return on composites of (1) all NASDAQ Global Select Market stocks for United States companies (broad market index) and (2) all NASDAQ Global Select Market bank stocks (peer group index). Cumulative total return is computed by dividing the sum of the cumulative amount of dividends for the measurement period and the difference between the Company’s share price at the end and the beginning of the measurement period by the share price at the beginning of the measurement period. The NASDAQ Global Select Market for United States companies’ index comprises all domestic common shares traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market and the NASDAQ Small-Cap Market. The NASDAQ Global Select Market bank stocks index comprises all banks traded on the NASDAQ Global Select Market and the NASDAQ Small-Cap Market.
This graph and other information furnished in the section titled “Performance Graph” under this Part II, Item 5 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K shall not be deemed to be “soliciting” materials or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, as amended.
Approximate Number of Equity Security Holders
As of February 24, 2016 there were approximately 1,702 shareholders of record of the Company’s common stock.
Dividends on Common Stock
The Company’s Board of Directors approved the first semi-annual dividend on the Company’s common stock in January 2000 and continued to approve a semi-annual dividend until quarterly dividends were approved in 2014 and 2015. The payment of dividends is subject to statutory restrictions and restrictions arising under the terms of the Company's 5.00% Non-Cumulative Perpetual Convertible Preferred Stock, Series C (the "Series C Preferred Stock"), the terms of the Company's Fixed-to-Floating Non-Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series D (the "Series D Preferred Stock"), the terms of the Company’s Trust Preferred Securities offerings and under certain financial covenants in the Company’s revolving and term facilities. Under the terms of these separate facilities entered into on December 15, 2014 and subsequently amended in December 2015, the Company is prohibited from paying dividends on any equity interests, including its common stock and preferred stock, if such payments would cause the Company to be in default under its facilities or exceed a certain threshold.
The following is a summary of the cash dividends paid in 2015 and 2014:
On January 28, 2016, Wintrust Financial Corporation announced that the Company’s Board of Directors approved a quarterly cash dividend of $0.12 per share of outstanding common stock. The dividend was paid on February 25, 2016 to shareholders of record as of February 11, 2016.
Because the Company’s consolidated net income consists largely of net income of the banks and certain wealth management subsidiaries, the Company’s ability to pay dividends generally depends upon its receipt of dividends from these entities. The banks’ ability to pay dividends is regulated by banking statutes. See “Supervision and Regulation - Payment of Dividends and Share Repurchases” in Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, the banks and certain wealth management subsidiaries paid $22.2 million, $77.0 million and $112.8 million, respectively, in dividends to the Company.
Reference is also made to Note 18 to the Consolidated Financial Statements and “Liquidity and Capital Resources” contained in Item 8 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K for a description of the restrictions on the ability of certain subsidiaries to transfer funds to the Company in the form of dividends.
Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities
No purchases of the Company’s common shares were made by or on behalf of the Company or any “affiliated purchaser” as defined in Rule 10b-18(a)(3) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, during the year ended December 31, 2015. There is currently no authorization to repurchase shares of outstanding common stock.
ITEM 6.
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(1)
Net revenue includes net interest income and non-interest income
(2)
See Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Non-GAAP Financial Measures/Ratios,” for a reconciliation of this performance measure/ratio to GAAP.
(3)
The net overhead ratio is calculated by netting total non-interest expense and total non-interest income, annualizing this amount, and dividing by that period’s total average assets. A lower ratio indicates a higher degree of efficiency.
(4)
The efficiency ratio is calculated by dividing total non-interest expense by tax-equivalent net revenue (less securities gains or losses). A lower ratio indicates more efficient revenue generation.
(5)
The allowance for credit losses includes both the allowance for loan losses and the allowance for unfunded lending-related commitments, but excludes the allowance for covered loan losses.
(6)
Total shareholders’ equity minus preferred stock and total intangible assets divided by total assets minus total intangible assets.
(7)
Asset quality ratios exclude covered loans.
ITEM 7.
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Forward Looking Statements
This document contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of federal securities laws. Forward-looking information can be identified through the use of words such as “intend,” “plan,” “project,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “contemplate,” “possible,” “will,” “may,” “should,” “would” and “could.” Forward-looking statements and information are not historical facts, are premised on many factors and assumptions, and represent only management’s expectations, estimates and projections regarding future events. Similarly, these statements are not guarantees of future performance and involve certain risks and uncertainties that are difficult to predict, which may include, but are not limited to, those listed below and the Risk Factors discussed under Item 1A
ITEM 7A. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISKS
Effects of Inflation
A banking organization’s assets and liabilities are primarily monetary. Changes in the rate of inflation do not have as great an impact on the financial condition of a bank as do changes in interest rates. Moreover, interest rates do not necessarily change at the same percentage as inflation. Accordingly, changes in inflation are not expected to have a material impact on the Company.
Asset-Liability Management
As an ongoing part of its financial strategy, the Company attempts to manage the impact of fluctuations in market interest rates on net interest income. This effort entails providing a reasonable balance between interest rate risk, credit risk, liquidity risk and maintenance of yield. Asset-liability management policies are established and monitored by management in conjunction with the boards of directors of the banks, subject to general oversight by the Risk Management Committee of the Company’s Board. The policies establish guidelines for acceptable limits on the sensitivity of the market value of assets and liabilities to changes in interest rates.
Interest rate risk arises when the maturity or re-pricing periods and interest rate indices of the interest earning assets, interest bearing liabilities, and derivative financial instruments are different. It is the risk that changes in the level of market interest rates will result in disproportionate changes in the value of, and the net earnings generated from, the Company’s interest earning assets, interest bearing liabilities and derivative financial instruments. The Company continuously monitors not only the organization’s current net interest margin, but also the historical trends of these margins. In addition, management attempts to identify potential adverse changes in net interest income in future years as a result interest rate fluctuations by performing simulation analysis of various interest rate environments. If a potential adverse change in net interest margin and/or net income is identified, management would take appropriate actions with its asset-liability structure to mitigate these potentially adverse situations. Please refer to Item 7 “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” for further discussion of the net interest margin.
Since the Company’s primary source of interest bearing liabilities is from customer deposits, the Company’s ability to manage the types and terms of such deposits is somewhat limited by customer preferences and local competition in the market areas in which the banks operate. The rates, terms and interest rate indices of the Company’s interest earning assets result primarily from the Company’s strategy of investing in loans and securities that permit the Company to limit its exposure to interest rate risk, together with credit risk, while at the same time achieving an acceptable interest rate spread.
The Company’s exposure to interest rate risk is reviewed on a regular basis by management and the Risk Management Committees of the boards of directors of the banks and the Company. The objective of the review is to measure the effect on net income and to adjust balance sheet and derivative financial instruments to minimize the inherent risk while at the same time maximize net interest income.
The following interest rate scenarios display the percentage change in net interest income over a one-year time horizon assuming increases and decreases of 100 and 200 basis points. The Static Shock Scenario results incorporate actual cash flows and repricing characteristics for balance sheet instruments following an instantaneous, parallel change in market rates based upon a static (i.e. no growth or constant) balance sheet. Conversely, the Ramp Scenario results incorporate management’s projections of future volume and pricing of each of the product lines following a gradual, parallel change in market rates over twelve months. Actual results may differ from these simulated results due to timing, magnitude, and frequency of interest rate changes as well as changes in market conditions and management strategies. The interest rate sensitivity for both the Static Shock and Ramp Scenarios at December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014 is as follows:
One method utilized by financial institutions, including the Company, to manage interest rate risk is to enter into derivative financial instruments. Derivative financial instruments include interest rate swaps, interest rate caps and floors, futures, forwards, option contracts and other financial instruments with similar characteristics. Additionally, the Company enters into commitments to fund certain mortgage loans (interest rate locks) to be sold into the secondary market and forward commitments for the future delivery of mortgage loans to third party investors. See Note 20 of the Financial Statements presented under Item 8
ITEM 8. FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND SUPPLEMENTARY DATA
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries
We have audited the accompanying consolidated statements of condition of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
We conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also includes assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe our audits provide a reasonable basis for our opinion.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the consolidated financial position of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries at December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the consolidated results of its operations and its cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries' internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) and our report dated February 29, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 29, 2016
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CONDITION
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE INCOME
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN SHAREHOLDERS’ EQUITY
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
See accompanying Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
(1) Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The accounting and reporting policies of Wintrust Financial Corporation ("Wintrust" or the "Company") and its subsidiaries conform to generally accepted accounting principles in the United States and prevailing practices of the banking industry. In the preparation of the consolidated financial statements, management is required to make certain estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts contained in the consolidated financial statements. Management believes that the estimates made are reasonable; however, changes in estimates may be required if economic or other conditions change beyond management’s expectations. Reclassifications of certain prior year amounts have been made to conform to the current year presentation. The following is a summary of the Company’s significant accounting policies.
Principles of Consolidation
The consolidated financial statements of Wintrust include the accounts of the Company and its subsidiaries. All significant intercompany accounts and transactions have been eliminated in the consolidated financial statements.
Earnings per Share
Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing income available to common shareholders by the weighted-average number of common shares outstanding for the period. Diluted earnings per share reflects the potential dilution that would occur if securities or other contracts to issue common stock were exercised or converted into common stock or resulted in the issuance of common stock that then shared in the earnings of the Company. The weighted-average number of common shares outstanding is increased by the assumed conversion of outstanding convertible preferred stock and tangible equity unit shares from the beginning of the year or date of issuance, if later, and the number of common shares that would be issued assuming the exercise of stock options, the issuance of restricted shares and stock warrants using the treasury stock method. The adjustments to the weighted-average common shares outstanding are only made when such adjustments will dilute earnings per common share. Net income applicable to common shares used in the diluted earnings per share calculation can be affected by the conversion of the Company's preferred stock. Where the effect of this conversion would reduce the loss per share or increase the income per share, net income applicable to common shares is not adjusted by the associated preferred dividends.
Business Combinations
The Company accounts for business combinations under the acquisition method of accounting in accordance with ASC 805, “Business Combinations” (“ASC 805”). The Company recognizes the fair value of the assets acquired and liabilities assumed, immediately expenses transaction costs and accounts for restructuring plans separately from the business combination. There is no separate recognition of the acquired allowance for loan losses on the acquirer’s balance sheet as credit related factors are incorporated directly into the fair value of the loans recorded at the acquisition date. The excess of the cost of the acquisition over the fair value of the net tangible and intangible assets acquired is recorded as goodwill. Alternatively, a gain is recorded equal to the amount by which the fair value of assets purchased exceeds the fair value of liabilities assumed and consideration paid.
Results of operations of the acquired business are included in the income statement from the effective date of acquisition.
Cash Equivalents
For purposes of the consolidated statements of cash flows, Wintrust considers cash on hand, cash items in the process of collection, non-interest bearing amounts due from correspondent banks, federal funds sold and securities purchased under resale agreements with original maturities of three months or less, to be cash equivalents.
Securities
The Company classifies securities upon purchase in one of three categories: trading, held-to-maturity, or available-for-sale. Debt and equity securities held for resale are classified as trading securities. Debt securities for which the Company has the ability and positive intent to hold until maturity are classified as held-to-maturity. All other securities are classified as available-for-sale as they may be sold prior to maturity in response to changes in the Company’s interest rate risk profile, funding needs, demand for collateralized deposits by public entities or other reasons.
Held-to-maturity securities are stated at amortized cost, which represents actual cost adjusted for premium amortization and discount accretion using methods that approximate the effective interest method. Available-for-sale securities are stated at fair value, with unrealized gains and losses, net of related taxes, included in shareholders’ equity as a separate component of other comprehensive income. Trading account securities are stated at fair value. Realized and unrealized gains and losses from sales and fair value adjustments are included in other non-interest income.
Declines in the fair value of held-to-maturity and available-for-sale investment securities (with certain exceptions for debt securities noted below) that are deemed to be other-than-temporary are charged to earnings as a realized loss, and a new cost basis for the securities is established. In evaluating other-than-temporary impairment, management considers the length of time and extent to which the fair value has been less than cost, the financial condition and near-term prospects of the issuer, and the intent and ability of the Company to retain its investment in the issuer for a period of time sufficient to allow for any anticipated recovery in fair value in the near term. Declines in the fair value of debt securities below amortized cost are deemed to be other-than-temporary in circumstances where: (1) the Company has the intent to sell a security; (2) it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery of its amortized cost basis; or (3) the Company does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. If the Company intends to sell a security or if it is more likely than not that the Company will be required to sell the security before recovery, an other-than-temporary impairment write-down is recognized in earnings equal to the difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and its fair value. If an entity does not intend to sell the security or it is not more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before recovery, the other-than-temporary impairment write-down is separated into an amount representing credit loss, which is recognized in earnings, and an amount related to all other factors, which is recognized in other comprehensive income.
Interest and dividends, including amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts, are recognized as interest income when earned. Realized gains and losses on sales (using the specific identification method) and declines in value judged to be other-than-temporary are included in non-interest income.
Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank Stock
Investments in Federal Home Loan Bank and Federal Reserve Bank stock are restricted as to redemption and are carried at cost.
Securities Purchased Under Resale Agreements and Securities Sold Under Repurchase Agreements
Securities purchased under resale agreements and securities sold under repurchase agreements are generally treated as collateralized financing transactions and are recorded at the amount at which the securities were acquired or sold plus accrued interest. Securities, generally U.S. government and Federal agency securities, pledged as collateral under these financing arrangements cannot be sold by the secured party. The fair value of collateral either received from or provided to a third party is monitored and additional collateral is obtained or requested to be returned as deemed appropriate.
Brokerage Customer Receivables
The Company, under an agreement with an out-sourced securities clearing firm, extends credit to its brokerage customers to finance their purchases of securities on margin. The Company receives income from interest charged on such extensions of credit. Brokerage customer receivables represent amounts due on margin balances. Securities owned by customers are held as collateral for these receivables.
Mortgage Loans Held-for-Sale
Mortgage loans are classified as held-for-sale when originated or acquired with the intent to sell the loan into the secondary market. Market conditions or other developments may change management’s intent with respect to the disposition of these loans and loans previously classified as mortgage loans held-for-sale may be reclassified to the loan portfolio, with the balance transferred at the lower of cost or market.
ASC 825, “Financial Instruments” provides entities with an option to report selected financial assets and liabilities at fair value. Mortgage loans originated by Wintrust Mortgage are measured at fair value which is determined by reference to investor prices for loan products with similar characteristics. Changes in fair value are recognized in mortgage banking revenue.
Loans, Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Covered Loan Losses and Allowance for Losses on Lending-Related Commitments
Loans are generally reported at the principal amount outstanding, net of unearned income. Interest income is recognized when earned. Loan origination fees and certain direct origination costs are deferred and amortized over the expected life of the loan as an adjustment to the yield using methods that approximate the effective interest method. Finance charges on premium finance receivables are earned over the term of the loan, using a method which approximates the effective yield method.
Interest income is not accrued on loans where management has determined that the borrowers may be unable to meet contractual principal and/or interest obligations, or where interest or principal is 90 days or more past due, unless the loans are adequately secured and in the process of collection. Cash receipts on non-accrual loans are generally applied to the principal balance until the remaining balance is considered collectible, at which time interest income may be recognized when received.
The Company maintains its allowance for loan losses at a level believed appropriate by management to absorb probable losses inherent in the loan portfolio and is based on the size and current risk characteristics of the loan portfolio, an assessment of internal problem loan reporting system loans and actual loss experience, changes in the composition of the loan portfolio, historical loss experience, changes in lending policies and procedures, including underwriting standards and collections, charge-off and recovery practices, changes in experience, ability and depth of lending management and staff, changes in national and local economic and business conditions and developments, including the condition of various market segments and changes in the volume and severity of past due and classified loans and trends in the volume of non-accrual loans, troubled debt restructurings and other loan modifications. The allowance for loan losses also includes an element for estimated probable but undetected losses and for imprecision in the credit risk models used to calculate the allowance. Loans with a credit risk rating of a 6 through 9 are reviewed on a monthly basis to determine if (a) an amount is deemed uncollectible (a charge-off) or (b) it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect amounts due in accordance with the original contractual terms of the loan (an impaired loan). If a loan is impaired, the carrying amount of the loan is compared to the expected payments to be received, discounted at the loan’s original rate, or for collateral dependent loans, to the fair value of the collateral less the estimated cost to sell. Any shortfall is recorded as a specific reserve. For loans with a credit risk rating of 7 or better that are not considered impaired loans, reserves are established based on the type of loan collateral, if any, and the assigned credit risk rating. Determination of the allowance is inherently subjective as it requires significant estimates, including the amounts and timing of expected future cash flows on impaired loans, estimated losses on pools of homogeneous loans based on the average historical loss experience, and consideration of current environmental factors and economic trends, all of which may be susceptible to significant change. Loan losses are charged off against the allowance, while recoveries are credited to the allowance. A provision for credit losses is charged to income based on management’s periodic evaluation of the factors previously mentioned, as well as other pertinent factors. Evaluations are conducted at least quarterly and more frequently if deemed necessary.
Under accounting guidance applicable to loans acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination, the excess of cash flows expected at acquisition over the estimated fair value is referred to as the accretable yield and is recognized in interest income over the remaining estimated life of the loans, using the effective-interest method. The difference between contractually required payments at acquisition and the cash flows expected to be collected at acquisition is referred to as the nonaccretable difference. Changes in the expected cash flows from the date of acquisition will either impact the accretable yield or result in a charge to the provision for credit losses. Subsequent decreases to expected principal cash flows will result in a charge to provision for credit losses and a corresponding increase to allowance for loan losses. Subsequent increases in expected principal cash flows will result in recovery of any previously recorded allowance for loan losses, to the extent applicable, and a reclassification from nonaccretable difference to accretable yield for any remaining increase. All changes in expected interest cash flows, including the impact of prepayments, will result in reclassifications to/from nonaccretable differences.
In estimating expected losses, the Company evaluates loans for impairment in accordance ASC 310, “Receivables.” A loan is considered impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that a creditor will be unable to collect all amounts due pursuant to the contractual terms of the loan. Impaired loans include non-accrual loans, restructured loans or loans with principal and/or interest at risk, even if the loan is current with all payments of principal and interest. Impairment is measured by estimating the fair value of the loan based on the present value of expected cash flows, the market price of the loan, or the fair value of the underlying collateral less costs to sell. If the estimated fair value of the loan is less than the recorded book value, a valuation allowance is established as a component of the allowance for loan losses. For TDRs in which impairment is calculated by the present value of future cash flows, the Company records interest income representing the decrease in impairment resulting from the passage of time during the respective period, which differs from interest income from contractually required interest on these specific loans.
The Company also maintains an allowance for lending-related commitments, specifically unfunded loan commitments and letters of credit, to provide for the risk of loss inherent in these arrangements. The allowance is computed using a methodology similar to that used to determine the allowance for loan losses. This allowance is included in other liabilities on the statement of condition while the corresponding provision for these losses is recorded as a component of the provision for credit losses.
Mortgage Servicing Rights
Mortgage Servicing Rights (“MSRs”) are recorded in the Consolidated Statements of Condition at fair value in accordance with ASC 860, “Transfers and Servicing.” The Company originates mortgage loans for sale to the secondary market, the majority of which are sold without retaining servicing rights. There are certain loans, however, that are originated and sold with servicing rights retained. MSRs associated with loans originated and sold, where servicing is retained, are capitalized at the time of sale at fair value based on the future net cash flows expected to be realized for performing the servicing activities, and included in other assets in the Consolidated Statements of Condition. The change in the fair value of MSRs is recorded as a component of mortgage banking revenue in non-interest income in the Consolidated Statements of Income. A third party valuation is obtained for purposes of measuring fair value related to a portion of MSRs. This third party valuation stratifies the servicing rights into pools based on homogenous characteristics, such as product type and interest rate. The fair value of each servicing rights pool is calculated based
on the present value of estimated future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with the risk associated with that pool, given current market conditions. Estimates of fair value include assumptions about prepayment speeds, interest rates and other factors which are subject to change over time. Changes in these underlying assumptions could cause the fair value of MSRs to change significantly in the future.
Premises and Equipment
Premises and equipment, including leasehold improvements, are stated at cost less accumulated depreciation and amortization. Depreciation and amortization are computed using the straight-line method over the estimated useful lives of the related assets. Useful lives range from two to 12 years for furniture, fixtures and equipment, two to five years for software and computer-related equipment and seven to 39 years for buildings and improvements. Land improvements are amortized over a period of 15 years and leasehold improvements are amortized over the shorter of the useful life of the improvement or the term of the respective lease including any lease renewals deemed to be reasonably assured. Land and antique furnishings and artwork are not subject to depreciation. Expenditures for major additions and improvements are capitalized, and maintenance and repairs are charged to expense as incurred. Internal costs related to the configuration and installation of new software and the modification of existing software that provides additional functionality are capitalized.
Long-lived depreciable assets are evaluated periodically for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying amount may not be recoverable. Impairment exists when the expected undiscounted future cash flows of a long-lived asset are less than its carrying value. In that event, a loss is recognized for the difference between the carrying value and the estimated fair value of the asset based on a quoted market price, if applicable, or a discounted cash flow analysis. Impairment losses are recognized in other non-interest expense.
FDIC Loss Share Asset (Liability)
In conjunction with FDIC-assisted transactions, the Company entered into loss share agreements with the FDIC. These agreements cover losses incurred with respect to loans, foreclosed real estate and certain other assets. The loss share assets and liabilities are measured separately from the loan portfolios because they are not contractually embedded in the loans and are not transferable with the loans should the Company choose to dispose of them. Fair values at the acquisition dates were estimated based on projected cash flows available for loss-share based on the credit adjustments estimated for each loan pool and the loss share percentages. The loss share assets and liabilities are recorded as FDIC indemnification assets and other liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Condition. Subsequent to the acquisition date, reimbursements received from the FDIC for actual incurred losses will reduce the FDIC loss share assets. Reductions to expected losses, to the extent such reductions to expected losses are the result of an improvement to the actual or expected cash flows from the covered assets, will also reduce the FDIC loss share assets and, if necessary, increase any loss share liability when necessary reductions exceed the current value of the FDIC loss share assets. In accordance with certain clawback provisions, the Company may be required to reimburse the FDIC when actual losses are less than certain thresholds established for each loss share agreement. The balance of these estimated reimbursements and any related amortization are adjusted periodically for changes in the expected losses on covered assets. On the Consolidated Statements of Condition, estimated reimbursements from clawback provisions are recorded as a reduction to the FDIC loss share assets or, if necessary, an increase to the loss share liability. Although these assets are contractual receivables from the FDIC, there are no contractual interest rates. Additional expected losses, to the extent such expected losses result in the recognition of an allowance for loan losses, will increase the FDIC loss share assets. The corresponding amortization or accretion is recorded as a component of non-interest income on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
Other Real Estate Owned
Other real estate owned is comprised of real estate acquired in partial or full satisfaction of loans and is included in other assets. Other real estate owned is recorded at its estimated fair value less estimated selling costs at the date of transfer. Any excess of the related loan balance over the fair value less expected selling costs is charged to the allowance for loan losses. In contrast, any excess of the fair value less expected selling costs over the related loan balance is recorded as a recovery of prior charge-offs on the loan and, if any portion of the excess exceeds prior charge-offs, as an increase to earnings. Subsequent changes in value are reported as adjustments to the carrying amount and are recorded in other non-interest expense. Gains and losses upon sale, if any, are also charged to other non-interest expense. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, other real estate owned, excluding covered other real estate owned, totaled $43.9 million and $45.6 million, respectively.
Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
Goodwill represents the excess of the cost of an acquisition over the fair value of net assets acquired. Other intangible assets represent purchased assets that also lack physical substance but can be distinguished from goodwill because of contractual or other legal rights or because the asset is capable of being sold or exchanged either on its own or in combination with a related contract, asset or liability. In accordance with accounting standards, goodwill is not amortized, but rather is tested for impairment on an
annual basis or more frequently when events warrant, using a qualitative or quantitative approach. Intangible assets which have finite lives are amortized over their estimated useful lives and also are subject to impairment testing. All of the Company’s other intangible assets have finite lives and are amortized over varying periods not exceeding twenty years.
Bank-Owned Life Insurance
The Company owns BOLI on certain executives. BOLI balances are recorded at their cash surrender values and are included in other assets. Changes in the cash surrender values are included in non-interest income. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, BOLI totaled $136.2 million and $121.4 million, respectively.
Derivative Instruments
The Company enters into derivative transactions principally to protect against the risk of adverse price or interest rate movements on the future cash flows or the value of certain assets and liabilities. The Company is also required to recognize certain contracts and commitments, including certain commitments to fund mortgage loans held-for-sale, as derivatives when the characteristics of those contracts and commitments meet the definition of a derivative. The Company accounts for derivatives in accordance with ASC 815, “Derivatives and Hedging”, which requires that all derivative instruments be recorded in the statement of condition at fair value. The accounting for changes in the fair value of a derivative instrument depends on whether it has been designated and qualifies as part of a hedging relationship and further, on the type of hedging relationship.
Derivative instruments designated in a hedge relationship to mitigate exposure to changes in the fair value of an asset or liability attributable to a particular risk, such as interest rate risk, are considered fair value hedges. Derivative instruments designated in a hedge relationship to mitigate exposure to variability in expected future cash flows, or other types of forecasted transactions, are considered cash flow hedges. Formal documentation of the relationship between a derivative instrument and a hedged asset or liability, as well as the risk-management objective and strategy for undertaking each hedge transaction and an assessment of effectiveness is required at inception to apply hedge accounting. In addition, formal documentation of ongoing effectiveness testing is required to maintain hedge accounting.
Fair value hedges are accounted for by recording the changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument and the changes in the fair value related to the risk being hedged of the hedged asset or liability on the statement of condition with corresponding offsets recorded in the income statement. The adjustment to the hedged asset or liability is included in the basis of the hedged item, while the fair value of the derivative is recorded as a freestanding asset or liability. Actual cash receipts or payments and related amounts accrued during the period on derivatives included in a fair value hedge relationship are recorded as adjustments to the interest income or expense recorded on the hedged asset or liability.
Cash flow hedges are accounted for by recording the changes in the fair value of the derivative instrument on the statement of condition as either a freestanding asset or liability, with a corresponding offset recorded in other comprehensive income within shareholders’ equity, net of deferred taxes. Amounts are reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive income to interest expense in the period or periods the hedged forecasted transaction affects earnings.
Under both the fair value and cash flow hedge scenarios, changes in the fair value of derivatives not considered to be highly effective in hedging the change in fair value or the expected cash flows of the hedged item are recognized in earnings as non-interest income during the period of the change.
Derivative instruments that are not designated as hedges according to accounting guidance are reported on the statement of condition at fair value and the changes in fair value are recognized in earnings as non-interest income during the period of the change.
Commitments to fund mortgage loans (i.e. interest rate locks) to be sold into the secondary market and forward commitments for the future delivery of these mortgage loans are accounted for as derivatives and are not designated in hedging relationships. Fair values of these mortgage derivatives are estimated based on changes in mortgage rates from the date of the commitments. Changes in the fair values of these derivatives are included in mortgage banking revenue.
Forward currency contracts used to manage foreign exchange risk associated with certain assets are accounted for as derivatives and are not designated in hedging relationships. Foreign currency derivatives are recorded at fair value based on prevailing currency exchange rates at the measurement date. Changes in the fair values of these derivatives resulting from fluctuations in currency rates are recognized in earnings as non-interest income during the period of change.
Periodically, the Company sells options to an unrelated bank or dealer for the right to purchase certain securities held within the banks’ investment portfolios (“covered call options”). These option transactions are designed primarily as an economic hedge to compensate for net interest margin compression by increasing the total return associated with holding the related securities as earning assets by using fee income generated from these options. These transactions are not designated in hedging relationships
pursuant to accounting guidance and, accordingly, changes in fair values of these contracts, are reported in other non-interest income. There were no covered call option contracts outstanding as of December 31, 2015 and 2014.
Trust Assets, Assets Under Management and Brokerage Assets
Assets held in fiduciary or agency capacity for customers are not included in the consolidated financial statements as they are not assets of Wintrust or its subsidiaries. Fee income is recognized on an accrual basis and is included as a component of non-interest income.
Income Taxes
Wintrust and its subsidiaries file a consolidated Federal income tax return. Income tax expense is based upon income in the consolidated financial statements rather than amounts reported on the income tax return. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the estimated future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using currently enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized as an income tax benefit or income tax expense in the period that includes the enactment date.
Positions taken in the Company’s tax returns may be subject to challenge by the taxing authorities upon examination. In accordance with applicable accounting guidance, uncertain tax positions are initially recognized in the financial statements when it is more likely than not the positions will be sustained upon examination by the tax authorities. Such tax positions are both initially and subsequently measured as the largest amount of tax benefit that is greater than 50% likely being realized upon settlement with the tax authority, assuming full knowledge of the position and all relevant facts. Interest and penalties on income tax uncertainties are classified within income tax expense in the income statement.
Stock-Based Compensation Plans
In accordance with ASC 718, “Compensation - Stock Compensation”, compensation cost is measured as the fair value of the awards on their date of grant. A Black-Scholes model is utilized to estimate the fair value of stock options and the market price of the Company’s stock at the date of grant is used to estimate the fair value of restricted stock awards. Compensation cost is recognized over the required service period, generally defined as the vesting period. For awards with graded vesting, compensation cost is recognized on a straight-line basis over the requisite service period for the entire award.
Accounting guidance requires the recognition of stock based compensation for the number of awards that are ultimately expected to vest. As a result, recognized compensation expense for stock options and restricted share awards is reduced for estimated forfeitures prior to vesting. Forfeitures rates are estimated for each type of award based on historical forfeiture experience. Estimated forfeitures will be reassessed in subsequent periods and may change based on new facts and circumstances.
The Company issues new shares to satisfy option exercises and vesting of restricted shares.
Comprehensive Income
Comprehensive income consists of net income and other comprehensive income. Other comprehensive income includes unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities, net of deferred taxes, changes in deferred gains and losses on investment securities transferred from available-for-sale securities to held-to-maturity securities, net of deferred taxes, adjustments related to cash flow hedges, net of deferred taxes and foreign currency translation adjustments, net of taxes.
Stock Repurchases
The Company periodically repurchases shares of its outstanding common stock through open market purchases or other methods. Repurchased shares are recorded as treasury shares on the trade date using the treasury stock method, and the cash paid is recorded as treasury stock.
Foreign Currency Translation
The Company revalues assets, liabilities, revenue and expense denominated in non-U.S. currencies into U.S. dollars at the end of each month using applicable exchange rates.
Gains and losses relating to translating functional currency financial statements for U.S. reporting are included in other comprehensive income. Gains and losses relating to the remeasurement of transactions to the functional currency are reported in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
New Accounting Pronouncements Adopted
In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-01, “Investments - Equity Method and Joint Ventures (Topic 323): Accounting for Investments in Qualified Affordable Housing Projects,” to provide guidance on accounting for investments by a reporting entity in flow-through limited liability entities that invest in affordable housing projects that qualify for the low-income housing tax credit. This ASU permits new accounting treatment, if certain conditions are met, which allows the Company to amortize the initial cost of an investment in proportion to the amount of tax credits and other tax benefits received with recognition of the investment performance in income tax expense. This guidance was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2014 and did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In January 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-04, “Receivables - Troubled Debt Restructurings by Creditors (Topic 310-40): Reclassification of Residential Real Estate Collateralized Consumer Mortgage Loans upon Foreclosure,” to address diversity in practice and clarify guidance regarding the accounting for an in-substance repossession or foreclosure of residential real estate collateral. This ASU clarifies that an in-substance repossession or foreclosure occurs upon either the creditor obtaining legal title to the residential real estate property upon completion of a foreclosure or the borrower conveying all interest in the residential real estate property to the creditor. Additionally, this ASU requires disclosure of both the amount of foreclosed residential real estate property held by the Company and the recorded investment in consumer mortgage loans collateralized by residential real estate property that are in the process of foreclosure. This guidance was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2014 and did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
(2) Recent Accounting Pronouncements
Revenue Recognition
In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, which created "Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606), to clarify the principles for recognizing revenue and develop a common revenue standard for customer contracts. This ASU provides guidance regarding how an entity should recognize revenue to depict the transfer of promised goods or services to customers in an amount that reflects the consideration to which the entity expects to be entitled in exchange for those goods or services. The ASU also added a new subtopic to the codification, ASC 340-40, "Other Assets and Deferred Costs: Contracts with Customers" to provide guidance on costs related to obtaining and fulfilling a customer contract. Furthermore, the new standard requires disclosure of sufficient information to enable users of financial statements to understand the nature, amount, timing, and uncertainty of revenue and cash flows arising from contracts with customers. At the time ASU No. 2014-09 was issued, the guidance was effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2016. In July 2015, the FASB approved a deferral of the effective date by one year, which would result in the guidance becoming effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this new guidance on the consolidated financial statements.
Extraordinary and Unusual Items
In January 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-01, “Income Statement - Extraordinary and Unusual Items (Subtopic 225-20): Simplifying Income Statement Presentation by Eliminating the Concept of Extraordinary Items,” to eliminate the concept of extraordinary items related to separately classifying, presenting and disclosing certain events and transactions that meet the criteria for that concept. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015 and is to be applied either prospectively or retrospectively. The Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Consolidation
In February 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-02, “Consolidation (Topic 810): Amendments to the Consolidation Analysis,” which changes the analysis that a reporting entity must perform to determine whether it should consolidate certain types of legal entities. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015 and is to be applied retrospectively. The Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Debt Issuance Costs
In April 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-03, "Interest - Imputation of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Simplifying the Presentation of Debt Issuance Costs," to clarify the presentation of debt issuance costs within the balance sheet. This ASU requires that an entity present debt issuance costs related to a recognized debt liability on the balance sheet as a direct deduction from the carrying amount of that debt liability, not as a separate asset. The ASU does not affect the current guidance for the recognition and measurement for these debt issuance costs. Additionally, in August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-15, "Interest - Imputation
of Interest (Subtopic 835-30): Presentation and Subsequent Measurement of Debt Issuance Costs Associated with Line-of-Credit Arrangements (Amendments to SEC Paragraphs Pursuant to Staff Announcement at June 18, 2015 EITF Meeting," to further clarify the the presentation of debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit agreements. This ASU states the SEC would not object to an entity deferring and presenting debt issuance costs related to line-of-credit agreements as an asset on the balance sheet and subsequently amortizing these costs ratably over the term of the agreement, regardless of any outstanding borrowing under the line-of-credit agreement. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015 and is to be applied retrospectively. The Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Business Combinations
In September 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-16, "Business Combinations (Topic 805): Simplifying the Accounting for Measurement-Period Adjustments," to simplify the accounting for subsequent adjustments made to provisional amounts recognized at the acquisition date of a business combination. This ASU eliminates the requirement to retrospectively account for these adjustment for all prior periods impacted. The acquirer is required to recognize these adjustments identified during the measurement period in the reporting period in which the adjustment amount is determined. Additionally, the ASU requires an entity to present separately on the face of the income statement or disclose in the notes the portion of the amount recorded in current-period earnings that would have been recorded in previous reporting periods if the adjustment had been recognized at the acquisition date. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2015 and is to be applied prospectively. The Company does not expect this guidance to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
Financial Instruments
In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, "Financial Instruments - Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities," to improve the accounting for financial instruments. This ASU requires equity investments with readily determinable fair values to be measured at fair value with changes recognized in net income regardless of classification. For equity investments without a readily determinable fair value, the value of the investment would be measured at cost minus impairment, if any, plus or minus changes resulting from observable price changes in orderly transactions for the identical or a similar investment of the same issuer instead of fair value, unless a qualitative assessment indicates impairment. Additionally, this ASU requires the separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or the accompanying notes to the financial statements. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and is to be applied prospectively with a cumulative-effect adjustment to the balance sheet as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this new guidance on the consolidated financial statements.
Leases
In February 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, "Leases (Topic 842)," to improve transparency and comparability across entities regarding leasing arrangements. This ASU requires the recognition of a separate lease liability representing the required lease payments over the lease term and a separate lease asset representing the right to use the underlying asset during the same lease term. Additionally, this ASU provides clarification regarding the identification of certain components of contracts that would represent a lease as well as requires additional disclosures to the notes of the financial statements. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years, and is to be applied under a modified retrospective approach, including the option to apply certain practical expedients. The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adopting this new guidance on the consolidated financial statements.
(3) Investment Securities
A summary of the available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios presenting carrying amounts and gross unrealized gains and losses as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
(1)
Consisting entirely of residential mortgage-backed securities, none of which are subprime.
In 2015, the Company transferred $862.7 million of investment securities with an unrealized loss of $14.4 million from the available-for-sale classification to the held-to-maturity classification. No investment securities were transferred from the available-for-sale classification to the held-to-maturity classification in 2014.
The following table presents the portion of the Company’s available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios which has gross unrealized losses, reflecting the length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position at December 31, 2015:
The following table presents the portion of the Company’s available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios which has gross unrealized losses, reflecting the length of time that individual securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position at December 31, 2014:
The Company conducts a regular assessment of its investment securities to determine whether securities are other-than-temporarily impaired considering, among other factors, the nature of the securities, credit ratings or financial condition of the issuer, the extent and duration of the unrealized loss, expected cash flows, market conditions and the Company’s ability to hold the securities through the anticipated recovery period.
The Company does not consider securities with unrealized losses at December 31, 2015 to be other-than-temporarily impaired. The Company does not intend to sell these investments and it is more likely than not that the Company will not be required to sell these investments before recovery of the amortized cost bases, which may be the maturity dates of the securities. The unrealized losses within each category have occurred as a result of changes in interest rates, market spreads and market conditions subsequent to purchase. Securities with continuous unrealized losses existing for more than twelve months were primarily U.S. government agencies and mortgage-backed securities. Unrealized losses recognized on corporate notes and mortgage-backed securities are the result of increases in yields for similar types of securities which have a longer duration and maturity.
In 2013, the Company recorded an other-than-temporary impairment charge related to a money market preferred security. The Company recognized this charge because it estimated that it would not be able to recover its amortized basis prior to its anticipated sale of the security as a result of the Volcker Rule.
The following table provides information as to the amount of gross gains and gross losses realized and proceeds received through the sales of available-for-sale investment securities:
Net gains on available-for-sale securities resulted in income tax expense of $122,000 in 2015. Net losses on available-for-sale securities resulted in an income tax benefit included in income tax expense of $194,000 and $1.2 million in 2014 and 2013, respectively.
The amortized cost and fair value of securities as of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, by contractual maturity, are shown in the following table. Contractual maturities may differ from actual maturities as borrowers may have the right to call or repay obligations with or without call or prepayment penalties. Mortgage-backed securities are not included in the maturity categories in the following maturity summary as actual maturities may differ from contractual maturities because the underlying mortgages may be called or prepaid without penalties:
At December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, securities having a carrying value of $1.2 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively, were pledged as collateral for public deposits, trust deposits, FHLB advances, securities sold under repurchase agreements and derivatives. At December 31, 2015, there were no securities of a single issuer, other than U.S. Government-sponsored agency securities, which exceeded 10% of shareholders’ equity.
(4) Loans
The following table shows the Company's loan portfolio by category as of the dates shown:
The Company’s loan portfolio is generally comprised of loans to consumers and small to medium-sized businesses located within the geographic market areas that the banks serve. The premium finance receivables portfolios are made to customers throughout the United States and Canada. The Company strives to maintain a loan portfolio that is diverse in terms of loan type, industry, borrower and geographic concentrations. Such diversification reduces the exposure to economic downturns that may occur in different segments of the economy or in different industries.
Certain premium finance receivables are recorded net of unearned income. The unearned income portions of such premium finance receivables were $56.7 million and $46.9 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Certain life insurance premium finance receivables attributable to the life insurance premium finance loan acquisition in 2009 as well as PCI loans are recorded net of credit discounts. See “Acquired Loan Information at Acquisition,” below.
Total loans, excluding PCI loans, include net deferred loan fees and costs and fair value purchase accounting adjustments totaling $(9.2) million and $330,000 at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. The net credit balance at December 31, 2015 is primarily the result of purchase accounting adjustments related to the various acquisitions during 2015.
Certain real estate loans, including mortgage loans held-for-sale, and home equity loans with balances totaling approximately $3.8 billion and $3.6 billion at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, were pledged as collateral to secure the availability of borrowings from certain federal agency banks. At December 31, 2015, approximately $3.2 billion of these pledged loans are included in a blanket pledge of qualifying loans to the FHLB. The remaining $579.2 million of pledged loans was used to secure potential borrowings at the Federal Reserve Bank discount window. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, the banks borrowed $859.9 million and $733.1 million, respectively, from the FHLB in connection with these collateral arrangements. See Note 11 - Federal Home Loan Bank Advances for a summary of these borrowings.
It is the policy of the Company to review each prospective credit in order to determine the appropriateness and, when required, the adequacy of security or collateral necessary to obtain when making a loan. The type of collateral, when required, will vary from liquid assets to real estate. The Company seeks to assure access to collateral, in the event of default, through adherence to state lending laws and the Company’s credit monitoring procedures.
Acquired Loan Information at Acquisition - PCI Loans
As part of our previous acquisitions, we acquired loans for which there was evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination (PCI loans) and we determined that it was probable that the Company would be unable to collect all contractually required principal and interest payments. The following table presents the unpaid principal balance and carrying value for these acquired loans:
The following table provides estimated details as of the date of acquisition on loans acquired in 2015 with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination:
(1)
Represents undiscounted expected principal and interest cash at acquisition.
See Note 5 - Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Losses on Lending-Related Commitments and Impaired Loans for further discussion regarding the allowance for loan losses associated with PCI loans at December 31, 2015.
Accretable Yield Activity - PCI Loans
Changes in expected cash flows may vary from period to period as the Company periodically updates its cash flow model assumptions for PCI loans. The factors that most significantly affect the estimates of gross cash flows expected to be collected, and accordingly the accretable yield, include changes in the benchmark interest rate indices for variable-rate products and changes in prepayment assumptions and loss estimates. The following table provides activity for the accretable yield of PCI loans.
(1)
Represents the portion of the current period accreted yield, resulting from lower expected losses, applied to reduce the loss share indemnification asset.
(2)
Reclassification is the result of subsequent increases in expected principal cash flows.
(3)
As of December 31, 2015, the Company estimates that the remaining accretable yield balance to be amortized to the indemnification asset for the bank acquisitions is $6.6 million. The remainder of the accretable yield related to bank acquisitions is expected to be amortized to interest income.
Accretion to interest income from acquired loans totaled $24.1 million and $37.0 million in 2015 and 2014, respectively. These amounts include accretion from both covered and non-covered loans, and are included together within interest and fees on loans in the Consolidated Statements of Income.
(5) Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Losses on Lending-Related Commitments and Impaired Loans
The tables below show the aging of the Company’s loan portfolio at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
(1)
PCI loans represent loans acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination, in accordance with ASC 310-30. Loan agings are based upon contractually required payments. See Note 4 - Loans for further discussion of these purchased loans.
(1)
PCI loans represent loans acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination, in accordance with ASC 310-30. Loan agings are based upon contractually required payments. See Note 4 - Loans for further discussion of these purchased loans.
Our ability to manage credit risk depends in large part on our ability to properly identify and manage problem loans. To do so, the Company operates a credit risk rating system under which our credit management personnel assign a credit risk rating (1 to 10 rating) to each loan at the time of origination and review loans on a regular basis.
Each loan officer is responsible for monitoring his or her loan portfolio, recommending a credit risk rating for each loan in his or her portfolio and ensuring the credit risk ratings are appropriate. These credit risk ratings are then ratified by the bank’s chief credit officer and/or concurrence credit officer. Credit risk ratings are determined by evaluating a number of factors including: a borrower’s financial strength, cash flow coverage, collateral protection and guarantees.
The Company’s Problem Loan Reporting system automatically includes all loans with credit risk ratings of 6 through 9. This system is designed to provide an on-going detailed tracking mechanism for each problem loan. Once management determines that a loan has deteriorated to a point where it has a credit risk rating of 6 or worse, the Company’s Managed Asset Division performs an overall credit and collateral review. As part of this review, all underlying collateral is identified and the valuation methodology is analyzed and tracked. As a result of this initial review by the Company’s Managed Asset Division, the credit risk rating is reviewed and a portion of the outstanding loan balance may be deemed uncollectible or an impairment reserve may be established. The Company’s impairment analysis utilizes an independent re-appraisal of the collateral (unless such a third-party evaluation is not possible due to the unique nature of the collateral, such as a closely-held business or thinly traded securities). In the case of commercial real estate collateral, an independent third party appraisal is ordered by the Company’s Real Estate Services Group to determine if there has been any change in the underlying collateral value. These independent appraisals are reviewed by the Real Estate Services Group and sometimes by independent third party valuation experts and may be adjusted depending upon market conditions.
Through the credit risk rating process, loans are reviewed to determine if they are performing in accordance with the original contractual terms. If the borrower has failed to comply with the original contractual terms, further action may be required by the Company, including a downgrade in the credit risk rating, movement to non-accrual status, a charge-off or the establishment of a specific impairment reserve. If we determine that a loan amount or portion thereof is uncollectible the loan’s credit risk rating is immediately downgraded to an 8 or 9 and the uncollectible amount is charged-off. Any loan that has a partial charge-off continues to be assigned a credit risk rating of an 8 or 9 for the duration of time that a balance remains outstanding. The Company undertakes a thorough and ongoing analysis to determine if additional impairment and/or charge-offs are appropriate and to begin a workout plan for the credit to minimize actual losses.
If, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due to it according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement, a specific impairment reserve is established. In determining the appropriate charge-off for collateral-dependent loans, the Company considers the results of appraisals for the associated collateral.
Non-performing loans include all non-accrual loans (8 and 9 risk ratings) as well as loans 90 days past due and still accruing interest, excluding PCI and covered loans. The remainder of the portfolio is considered performing under the contractual terms of the loan agreement. The following table presents the recorded investment based on performance of loans by class, excluding covered loans, per the most recent analysis at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
(1)
PCI loans represent loans acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination, in accordance with ASC 310-30. See Note 4 - Loans for further discussion of these purchased loans.
A summary of the activity in the allowance for credit losses by loan portfolio (excluding covered loans) for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
A summary of activity in the allowance for covered loan losses for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
In conjunction with FDIC-assisted transactions, the Company entered into loss share agreements with the FDIC. Additional expected losses, to the extent such expected losses result in the recognition of an allowance for loan losses, will increase the FDIC loss share asset or reduce any FDIC loss share liability. The allowance for loan losses for loans acquired in FDIC-assisted transactions is determined without giving consideration to the amounts recoverable through loss share agreements (since the loss share agreements are separately accounted for and thus presented “gross” on the balance sheet). On the Consolidated Statements of Income, the provision for credit losses is reported net of changes in the amount recoverable under the loss share agreements. Reductions to expected losses, to the extent such reductions to expected losses are the result of an improvement to the actual or expected cash flows from the covered assets, will reduce the FDIC loss share asset or increase any FDIC loss share liability. Additions to expected losses will require an increase to the allowance for loan losses, and a corresponding increase to the FDIC loss share asset or reduction to any FDIC loss share liability. See "FDIC-Assisted Transactions" within Note 7 - Business Combinations for more detail.
Impaired Loans
A summary of impaired loans, including TDRs, at December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
(1)
These impaired loans require an allowance for loan losses because the estimated fair value of the loans or related collateral is less than the recorded investment in the loans.
(2)
Impaired loans are considered by the Company to be non-accrual loans, TDRs or loans with principal and/or interest at risk, even if the loan is current with all payments of principal and interest.
The following tables present impaired loans evaluated for impairment by loan class as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Average recorded investment in impaired loans for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013 were $107.2 million, $135.0 million, and $170.7 million, respectively. Interest income recognized on impaired loans was $6.2 million, $7.2 million, and $8.9 million for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively.
TDRs
At December 31, 2015, the Company had $51.9 million in loans modified in TDRs. The $51.9 million in TDRs represents 102 credits in which economic concessions were granted to certain borrowers to better align the terms of their loans with their current ability to pay.
The Company’s approach to restructuring loans, excluding PCI loans, is built on its credit risk rating system which requires credit management personnel to assign a credit risk rating to each loan. In each case, the loan officer is responsible for recommending a credit risk rating for each loan and ensuring the credit risk ratings are appropriate. These credit risk ratings are then reviewed and approved by the bank’s chief credit officer and/or concurrence credit officer. Credit risk ratings are determined by evaluating a number of factors including a borrower’s financial strength, cash flow coverage, collateral protection and guarantees. The Company’s credit risk rating scale is one through ten with higher scores indicating higher risk. In the case of loans rated six or worse following modification, the Company’s Managed Assets Division evaluates the loan and the credit risk rating and determines that the loan has been restructured to be reasonably assured of repayment and of performance according to the modified terms and is supported by a current, well-documented credit assessment of the borrower’s financial condition and prospects for repayment under the revised terms.
A modification of a loan, excluding PCI loans, with an existing credit risk rating of 6 or worse or a modification of any other credit, which will result in a restructured credit risk rating of 6 or worse, must be reviewed for possible TDR classification. In that event, our Managed Assets Division conducts an overall credit and collateral review. A modification of these loans is considered to be a TDR if both (1) the borrower is experiencing financial difficulty and (2) for economic or legal reasons, the bank grants a concession to a borrower that it would not otherwise consider. The modification of a loan, excluding PCI loans, where the credit risk rating is 5 or better both before and after such modification is not considered to be a TDR. Based on the Company’s credit risk rating system, it considers that borrowers whose credit risk rating is 5 or better are not experiencing financial difficulties and therefore, are not considered TDRs.
All credits determined to be a TDR will continue to be classified as a TDR in all subsequent periods, unless the borrower has been in compliance with the loan’s modified terms for a period of six months (including over a calendar year-end) and the current interest rate represents a market rate at the time of restructuring. The Managed Assets Division, in consultation with the respective loan officer, determines whether the modified interest rate represented a current market rate at the time of restructuring. Using knowledge of current market conditions and rates, competitive pricing on recent loan originations, and an assessment of various characteristics of the modified loan (including collateral position and payment history), an appropriate market rate for a new borrower with similar risk is determined. If the modified interest rate meets or exceeds this market rate for a new borrower with similar risk, the modified interest rate represents a market rate at the time of restructuring. Additionally, before removing a loan from TDR classification, a review of the current or previously measured impairment on the loan and any concerns related to future performance by the borrower is conducted. If concerns exist about the future ability of the borrower to meet its obligations under the loans based on a credit review by the Managed Assets Division, the TDR classification is not removed from the loan.
TDRs are reviewed at the time of modification and on a quarterly basis to determine if a specific reserve is necessary. The carrying amount of the loan is compared to the expected payments to be received, discounted at the loan’s original rate, or for collateral dependent loans, to the fair value of the collateral. Any shortfall is recorded as a specific reserve. The Company, in accordance with ASC 310-10, continues to individually measure impairment of these loans after the TDR classification is removed.
Each TDR was reviewed for impairment at December 31, 2015 and approximately $1.8 million of impairment was present and appropriately reserved for through the Company’s normal reserving methodology in the Company’s allowance for loan losses. For TDRs in which impairment is calculated by the present value of future cash flows, the Company records interest income representing the decrease in impairment resulting from the passage of time during the respective period, which differs from interest income from contractually required interest on these specific loans. For the year ended December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company recorded $573,000 and $724,000, respectively, in interest income representing this decrease in impairment.
TDRs may arise in which, due to financial difficulties experienced by the borrower, the Company obtains through physical possession one or more collateral assets in satisfaction of all or part of an existing credit. Once possession is obtained, the Company reclassifies the appropriate portion of the remaining balance of the credit from loans to OREO, which is included within other assets in the Consolidated Statements of Condition. For any residential real estate property collateralizing a consumer mortgage loan, the Company is considered to possess the related collateral only if legal title is obtained upon completion of foreclosure, or the borrower conveys all interest in the residential real estate property to the Company through completion of a deed in lieu of
foreclosure or similar legal agreement. Excluding covered OREO, at December 31, 2015, the Company had $14.2 million of foreclosed residential real estate properties included within OREO.
The tables below present a summary of the post-modification balance of loans restructured during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, which represent TDRs:
(1)
TDRs may have more than one modification representing a concession. As such, TDRs during the period may be represented in more than one of the categories noted above.
(2)
Balances represent the recorded investment in the loan at the time of the restructuring.
During the year ended December 31, 2015, $2.0 million, or 12 loans, were determined to be TDRs, compared to $12.0 million, or 21 loans, and $22.7 million, or 35 loans, in the years ended 2014 and 2013, respectively. Of these loans extended at below market terms, the weighted average extension had a term of approximately 45 months in 2015 compared to 19 months in 2014 and 18 months in 2013. Further, the weighted average decrease in the stated interest rate for loans with a reduction of interest rate during the period was approximately 358 basis points, 170 basis points and 184 basis points during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, respectively. Interest-only payment terms were approximately 17 months during the year ended 2015 compared to seven months and 11 months for the years ended 2014 and 2013, respectively. Additionally, no principal balances were forgiven during 2015 and 2014, compared to $1.0 million forgiven during 2013.
The tables below present a summary of all loans restructured in TDRs during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013, and such loans which were in payment default under the restructured terms during the respective periods:
(1)
Total TDRs represent all loans restructured in TDRs during the year indicated.
(2)
TDRs considered to be in payment default are over 30 days past-due subsequent to the restructuring.
(3)
Balances represent the recorded investment in the loan at the time of the restructuring.
(6) Mortgage Servicing Rights
Following is a summary of the changes in the carrying value of MSRs, accounted for at fair value, for the years ending December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:
The Company recognizes MSR assets upon the sale of residential real estate loans when it retains the obligation to service the loans and the servicing fee is more than adequate compensation. Additionally, in 2014, the Company recognized MSRs related to certain agricultural and farmland-related loans purchased from an unaffiliated bank. The initial recognition of MSR assets from loans sold with servicing retained and subsequent changes in fair value of all MSRs are recognized in mortgage banking revenue. MSRs are subject to changes in value from actual and expected prepayment of the underlying loans. The Company does not specifically hedge the value of its MSRs.
The Company uses a third party to assist in the valuation of a portion of MSRs. Fair values are determined by using a discounted cash flow model that incorporates the objective characteristics of the portfolio as well as subjective valuation parameters that purchasers of servicing would apply to such portfolios sold into the secondary market. The subjective factors include loan prepayment speeds, interest rates, servicing costs and other economic factors.
(7) Business Combinations
Non-FDIC Assisted Bank Acquisitions
On July 24, 2015, the Company acquired CFIS. CFIS was the parent company of CBWGE, which had four banking locations. CBWGE was merged into Wheaton Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $350.5 million, including approximately $159.5 million of loans, and assumed deposits with a fair value of approximately $290.0 million. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $27.6 million on the acquisition.
On July 17, 2015, the Company acquired Suburban. Suburban was the parent company of SBT, which operated ten banking locations. SBT was merged into Hinsdale Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $494.7 million, including approximately $257.8 million of loans, and assumed deposits with a fair value of approximately $416.7 million. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $18.8 million on the acquisition.
On July 1, 2015, the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Wintrust Bank, acquired North Bank, which had two banking locations. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of $117.9 million, including approximately $51.6 million of loans, and assumed deposits with a fair value of approximately $101.0 million. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $6.7 million on the acquisition.
On January 16, 2015, the Company acquired Delavan. Delavan was the parent company of Community Bank CBD, which had four banking locations. Community Bank CBD was merged into the Company's wholly-owned subsidiary Town Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $224.1 million, including approximately $128.0 million of loans, and assumed liabilities with a fair value of approximately $186.4 million, including approximately $170.2 million of deposits. Additionally the Company recorded goodwill of $16.8 million on the acquisition.
On August 8, 2014, the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Town Bank, acquired eleven branch offices and deposits of Talmer Bank & Trust. Subsequent to this date, the Company acquired loans from these branches as well. In total, the Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $361.3 million, including approximately $41.5 million of loans, and assumed liabilities with a fair value of approximately $361.3 million, including approximately $354.9 million of deposits. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $9.7 million on the acquisition.
On July 11, 2014 the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Town Bank, acquired the Pewaukee, Wisconsin branch of THE National Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $94.1 million, including approximately $75.0 million of loans, and assumed deposits with a fair value of approximately $36.2 million. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $16.3 million on the acquisition.
On May 16, 2014, the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary Hinsdale Bank acquired the Stone Park branch office and certain related deposits of Urban Partnership Bank. The Company assumed liabilities with a fair value of approximately $5.5 million, including approximately $5.4 million of deposits. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $678,000 on the acquisition.
On October 18, 2013, the Company acquired Diamond Bancorp, Inc. ("Diamond"). Diamond was the parent company of Diamond Bank, FSB ("Diamond Bank"), which operated four banking locations in Chicago, Schaumburg, Elmhurst, and Northbrook, Illinois. As part of the transaction, Diamond Bank was merged into Wintrust Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $172.5 million, including approximately $91.7 million of loans, and assumed liabilities with a fair value of approximately $169.1 million, including approximately $140.2 million of deposits. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $8.4 million on the acquisition.
On May 1, 2013, the Company acquired First Lansing Bancorp, Inc. ("FLB"). FLB was the parent company of First National Bank of Illinois ("FNBI"), which operated seven banking locations in the south and southwest suburbs of Chicago, as well as one location in northwest Indiana. As part of this transaction, FNBI was merged into Old Plank Trail Bank. The Company acquired assets with a fair value of approximately $373.4 million, including approximately $123.0 million of loans, and assumed liabilities with a fair value of approximately $334.7 million, including approximately $331.4 million of deposits. Additionally, the Company recorded goodwill of $14.0 million on the acquisition.
FDIC Assisted Bank Acquisitions
Since 2010, the Company acquired the banking operations, including the acquisition of certain assets and the assumption of liabilities, of nine financial institutions in FDIC-assisted transactions. Loans comprise the majority of the assets acquired in nearly all of these FDIC-assisted transactions, most of which are subject to loss sharing agreements with the FDIC whereby the FDIC has agreed to reimburse the Company for 80% of losses incurred on the purchased loans, other real estate owned (“OREO”), and certain other assets. Additionally, clawback provisions within these loss share agreements with the FDIC require the Company to reimburse the FDIC in the event that actual losses on covered assets are lower than the original loss estimates agreed upon with the FDIC with respect of such assets in the loss share agreements. The Company refers to the loans subject to these loss sharing agreements as “covered loans” and uses the term “covered assets” to refer to covered loans, covered OREO and certain other covered assets. The agreements with the FDIC require that the Company follow certain servicing procedures or risk losing the FDIC reimbursement of covered asset losses.
The loans covered by the loss sharing agreements are classified and presented as covered loans and the estimated reimbursable losses are recorded as an FDIC indemnification asset in the Consolidated Statements of Condition. The Company recorded the acquired assets and liabilities at their estimated fair values at the acquisition date. The fair value for loans reflected expected credit losses at the acquisition date. Therefore, the Company will only recognize a provision for credit losses and charge-offs on the acquired loans for any further credit deterioration subsequent to the acquisition date. See Note 5 - Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Losses on Lending-Related Commitments and Impaired Loans for further discussion of the allowance on covered loans.
The loss share agreements with the FDIC cover realized losses on loans, foreclosed real estate and certain other assets and require the Company to record loss share assets and liabilities that are measured separately from the loan portfolios because they are not contractually embedded in the loans and are not transferable with the loans should the Company choose to dispose of them. Fair values at the acquisition dates were estimated based on projected cash flows available for loss share based on the credit adjustments estimated for each loan pool and the loss share percentages. The loss share assets and liabilities are recorded as FDIC indemnification assets and other liabilities, respectively, on the Consolidated Statements of Condition. Subsequent to the acquisition date, reimbursements received from the FDIC for actual incurred losses will reduce the FDIC indemnification assets. Reductions to expected losses, to the extent such reductions to expected losses are the result of an improvement to the actual or expected cash flows from the covered assets, will also reduce the FDIC indemnification assets and, if necessary, increase any loss share liability when necessary reductions exceed the current value of the FDIC indemnification assets. In accordance with the clawback provision noted above, the Company may be required to reimburse the FDIC when actual losses are less than certain thresholds established for each loss share agreement. The balance of these estimated reimbursements in accordance with clawback provisions and any
related amortization are adjusted periodically for changes in the expected losses on covered assets. On the Consolidated Statements of Condition, estimated reimbursements from clawback provisions are recorded as a reduction to the FDIC indemnification asset or, if necessary, an increase to the loss share liability, which is included within accrued interest payable and other liabilities. Although these assets are contractual receivables from the FDIC, there are no contractual interest rates. Additional expected losses, to the extent such expected losses result in recognition of an allowance for covered loan losses, will increase the FDIC indemnification asset. The corresponding amortization is recorded as a component of non-interest income on the Consolidated Statements of Income.
The following table summarizes the activity in the Company’s FDIC loss share asset (liability) during the periods indicated:
Divestiture of Previous FDIC-Assisted Acquisition
On February 1, 2013, the Company completed the divestiture of the deposits and current banking operations of Second Federal to an unaffiliated financial institution. Through this transaction, the Company divested approximately $149 million of related deposits.
Specialty Finance Acquisitions
On April 28, 2014, the Company, through its wholly-owned subsidiary, First Insurance Funding of Canada, Inc., completed its acquisition of Policy Billing Services Inc. and Equity Premium Finance Inc., two affiliated Canadian insurance premium funding and payment services companies. Through this transaction, the Company acquired approximately $7.4 million of premium finance receivables. The Company recorded goodwill of approximately $6.5 million on the acquisition.
Wealth Management Acquisitions
On August 8, 2014, CTC acquired the trust operations certain branches acquired from Talmer Bank & Trust. The Company recorded goodwill of $250,000 on this trust operations acquisition.
Mortgage Banking Acquisitions
On October 1, 2013, the Company acquired certain assets and assumed certain liabilities of the mortgage banking business of Surety of Sherman Oaks, California. Surety had five offices located in southern California which originated approximately $1.0 billion in the twelve months prior to the acquisition date. The Company recorded goodwill of $9.5 million on the acquisition.
PCI loans
Purchased loans acquired in a business combination are recorded at estimated fair value on their purchase date. Expected future cash flows at the purchase date in excess of the fair value of loans are recorded as interest income over the life of the loans if the timing and amount of the future cash flows is reasonably estimable (“accretable yield”). The difference between contractually required payments and the cash flows expected to be collected at acquisition is referred to as the non-accretable difference and represents probable losses in the portfolio.
In determining the acquisition date fair value of purchased impaired loans, and in subsequent accounting, the Company aggregates these purchased loans into pools of loans by common risk characteristics, such as credit risk rating and loan type. Subsequent to the purchase date, increases in cash flows over those expected at the purchase date are recognized as interest income prospectively. Subsequent decreases to the expected cash flows will result in a provision for loan losses.
The Company purchased a portfolio of life insurance premium finance receivables in 2009. These purchased life insurance premium finance receivables are valued on an individual basis with the accretable component being recognized into interest income using the effective yield method over the estimated remaining life of the loans. The non-accretable portion is evaluated each quarter and if the loans’ credit related conditions improve, a portion is transferred to the accretable component and accreted over future periods. In the event a specific loan prepays in whole, any remaining accretable and non-accretable discount is recognized in income immediately. If credit related conditions deteriorate, an allowance related to these loans will be established as part of the provision for credit losses.
See Note 4 - Loans, for more information on loans acquired with evidence of credit quality deterioration since origination.
(8) Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets
A summary of the Company’s goodwill assets by business segment is presented in the following table:
The community banking segment's goodwill increased $69.9 million in 2015 as a result of the acquisitions of Delavan, Suburban, North Bank and CFIS. The specialty finance segment's goodwill decreased $3.7 million in 2015 as a result of foreign currency translation adjustments related to the Canadian acquisitions.
A summary of finite-lived intangible assets as of the dates shown and the expected amortization as of December 31, 2015 is as follows:
The core deposit intangibles recognized in connection with prior bank acquisitions are amortized over a ten-year period on an accelerated basis. The customer list intangibles recognized in connection with the purchase of life insurance premium finance assets in 2009 are being amortized over an 18-year period on an accelerated basis while the customer list intangibles recognized
in connection with prior acquisitions within the wealth management segment are being amortized over a ten-year period on a straight-line basis.
Total amortization expense associated with finite-lived intangibles in 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $4.6 million, $4.7 million and $4.6 million, respectively.
(9) Premises and Equipment, Net
A summary of premises and equipment at December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
Depreciation and amortization expense related to premises and equipment totaled $31.1 million in 2015, $28.1 million in 2014 and $26.0 million in 2013.
(10) Deposits
The following is a summary of deposits at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Wealth management deposits represent deposit balances (primarily money market accounts) at the Company’s subsidiary banks from brokerage customers of WHI, trust and asset management customers of CTC and brokerage customers from unaffiliated companies.
The scheduled maturities of time certificates of deposit at December 31, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:
The following table sets forth the scheduled maturities of time deposits in denominations of $100,000 or more at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Time deposits in denominations of $250,000 or more were $1.3 billion and $1.5 billion at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
(11) Federal Home Loan Bank Advances
A summary of the outstanding FHLB advances at December 31, 2015 and 2014, is as follows:
Federal Home Loan Bank advances consist of obligations of the banks and are collateralized by qualifying residential real estate and home equity loans and certain securities. The banks have arrangements with the FHLB whereby, based on available collateral, they could have borrowed an additional $931.0 million at December 31, 2015.
FHLB advances are stated at par value of the debt adjusted for unamortized fair value adjustments recorded in connection with advances acquired through acquisitions. Prepayment fees paid at the time of restructurings of FHLB advances are classified in other assets on the Consolidated Statements of Condition and are amortized as an adjustment to interest expense using the effective interest method.
Approximately $35.0 million of the FHLB advances outstanding at December 31, 2015, have varying put dates in February 2016. At December 31, 2015, the weighted average contractual interest rate on FHLB advances was 0.92%.
(12) Subordinated Notes
At December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014, the Company had outstanding subordinated notes totaling $140.0 million. In 2014, the Company issued $140.0 million of subordinated notes receiving $139.1 million in net proceeds. The notes have a stated interest rate of 5.00% and mature in June 2024. Previously, the Company borrowed $75.0 million under three separate $25.0 million subordinated note agreements. Each subordinated note required annual principal payments of $5.0 million beginning in the sixth year of the note and had a term of ten years. The interest rate on each subordinated note was calculated at a rate equal to LIBOR plus 130 basis points. In 2013, the only remaining subordinated note with a balance of $10.0 million was paid off prior to maturity.
In connection with the issuance of subordinated notes in 2014, the Company incurred costs totaling $1.3 million. These costs are included in other assets and will be amortized to interest expense using a method that approximates the effective interest method. At December 31, 2015, the unamortized balances of these costs were approximately $1.1 million. These subordinated notes qualify as Tier II capital under the regulatory capital requirements, subject to restrictions.
(13) Other Borrowings
The following is a summary of other borrowings at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Notes Payable
At December 31, 2015, notes payable represented a $67.5 million term facility ("Term Facility"), which is part of a $150.0 million loan agreement with unaffiliated banks dated December 15, 2014. The agreement consists of the Term Facility and a $75.0 million revolving credit facility ("Revolving Credit Facility"). At December 31, 2015, the Company had an outstanding balance of $67.5 million compared to no outstanding balance at December 31, 2014 under the Term Facility. The Company was contractually required to borrow the entire amount of the Term Facility on June 15, 2015 and all such borrowings must be repaid by June 15, 2020. Beginning September 30, 2015, the Company was required to make straight-line quarterly amortizing payments on the Term Facility. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had no outstanding balance under the Revolving Credit Facility. In December 2015, the Company amended the loan agreement, effectively extending the maturity date on the Revolving Credit Facility from December 14, 2015 to December 12, 2016.
Borrowings under the agreement that are considered “Base Rate Loans” bear interest at a rate equal to the sum of (1) 50 basis points (in the case of a borrowing under the Revolving Credit Facility) or 75 basis points (in the case of a borrowing under the Term Facility) plus (2) the highest of (a) the federal funds rate plus 50 basis points, (b) the lender's prime rate, and (c) the Eurodollar Rate (as defined below) that would be applicable for an interest period of one month plus 100 basis points. Borrowings under the agreement that are considered “Eurodollar Rate Loans” bear interest at a rate equal to the sum of (1) 150 basis points (in the case of a borrowing under the Revolving Credit Facility) or 175 basis points (in the case of a borrowing under the Term Facility) plus (2) the LIBOR rate for the applicable period, as adjusted for statutory reserve requirements for eurocurrency liabilities (the “Eurodollar Rate”). A commitment fee is payable quarterly equal to 0.20% of the actual daily amount by which the lenders' commitment under the Revolving Credit Facility exceeded the amount outstanding under such facility.
In prior periods, the Company has had a $101.0 million loan agreement with unaffiliated banks dated as of October 30, 2009, which had been amended at least annually between 2009 and 2014. The agreement consisted of a $100.0 million revolving credit facility, maturing on October 25, 2013, and a $1.0 million term loan maturing on June 1, 2015. In 2013, the Company repaid and terminated the $1.0 million term loan, and amended the agreement, effectively extending the maturity date on the revolving credit facility from October 25, 2013 to November 6, 2014. The agreement was also amended in 2014 effectively extending the term to December 15, 2014 at which time the agreement matured. At December 31, 2014, no amount was outstanding on the $100.0 million revolving credit facility.
Borrowings under the agreements are secured by pledges of and first priority perfected security interests in the Company's equity interest in its bank subsidiaries and contain several restrictive covenants, including the maintenance of various capital adequacy levels, asset quality and profitability ratios, and certain restrictions on dividends and other indebtedness. At December 31, 2015, the Company was in compliance with all such covenants. The Revolving Credit Facility and the Term Facility are available to be
utilized, as needed, to provide capital to fund continued growth at the Company’s banks and to serve as an interim source of funds for acquisitions, common stock repurchases or other general corporate purposes.
Short-term Borrowings
Short-term borrowings include securities sold under repurchase agreements and federal funds purchased. These borrowings totaled $63.9 million and $48.6 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, securities sold under repurchase agreements represent $58.9 million and $48.6 million, respectively, of customer sweep accounts in connection with master repurchase agreements at the banks. During 2014, additional short-term borrowings from banks and brokers totaling $180.0 million were paid off. The Company records securities sold under repurchase agreements at their gross value and does not offset positions on the Consolidated Statements of Condition. As of December 31, 2015, the Company had pledged securities related to its customer balances in sweep accounts of $88.2 million. Securities pledged for customer balances in sweep accounts and short-term borrowings from brokers are maintained under the Company’s control and consist of U.S. Government agency, mortgage-backed and corporate securities. These securities are included in the available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolios as reflected on the Company’s Consolidated Statements of Condition. The following is a summary of these securities pledged as of December 31, 2015 disaggregated by investment category and maturity, and reconciled to the outstanding balance of securities sold under repurchase agreements:
Other Borrowings
Other borrowings at December 31, 2015 represent a fixed-rate promissory note issued by the Company in August 2012 ("Fixed-rate Promissory Note") related to and secured by an office building owned by the Company, and non-recourse notes issued by the Company to other banks related to certain capital leases. At December 31, 2015, the Fixed-rate Promissory Note had an outstanding balance of $18.3 million compared to $18.8 million at December 31, 2014. Under the Fixed-rate Promissory Note, the Company will make monthly principal payments and pay interest at a fixed rate of 3.75% until maturity on September 1, 2017. At December 31, 2015, the non-recourse notes related to certain capital leases totaled $732,000.
Junior subordinated amortizing notes issued by the Company in connection with the issuance of the TEU's in December 2010 were paid off in 2013. At issuance, the junior subordinated notes were recorded at their initial principal balance of $44.7 million, net of issuance costs. These notes had a stated interest rate of 9.5% and required quarterly principal and interest payments of $4.3 million, with an initial payment of $4.6 million that was paid on March 15, 2011. The issuance costs were being amortized to interest expense using the effective-interest method. The final installment payment on the notes was made as scheduled on December 15, 2013. See Note 22 - Shareholders’ Equity for further discussion of the TEUs.
Secured Borrowings
In December 2014, the Company, through its subsidiary, FIFC Canada, sold an undivided co-ownership interest in all receivables owed to FIFC Canada to an unrelated third party in exchange for a cash payment of approximately C$150 million pursuant to a receivables purchase agreement (“Receivables Purchase Agreement”). The Receivables Purchase Agreement was amended in December 2015, effectively extending the maturity date from December 15, 2015 to December 15, 2017. Additionally, at that time, the unrelated third party paid an additional C$10 million, which increased the total payments to C$160 million. These transactions were not considered sales of receivables and, as such, related proceeds received are reflected on the Company’s
Consolidated Statements of Condition as a secured borrowing owed to the unrelated third party and translated to the Company’s reporting currency as of the respective date. At December 31, 2015, the translated balance of the secured borrowing totaled $115.6 million compared to $129.1 million at December 31, 2014. Additionally, the interest rate under the Receivables Purchase Agreement at December 31, 2015 was 1.4452%.
(14) Junior Subordinated Debentures
As of December 31, 2015, the Company owned 100% of the common securities of eleven trusts, Wintrust Capital Trust III, Wintrust Statutory Trust IV, Wintrust Statutory Trust V, Wintrust Capital Trust VII, Wintrust Capital Trust VIII, Wintrust Capital Trust IX, Northview Capital Trust I, Town Bankshares Capital Trust I, First Northwest Capital Trust I, Suburban Illinois Capital Trust II, and Community Financial Shares Statutory Trust II (the “Trusts”) set up to provide long- term financing. The Northview, Town, First Northwest, Suburban and Community Financial Shares capital trusts were acquired as part of the acquisitions of Northview Financial Corporation, Town Bankshares, Ltd., First Northwest Bancorp, Inc., Suburban and CFIS, respectively. The Trusts were formed for purposes of issuing trust preferred securities to third-party investors and investing the proceeds from the issuance of the trust preferred securities and common securities solely in junior subordinated debentures issued by the Company (or assumed by the Company in connection with an acquisition), with the same maturities and interest rates as the trust preferred securities. The junior subordinated debentures are the sole assets of the Trusts. In each Trust, the common securities represent approximately 3% of the junior subordinated debentures and the trust preferred securities represent approximately 97% of the junior subordinated debentures.
The Trusts are reported in the Company’s consolidated financial statements as unconsolidated subsidiaries. Accordingly, in the Consolidated Statements of Condition, the junior subordinated debentures issued by the Company to the Trusts are reported as liabilities and the common securities of the Trusts, all of which are owned by the Company, are included in available-for-sale securities.
The following table provides a summary of the Company’s junior subordinated debentures as of December 31, 2015 and 2014. The junior subordinated debentures represent the par value of the obligations owed to the Trusts.
The junior subordinated debentures totaled $268.6 million and $249.5 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The interest rates on the variable rate junior subordinated debentures are based on the three-month LIBOR rate and reset on a quarterly basis. At December 31, 2015, the weighted average contractual interest rate on the junior subordinated debentures was 2.68%. The Company entered into interest rate swaps and caps with an aggregate notional value of $225 million to hedge the variable cash flows on certain junior subordinated debentures. Two of these interest rate caps, which were purchased in 2013 with an aggregate notional amount of $90 million, replaced two interest swaps that matured in September 2013. The hedge-adjusted rate on the junior subordinated debentures as of December 31, 2015, was 3.34%. Distributions on the common and preferred securities issued by the Trusts are payable quarterly at a rate per annum equal to the interest rates being earned by the Trusts on the junior subordinated debentures. Interest expense on the junior subordinated debentures is deductible for income tax purposes.
The Company has guaranteed the payment of distributions and payments upon liquidation or redemption of the trust preferred securities, in each case to the extent of funds held by the Trusts. The Company and the Trusts believe that, taken together, the obligations of the Company under the guarantees, the junior subordinated debentures, and other related agreements provide, in
the aggregate, a full, irrevocable and unconditional guarantee, on a subordinated basis, of all of the obligations of the Trusts under the trust preferred securities. Subject to certain limitations, the Company has the right to defer the payment of interest on the junior subordinated debentures at any time, or from time to time, for a period not to exceed 20 consecutive quarters. The trust preferred securities are subject to mandatory redemption, in whole or in part, upon repayment of the junior subordinated debentures at maturity or their earlier redemption. The junior subordinated debentures are redeemable in whole or in part prior to maturity at any time after the earliest redemption dates shown in the table, and earlier at the discretion of the Company if certain conditions are met, and, in any event, only after the Company has obtained Federal Reserve approval, if then required under applicable guidelines or regulations.
Prior to January 1, 2015, the junior subordinated debentures, subject to certain limitations, qualified as Tier 1 regulatory capital of the Company and the amount in excess of those certain limitations could, subject to other restrictions, be included in Tier 2 capital. At December 31, 2014, all of the junior subordinated debentures, net of the common securities, were included in the Company's Tier 1 regulatory capital. In 2015, a portion of these junior subordinated debentures still qualified as Tier 1 regulatory capital of the Company and the amount in excess of those certain limitations, subject to certain restrictions, was included in Tier 2 capital. At December 31, 2015, $65.1 million and $195.4 million of the junior subordinated debentures, net of common securities, were included in the Company's Tier 1 and Tier 2 regulatory capital, respectively.
(15) Minimum Lease Commitments
The Company occupies certain facilities under operating lease agreements. Gross rental expense related to the Company’s operating leases were $15.7 million in 2015, $10.5 million in 2014, and $9.1 million in 2013. The Company also leases certain owned premises and receives rental income from such lease agreements. Gross rental income related to the Company’s buildings totaled $7.7 million, $6.9 million and $7.0 million, in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The approximate minimum annual gross rental payments and gross rental receipts under noncancelable agreements for office space with remaining terms in excess of one year as of December 31, 2015, are as follows (in thousands):
(16) Income Taxes
Income tax expense (benefit) for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is summarized as follows:
The Company's income before income taxes in 2015, 2014 and 2013 includes $3.9 million, $3.8 million and $4.3 million, respectively, of foreign income attributable to its Canadian subsidiary.
The tax effect of fair value adjustments on securities available-for-sale and derivative instruments in cash flow hedges are recorded directly to shareholders' equity as part of other comprehensive income (loss) and are reflected on the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income. In addition, tax expense of $1.9 million, $594,000, and $831,000 in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively, related to the exercise and expiration of certain stock options and vesting and issuance of restricted shares and performance stock awards pursuant to the Stock Incentive Plans and the issuance of shares pursuant to the Directors Deferred Fee and Stock Plan, was recorded directly to shareholders’ equity.
A reconciliation of the differences between taxes computed using the statutory Federal income tax rate of 35% and actual income tax expense is as follows:
The tax effects of temporary differences that give rise to significant portions of the deferred tax assets and liabilities at December 31, 2015 and 2014 are as follows:
Management has determined that a valuation allowance is not required for the deferred tax assets at December 31, 2015 because it is more likely than not that these assets could be realized through carry back to taxable income in prior years, future reversals of existing taxable temporary differences, tax planning strategies and future taxable income. This conclusion is based on the Company's historical earnings, its current level of earnings and prospects for continued growth and profitability.
The Company has a Federal AMT credit carryforward of $1.5 million which has no expiration date and a Federal NOL carryforward of $13.4 million that begins to expire in 2028 through 2034 and is subject to Internal Revenue Code Section 382 annual limitation. These credit and loss carryforwards were a result of acquisitions made in 2012, 2013 and 2015. The Company has a Foreign NOL carryforward of $25.1 million that begins to expire in 2034 through 2035. Management believes it is more likely than not that it will be able to fully utilize the Federal and Foreign NOLs and tax credits in future tax years.
The Company is required to record a liability (or a reduction of an asset) for the uncertainty associated with certain tax positions. This liability, if any, reflects the fact that the Company has not recognized the benefit associated with the tax position. The Company had no unrecognized tax benefits at December 31, 2014 and it did not have increases or decreases in unrecognized tax benefits during 2015 and does not have any tax positions for which unrecognized tax benefits must be recorded at December 31, 2015. In addition, for the year ended December 31, 2015, the Company has no interest or penalties relating to income tax positions recognized in the income statement or in the balance sheet. If the Company were to record interest and penalties associated with uncertain tax positions or as a result of an audit by a tax jurisdiction, the interest and penalties would be included in income tax expense. The Company does not believe it is reasonably possible that unrecognized tax benefits will significantly change in the next 12 months.
The Company and its subsidiaries are subject to U.S. federal income tax as well as income tax in numerous state jurisdictions and in Canada. In the ordinary course of business we are routinely subject to audit by the taxing authorities of these jurisdictions. Currently, the Company's U.S. federal income tax returns are open and subject to audit for the 2012 tax return year forward, and in general, the Company's state income tax returns are open and subject to audit from the 2012 tax return year forward, subject to individual state statutes of limitation. The Company's Canadian subsidiary's Canadian income tax returns are also subject to audit for the 2012 tax return year forward.
(17) Stock Compensation Plans and Other Employee Benefit Plans
Stock Incentive Plan
In May 2015, the Company’s shareholders approved the 2015 Stock Incentive Plan (“the 2015 Plan”) which provides for the issuance of up to 5,485,000 shares of common stock. The 2015 Plan replaced the 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (“the 2007 Plan”), which replaced the 1997 Stock Incentive Plan (“the 1997 Plan”). The 2015 Plan, the 2007 Plan and the 1997 Plan are collectively referred to as “the Plans.” The 2015 Plan has substantially similar terms to the 2007 Plan and the 1997 Plan. Outstanding awards under the Plans for which common shares are not issued by reason of cancellation, forfeiture, lapse of such award or settlement of such award in cash, are again available under the 2015 Plan. All grants made after the approval of the 2015 Plan will be made pursuant to the 2015 Plan. As of December 31, 2015, approximately 5.6 million shares were available for future grants (assuming the maximum number of shares are issued for the performance awards outstanding.) The Plans cover substantially all employees of Wintrust. The Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors administers all stock-based compensation programs and authorizes all awards granted pursuant to the Plans.
The Plans permit the grant of incentive stock options, non-qualified stock options, stock appreciation rights, stock awards, restricted share or unit awards, performance based awards settled in shares of common stock and other incentive awards based in whole or in part by reference to the Company’s stock price. The Company historically awarded stock-based compensation in the form of time-vested nonqualified stock options and time-vested restricted share unit awards (“restricted shares”). In general, the grants of options provide for the purchase shares of the Company’s common stock at the fair market value of the stock on the date the options are granted. Options under the 2015 Plan and the 2007 Plan generally vest ratably over periods of three to five years and have a maximum term of seven years from the date of grant. Stock options granted under the 1997 Plan provided for a maximum term of 10 years. Restricted shares entitle the holders to receive, at no cost, shares of the Company’s common stock. Restricted shares generally vest over periods of one to five years from the date of grant.
Beginning in 2011, the Company has awarded annual grants under the Long-Term Incentive Program (“LTIP”), which is administered under the Plans. The LTIP is designed in part to align the interests of management with interests of shareholders, foster retention, create a long-term focus based on sustainable results and provide participants a target long-term incentive opportunity. It is anticipated that LTIP awards will continue to be granted annually. LTIP grants to date have consisted of time-vested nonqualified stock options and performance-based stock and cash awards. Stock options granted under the LTIP have a term of sevenyears and will generally vest equally over three years based on continued service. Performance-based stock and cash awards granted under the LTIP are contingent upon the achievement of pre-established long-term performance goals set in advance by the Compensation Committee over a three-year period. These performance awards are granted at a target level, and based on the Company’s achievement of the pre-established long-term goals, the actual payouts can range from 0% to 150% (for awards granted in 2015) or 200% (for awards granted prior to 2015) of the target award. The awards vest in the quarter after the end of the performance period upon certification of the payout by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. Holders of performance-based stock awards are entitled to shares of common stock at no cost.
Holders of restricted share awards and performance-based stock awards received under the Plans are not entitled to vote or receive cash dividends (or cash payments equal to the cash dividends) on the underlying common shares until the awards are vested and issued. Except in limited circumstances, these awards are canceled upon termination of employment without any payment of consideration by the Company.
Stock-based compensation is measured as the fair value of an award on the date of grant, and the measured cost is recognized over the period which the recipient is required to provide service in exchange for the award. The fair values of restricted share and performance-based stock awards are determined based on the average of the high and low trading prices on the grant date, and the fair value of stock options is estimated using a Black-Scholes option-pricing model that utilizes the assumptions outlined in the following table. Option-pricing models require the input of highly subjective assumptions and are sensitive to changes in the option’s expected life and the price volatility of the underlying stock, which can materially affect the fair value estimate. Options granted in 2013, 2014 and 2015, were primarily granted as LTIP awards. The expected life of the options granted pursuant to the LTIP awards is based on the safe harbor rule of the SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin No. 107 “Share-Based Payment” as the Company believes historical exercise data may not provide a reasonable basis to estimate the expected term of these options. Expected stock
price volatility is based on historical volatility of the Company’s common stock, which correlates with the expected life of the options, and the risk-free interest rate is based on comparable U.S. Treasury rates. Management reviews and adjusts the assumptions used to calculate the fair value of an option on a periodic basis to better reflect expected trends.
The following table presents the weighted average assumptions used to determine the fair value of options granted in the years ending December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:
Stock based compensation is recognized based on the number of awards that are ultimately expected to vest. Forfeitures are estimated based on historical forfeiture experience. For performance-based stock awards, an estimate is made of the number of shares expected to vest as a result of actual performance against the performance criteria to determine the amount of compensation expense to be recognized. The estimate is reevaluated quarterly and total compensation expense is adjusted for any change in the current period.
Stock-based compensation expense recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Income was $9.7 million, $10.1 million and $6.7 million and the related tax benefits were $3.8 million, $4.0 million and $2.5 million in 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. The 2014 stock-based compensation expense includes a $2.1 million charge for a modification to the performance measurement criteria related to the 2011 LTIP performance-based stock grants that were vested and paid out in the first quarter of 2014. The cost of the modification was determined based on the stock price on the date of re-measurement and paid to the holders of the performance-based stock awards in cash.
A summary of the Plans’ stock option activity for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is as follows:
(1)
Represents the weighted average contractual remaining life in years.
(2)
Aggregate intrinsic value represents the total pretax intrinsic value (i.e., the difference between the Company’s stock price at year end and the option exercise price, multiplied by the number of shares) that would have been received by the option holders if they had exercised their options on the last day of the year. Options with exercise prices above the year end stock price are excluded from the calculation of intrinsic value. The intrinsic value will change based on the fair market value of the Company’s stock.
The weighted average per share grant date fair value of options granted during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $9.72, $11.52 and $17.49, respectively. The aggregate intrinsic value of options exercised during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013, was $2.5 million, $2.3 million and $1.2 million, respectively. The actual tax benefit realized for the tax deductions from option exercises totaled $985,000, $900,000 and $485,000 for 2015, 2014 and 2013, respectively. Cash received from option exercises under the Plans for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $11.7 million, $5.9 million and $15.0 million, respectively.
A summary of the Plans’ restricted share activity for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 is as follows:
A summary of the 2007 Plan’s performance-based stock award activity, based on the target level of the awards, for the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014, and 2013 is as follows:
In the first quarter of 2015, the 2012 grants vested and were paid, and in 2014, the 2011 grants vested and were paid. As previously discussed, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company modified the 2011 awards such that 17% of the awards were paid in shares and the remainder in cash. As a result, the remaining shares granted in connection with the 2011 awards were canceled and remain available for future use under the Plan. The Company issues new shares to satisfy its obligation to issue shares granted pursuant to the Plans.
At December 31, 2015, the maximum number of performance-based shares that could be issued on outstanding awards if performance is attained at the maximum amount (200% of target for 2013 and 2014 grants and 150% of target for 2015 grants) was approximately 503,000 shares.
The actual tax benefit realized upon the vesting of restricted shares and performance-based stock is based on the fair value of the shares on the issue date and the estimated tax benefit of the awards is based on fair value of the awards on the grant date. The actual tax benefit realized upon the vesting of restricted shares and performance-based stock in 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $517,000, $254,000 and $329,000, respectively, more than the estimated tax benefit for those shares. These differences in actual and estimated tax benefits were recorded directly to shareholders’ equity.
As of December 31, 2015, there was $11.0 million of total unrecognized compensation cost related to non-vested share based arrangements under the Plans. That cost is expected to be recognized over a weighted average period of approximately two years. The total fair value of shares vested during the years ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013 was $7.9 million, $7.8 million and $7.4 million, respectively.
The Company issues new shares to satisfy its obligation to issue shares granted pursuant to the Plans.
Cash Incentive and Retention Plan
The Cash Incentive and Retention Plan (“CIRP”) allows the Company to provide cash compensation to the Company’s and its subsidiaries’ officers and employees. The CIRP is administered by the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors. The CIRP generally provides for the grants of cash awards, which may be earned pursuant to the achievement of performance criteria established by the Compensation Committee and/or continued employment. The performance criteria, if any, established by the Compensation Committee must relate to one or more of the criteria specified in the CIRP, which includes: earnings, earnings growth, revenues, stock price, return on assets, return on equity, improvement of financial ratings, achievement of balance sheet or income statement objectives and expenses. These criteria may relate to the Company, a particular line of business or a specific subsidiary of the Company. The Company’s expense related to the CIRP was approximately $20,000 and $115,000 in 2014 and 2013. There was no expense related to CIRP in 2015. In 2015 and 2014, the Company paid $100,000 and $473,000 related to CIRP awards. No awards were paid in 2013. As of December 31, 2015, there were no outstanding awards under this plan.
Other Employee Benefits
Wintrust and its subsidiaries also provide 401(k) Retirement Savings Plans (“401(k) Plans”). The 401(k) Plans cover all employees meeting certain eligibility requirements. Contributions by employees are made through salary deferrals at their direction, subject to certain Plan and statutory limitations. Employer contributions to the 401(k) Plans are made at the employer’s discretion. Generally, participants completing 501 hours of service are eligible to share in an allocation of employer contributions. The Company’s expense for the employer contributions to the 401(k) Plans was approximately $6.4 million in 2015, $5.0 million in 2014, and $4.9 million in 2013.
The Wintrust Financial Corporation Employee Stock Purchase Plan (“ESPP”) is designed to encourage greater stock ownership among employees, thereby enhancing employee commitment to the Company. The ESPP gives eligible employees the right to accumulate funds over an offering period to purchase shares of common stock. All shares offered under the ESPP will be either newly issued shares of the Company or shares issued from treasury, if any. In accordance with the ESPP, beginning January 1, 2015, the purchase price of the shares of common stock will be equal to 95% of the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the last day of the offering period. Previously, the Company’s Board of Directors authorized a purchase price calculation of the lesser of 90% of fair market value per share of the common stock on the first day of the offering period or 90% of the fair market value of the common stock on the last day of the offering period. During 2015, 56,517 shares of common stock were earned by participants and no compensation expense was recorded. In 2014 and 2013, a total of 66,521 shares and 62,096 shares, respectively, were earned by participants and approximately $377,000 and $355,000, respectively, of compensation expense was recognized. The Company plans to continue to offer common stock through this ESPP on an ongoing basis. In May 2012, the Company's shareholders authorized an additional 300,000 shares of common stock that may be offered under the ESPP. At December 31, 2015, the Company had an obligation to issue 14,053 shares of common stock to participants and had 135,982 shares available for future grants under the ESPP.
As a result of the Company's acquisition of HPK in December 2012, the Company assumed the obligations of a noncontributory pension plan, (“the HPK Plan”), that covers approximately 100 participants with benefits based on years of service and compensation prior to retirement. The HPK Plan was “frozen” as of December 31, 2006, with no additional years of credit earned for service or compensation paid. As of December 31, 2015, the projected benefit obligation was $6.1 million and the fair value of the plan's assets was $4.9 million. Similarly, in connection with the Company's acquisition of Diamond in October 2013, the Company assumed the obligation of Diamond's pension plan, which covers approximately 35 participants. The Diamond Plan was "frozen" as of December 31, 2004, and only service and compensation prior to this date is considered in determining benefits. As of December 31, 2015, the projected benefit obligation was $3.1 million and the fair value of the plan's assets was $2.1 million. The Company has accrued liabilities for the unfunded portions of these plans. The Company recorded expense (benefit) of $1.4 million and ($1.1 million) in 2015 and 2014 related to these plans. There was no expense related to these plans in 2013.
The Company does not currently offer other postretirement benefits such as health care or other pension plans.
Directors Deferred Fee and Stock Plan
The Wintrust Financial Corporation Directors Deferred Fee and Stock Plan (“DDFS Plan”) allows directors of the Company and its subsidiaries to choose to receive payment of directors’ fees in either cash or common stock of the Company and to defer the receipt of the fees. The DDFS Plan is designed to encourage stock ownership by directors. All shares offered under the DDFS Plan will be either newly issued shares of the Company or shares issued from treasury. The number of shares issued is determined on a quarterly basis based on the fees earned during the quarter and the fair market value per share of the common stock on the last trading day of the preceding quarter. The shares are issued annually and the directors are entitled to dividends and voting rights upon the issuance of the shares. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, a total of 20,475 shares, 19,488 shares and 30,547 shares, respectively, were issued to directors. For those directors that elect to defer the receipt of the common stock, the Company maintains records of stock units representing an obligation to issue shares of common stock. The number of stock units equals the number of shares that would have been issued had the director not elected to defer receipt of the shares. Additional stock units are credited at the time dividends are paid, however no voting rights are associated with the stock units. The shares of common stock represented by the stock units are issued in the year specified by the directors in their participation agreements. In July 2015, the shares authorized under the DDFS Plan were increased by 150,000. At December 31, 2015, the Company has an obligation to issue 279,479 shares of common stock to directors and has 148,363 shares available for future grants under the DDFS Plan.
(18) Regulatory Matters
Banking laws place restrictions upon the amount of dividends that can be paid to Wintrust by the banks. Based on these laws, the banks could, subject to minimum capital requirements, declare dividends to Wintrust without obtaining regulatory approval in an amount not exceeding (a) undivided profits, and (b) the amount of net income reduced by dividends paid for the current and prior two years. During 2015, 2014 and 2013, cash dividends totaling $22.2 million, $77.0 million and $112.8 million, respectively, were paid to Wintrust by the banks and other subsidiaries. As of January 1, 2016, the banks had approximately $70.2 million available to be paid as dividends to Wintrust without prior regulatory approval and without reducing their capital below the well-capitalized level.
The banks are also required by the Federal Reserve Act to maintain reserves against deposits. Reserves are held either in the form of vault cash or balances maintained with the Federal Reserve Bank and are based on the average daily deposit balances and statutory reserve ratios prescribed by the type of deposit account. At December 31, 2015 and 2014, reserve balances of approximately $412.7 million and $291.0 million, respectively, were required to be maintained at the Federal Reserve Bank.
The Company and the banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements established by the federal banking agencies that take into account risk attributable to balance sheet and off-balance sheet activities. Failure to meet minimum capital requirements can initiate certain mandatory - and possibly discretionary - actions by regulators, that if undertaken could have a direct material effect on the Company’s financial statements. Under capital adequacy guidelines and the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action, the Company and the banks must meet specific capital guidelines that involve quantitative measures of the Company’s assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items as calculated under regulatory accounting practices.
Quantitative measures established by regulation to ensure capital adequacy require the Company and the banks to maintain minimum amounts and ratios of total and Tier 1 capital (as defined in the regulations) to risk-weighted assets (as defined) and Tier 1 leverage capital (as defined) to average quarterly assets (as defined). The Federal Reserve’s capital guidelines require bank holding companies to maintain a minimum ratio of qualifying total capital to risk-weighted assets of 8.0%, of which at least 4.50% must be in the form of common equity Tier 1 capital and 6.0% must be in the form of Tier 1 capital. The Federal Reserve also requires a minimum leverage ratio of Tier 1 capital to total assets of 4.0%. In addition the Federal Reserve continues to consider the Tier 1 leverage ratio in evaluating proposals for expansion or new activities. As reflected in the following table, the Company met all minimum capital requirements at December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Wintrust is designated as a financial holding company. Bank holding companies approved as financial holding companies may engage in an expanded range of activities, including the businesses conducted by its wealth management subsidiaries. As a financial holding company, Wintrust’s banks are required to maintain their capital positions at the “well-capitalized” level. As of December 31, 2015, the banks were categorized as well capitalized under the regulatory framework for prompt corrective action. The ratios required for the banks to be “well capitalized” by regulatory definition are 10.0%, 8.0%, 6.5% and 5.0% for Total capital to risk-weighted assets, Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets, Common equity Tier 1 capital to risk weighted assets and Tier 1 leverage ratio, respectively.
The banks’ actual capital amounts and ratios as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 are presented in the following table:
Wintrust’s mortgage banking division and broker/dealer subsidiary are also required to maintain minimum net worth capital requirements with various governmental agencies. The mortgage banking division’s net worth requirements are governed by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the broker/dealer’s net worth requirements are governed by the SEC. As of December 31, 2015, these business units met their minimum net worth capital requirements.
(19) Commitments and Contingencies
The Company has outstanding, at any time, a number of commitments to extend credit. These commitments include revolving home equity line and other credit agreements, term loan commitments and standby and commercial letters of credit. Standby and commercial letters of credit are conditional commitments issued to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party. Standby letters of credit are contingent upon the failure of the customer to perform according to the terms of the underlying contract with the third party, while commercial letters of credit are issued specifically to facilitate commerce and typically result in the commitment being drawn on when the underlying transaction is consummated between the customer and the third party.
These commitments involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amounts recognized in the Consolidated Statements of Condition. Since many of the commitments are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amounts do not necessarily represent future cash requirements. The Company uses the same credit policies in making commitments as it does for on-balance sheet instruments. Commitments to extend commercial, commercial real estate and construction loans totaled $3.7 billion and $3.1 billion as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and unused home equity lines totaled $855.1 million and $744.3 million as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively. Standby and commercial letters of credit totaled $176.1 million at December 31, 2015 and $175.7 million at December 31, 2014.
In addition, at December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company had approximately $473.4 million and $427.4 million, respectively, in commitments to fund residential mortgage loans to be sold into the secondary market. These lending commitments are also considered derivative instruments. The Company also enters into forward contracts for the future delivery of residential mortgage loans at specified interest rates to reduce the interest rate risk associated with commitments to fund loans as well as mortgage loans held-for-sale. These forward contracts are also considered derivative instruments and had contractual amounts of approximately $753.9 million at December 31, 2015 and $575.4 million at December 31, 2014. See Note 20 for further discussion on derivative instruments.
The Company enters into residential mortgage loan sale agreements with investors in the normal course of business. These agreements usually require certain representations concerning credit information, loan documentation, collateral and insurability. On occasion, investors have requested the Company to indemnify them against losses on certain loans or to repurchase loans which the investors believe do not comply with applicable representations. Management maintains a liability for estimated losses on loans expected to be repurchased or on which indemnification is expected to be provided and regularly evaluates the adequacy of this recourse liability based on trends in repurchase and indemnification requests, actual loss experience, known and inherent risks in the loans, and current economic conditions.
The Company sold approximately $4.0 billion of mortgage loans in 2015 and $3.2 billion in 2014. The liability for estimated losses on repurchase and indemnification claims for residential mortgage loans previously sold to investors was $4.0 million and $3.1 million at December 31, 2015 and 2014, respectively, and was included in other liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Condition. Losses charged against the liability were $1.1 million in 2015 as compared to $435,000 in 2014. These losses relate to mortgages which experienced early payment and other defaults meeting certain representation and warranty recourse requirements.
The Company utilizes an out-sourced securities clearing platform and has agreed to indemnify the clearing broker of WHI for losses that it may sustain from the customer accounts introduced by WHI. As of December 31, 2015, the total amount of customer balances maintained by the clearing broker and subject to indemnification was approximately $26.7 million. WHI seeks to control the risks associated with its customers’ activities by requiring customers to maintain margin collateral in compliance with various regulatory and internal guidelines.
In the ordinary course of business, there are legal proceedings pending against the Company and its subsidiaries. Management does not believe that a material loss related to these matters is reasonably possible.
(20) Derivative Financial Instruments
The Company primarily enters into derivative financial instruments as part of its strategy to manage its exposure to changes in interest rates. Derivative instruments represent contracts between parties that result in one party delivering cash to the other party based on a notional amount and an underlying term (such as a rate, security price or price index) as specified in the contract. The amount of cash delivered from one party to the other is determined based on the interaction of the notional amount of the contract with the underlying term. Derivatives are also implicit in certain contracts and commitments.
The derivative financial instruments currently used by the Company to manage its exposure to interest rate risk include: (1) interest rate swaps and caps to manage the interest rate risk of certain fixed and variable rate assets and variable rate liabilities; (2) interest rate lock commitments provided to customers to fund certain mortgage loans to be sold into the secondary market; (3) forward commitments for the future delivery of such mortgage loans to protect the Company from adverse changes in interest rates and corresponding changes in the value of mortgage loans held-for-sale; and (4) covered call options to economically hedge specific investment securities and receive fee income effectively enhancing the overall yield on such securities to compensate for net interest margin compression. The Company also enters into derivatives (typically interest rate swaps) with certain qualified borrowers to facilitate the borrowers’ risk management strategies and concurrently enters into mirror-image derivatives with a third party counterparty, effectively making a market in the derivatives for such borrowers. Additionally, the Company enters into foreign currency contracts to manage foreign exchange risk associated with certain foreign currency denominated assets.
The Company has purchased interest rate cap derivatives to hedge or manage its own risk exposures. Certain interest rate cap derivatives have been designated as cash flow hedge derivatives of the variable cash outflows associated with interest expense on the Company’s junior subordinated debentures and certain deposits. Other cap derivatives are not designated for hedge accounting but are economic hedges of the Company's overall portfolio, therefore any mark to market changes in the value of these caps are recognized in earnings.
Below is a summary of the interest rate cap derivatives held by the Company as of December 31, 2015:
The Company recognizes derivative financial instruments in the consolidated financial statements at fair value regardless of the purpose or intent for holding the instrument. The Company records derivative assets and derivative liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Condition within accrued interest receivable and other assets and accrued interest payable and other liabilities,
respectively. Changes in the fair value of derivative financial instruments are either recognized in income or in shareholders’ equity as a component of other comprehensive income depending on whether the derivative financial instrument qualifies for hedge accounting and, if so, whether it qualifies as a fair value hedge or cash flow hedge. Generally, changes in fair values of derivatives accounted for as fair value hedges are recorded in income in the same period and in the same income statement line as changes in the fair values of the hedged items that relate to the hedged risk(s). Changes in fair values of derivative financial instruments accounted for as cash flow hedges, to the extent they are effective hedges, are recorded as a component of other comprehensive income, net of deferred taxes, and reclassified to earnings when the hedged transaction affects earnings. Changes in fair values of derivative financial instruments not designated in a hedging relationship pursuant to ASC 815, including changes in fair value related to the ineffective portion of cash flow hedges, are reported in non-interest income during the period of the change. Derivative financial instruments are valued by a third party and are corroborated by comparison with valuations provided by the respective counterparties. Fair values of certain mortgage banking derivatives (interest rate lock commitments and forward commitments to sell mortgage loans) are estimated based on changes in mortgage interest rates from the date of the loan commitment. The fair value of foreign currency derivatives is computed based on changes in foreign currency rates stated in the contract compared to those prevailing at the measurement date.
The table below presents the fair value of the Company’s derivative financial instruments as of December 31, 2015 and December 31, 2014:
Cash Flow Hedges of Interest Rate Risk
The Company’s objectives in using interest rate derivatives are to add stability to net interest income and to manage its exposure to interest rate movements. To accomplish these objectives, the Company primarily uses interest rate swaps and interest rate caps as part of its interest rate risk management strategy. Interest rate swaps designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of variable-rate amounts from a counterparty in exchange for the Company making fixed-rate payments over the life of the agreements without the exchange of the underlying notional amount. Interest rate caps designated as cash flow hedges involve the receipt of payments at the end of each period in which the interest rate specified in the contract exceeds the agreed upon strike price.
During the first quarter of 2014, the Company designated two existing interest rate cap derivatives as cash flow hedges of variable rate deposits. The cap derivatives had notional amounts of $216.5 million and $43.5 million, respectively, both maturing in August 2016. Additionally, as of December 31, 2015, the Company had two interest rate swaps and two interest rate caps designated as hedges of the variable cash outflows associated with interest expense on the Company’s junior subordinated debentures. The effective portion of changes in the fair value of these cash flow hedges is recorded in accumulated other comprehensive income and is subsequently reclassified to interest expense as interest payments are made on the Company’s variable rate junior subordinated debentures. The changes in fair value (net of tax) are separately disclosed in the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income. The ineffective portion of the change in fair value of these derivatives is recognized directly in earnings; however, no hedge ineffectiveness was recognized during the years ended December 31, 2015 or December 31, 2014. The Company uses the hypothetical derivative method to assess and measure hedge effectiveness.
The table below provides details on each of these cash flow hedges as of December 31, 2015:
A rollforward of the amounts in accumulated other comprehensive loss related to interest rate derivatives designated as cash flow hedges follows:
As of December 31, 2015, the Company estimates that during the next twelve months, $2.6 million will be reclassified from accumulated other comprehensive loss as an increase to interest expense.
Fair Value Hedges of Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate swaps designated as fair value hedges involve the payment of fixed amounts to a counterparty in exchange for the Company receiving variable payments over the life of the agreements without the exchange of the underlying notional amount. As of December 31, 2015, the Company has four interest rate swaps with an aggregate notional amount of $16.4 million that were designated as fair value hedges associated with fixed rate commercial franchise loans.
For derivatives designated and that qualify as fair value hedges, the gain or loss on the derivative as well as the offsetting loss or gain on the hedged item attributable to the hedged risk are recognized in earnings. The Company includes the gain or loss on the hedged item in the same line item as the offsetting loss or gain on the related derivatives. The Company recognized a net loss of $16,000 and $5,000 in other income related to hedge ineffectiveness for the years ended 2015 and 2014, respectively.
On June 1, 2013, the Company de-designated a $96.5 million cap which was previously designated as a fair value hedge of interest rate risk associated with an embedded cap in one of the Company’s floating rate loans. The hedged loan was restructured which resulted in the interest rate cap no longer qualifying as an effective fair value hedge. As such, the interest rate cap derivative is no longer accounted for under hedge accounting and all changes in value subsequent to June 1, 2013 are recorded in earnings. Additionally, the Company recorded amortization of the basis in the previously hedged item as a reduction to interest income of $172,000 for both of the years ended 2015 and 2014, respectively.
The following table presents the gain/(loss) and hedge ineffectiveness recognized on derivative instruments and the related hedged items that are designated as a fair value hedge accounting relationship as of December 31, 2015 and 2014:
Non-Designated Hedges
The Company does not use derivatives for speculative purposes. Derivatives not designated as hedges are used to manage the Company’s exposure to interest rate movements and other identified risks but do not meet the strict hedge accounting requirements of ASC 815. Changes in the fair value of derivatives not designated in hedging relationships are recorded directly in earnings.
Interest Rate Derivatives-The Company has interest rate derivatives, including swaps and option products, resulting from a service the Company provides to certain qualified borrowers. The Company’s banking subsidiaries execute certain derivative products (typically interest rate swaps) directly with qualified commercial borrowers to facilitate their respective risk management strategies. For example, these arrangements allow the Company’s commercial borrowers to effectively convert a variable rate loan to a fixed rate. In order to minimize the Company’s exposure on these transactions, the Company simultaneously executes offsetting derivatives with third parties. In most cases, the offsetting derivatives have mirror-image terms, which result in the positions’ changes in fair value substantially offsetting through earnings each period. However, to the extent that the derivatives are not a mirror-image and because of differences in counterparty credit risk, changes in fair value will not completely offset resulting in some earnings impact each period. Changes in the fair value of these derivatives are included in other non-interest income. At December 31, 2015, the Company had interest rate derivative transactions with an aggregate notional amount of approximately $3.4 billion (all interest rate swaps and caps with customers and third parties) related to this program. These interest rate derivatives had maturity dates ranging from January 2016 to February 2045.
Mortgage Banking Derivatives-These derivatives include interest rate lock commitments provided to customers to fund certain mortgage loans to be sold into the secondary market and forward commitments for the future delivery of such loans. It is the Company’s practice to enter into forward commitments for the future delivery of a portion of our residential mortgage loan production when interest rate lock commitments are entered into in order to economically hedge the effect of future changes in interest rates on its commitments to fund the loans as well as on its portfolio of mortgage loans held-for-sale. The Company’s mortgage banking derivatives have not been designated as being in hedge relationships. At December 31, 2015, the Company had forward commitments to sell mortgage loans with an aggregate notional amount of approximately $753.9 million and interest rate lock commitments with an aggregate notional amount of approximately $326.7 million. Additionally, the Company’s total mortgage loans held-for-sale at December 31, 2015 was $388.0 million. The fair values of these derivatives were estimated based on changes in mortgage rates from the dates of the commitments. Changes in the fair value of these mortgage banking derivatives are included in mortgage banking revenue.
Foreign Currency Derivatives-These derivatives include foreign currency contracts used to manage the foreign exchange risk associated with foreign currency denominated assets and transactions. Foreign currency contracts, which include spot and forward contracts, represent agreements to exchange the currency of one country for the currency of another country at an agreed-upon price on an agreed-upon settlement date. As a result of fluctuations in foreign currencies, the U.S. dollar-equivalent value of the foreign currency denominated assets or forecasted transactions increase or decrease. Gains or losses on the derivative instruments related to these foreign currency denominated assets or forecasted transactions are expected to substantially offset this variability. As of December 31, 2015 the Company held foreign currency derivatives with an aggregate notional amount of approximately $22.0 million.
Other Derivatives-Periodically, the Company will sell options to a bank or dealer for the right to purchase certain securities held within the banks’ investment portfolios (covered call options). These option transactions are designed primarily to mitigate overall interest rate risk and to increase the total return associated with the investment securities portfolio. These options do not qualify as hedges pursuant to ASC 815, and, accordingly, changes in fair value of these contracts are recognized as other non-interest income. There were no covered call options outstanding as of December 31, 2015 or December 31, 2014.
As discussed above, the Company has entered into interest rate cap derivatives to protect the Company in a rising rate environment against increased margin compression due to the repricing of variable rate liabilities and lack of repricing of fixed rate loans and/
or securities. As of December 31, 2015, the Company held four interest rate cap derivative contracts, which are not designated in hedge relationships, have an aggregate notional value of $446.5 million.
Amounts included in the Consolidated Statements of Income related to derivative instruments not designated in hedge relationships were as follows:
Credit Risk
Derivative instruments have inherent risks, primarily market risk and credit risk. Market risk is associated with changes in interest rates and credit risk relates to the risk that the counterparty will fail to perform according to the terms of the agreement. The amounts potentially subject to market and credit risks are the streams of interest payments under the contracts and the market value of the derivative instrument and not the notional principal amounts used to express the volume of the transactions. Market and credit risks are managed and monitored as part of the Company’s overall asset-liability management process, except that the credit risk related to derivatives entered into with certain qualified borrowers is managed through the Company’s standard loan underwriting process since these derivatives are secured through collateral provided by the loan agreements. Actual exposures are monitored against various types of credit limits established to contain risk within parameters. When deemed necessary, appropriate types and amounts of collateral are obtained to minimize credit exposure.
The Company has agreements with certain of its interest rate derivative counterparties that contain cross-default provisions, which provide that if the Company defaults on any of its indebtedness, including default where repayment of the indebtedness has not been accelerated by the lender, then the Company could also be declared in default on its derivative obligations. The Company also has agreements with certain of its derivative counterparties that contain a provision allowing the counterparty to terminate the derivative positions if the Company fails to maintain its status as a well or adequately capitalized institution, which would require the Company to settle its obligations under the agreements. As of December 31, 2015, the fair value of interest rate derivatives in a net liability position, which includes accrued interest related to these agreements, was $43.3 million. If the Company had breached any of these provisions at December 31, 2015 it would have been required to settle its obligations under the agreements at the termination value and would have been required to pay any additional amounts due in excess of amounts previously posted as collateral with the respective counterparty.
The Company is also exposed to the credit risk of its commercial borrowers who are counterparties to interest rate derivatives with the banks. This counterparty risk related to the commercial borrowers is managed and monitored through the banks’ standard underwriting process applicable to loans since these derivatives are secured through collateral provided by the loan agreement. The counterparty risk associated with the mirror-image swaps executed with third parties is monitored and managed in connection with the Company’s overall asset liability management process.
The Company records interest rate derivatives subject to master netting agreements at their gross value and does not offset derivative assets and liabilities on the Consolidated Statements of Condition. The tables below summarize the Company's interest rate derivatives and offsetting positions as of the dates shown.
(1)
As of December 31, 2015 and 2014, the Company posted collateral of $45.5 million and $43.8 million, respectively which resulted in excess collateral with its counterparties. For purposes of this disclosure, the amount of posted collateral is limited to the amount offsetting the derivative liability.
(21) Fair Value of Assets and Liabilities
The Company measures, monitors and discloses certain of its assets and liabilities on a fair value basis. These financial assets and financial liabilities are measured at fair value in three levels, based on the markets in which the assets and liabilities are traded and the observability of the inputs used to determine fair value. These levels are:
•
Level 1 - unadjusted quoted prices in active markets for identical assets or liabilities.
•
Level 2 - inputs other than quoted prices included in Level 1 that are observable for the asset or liability, either directly or indirectly. These include quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities in active markets, quoted prices for identical or similar assets or liabilities in markets that are not active, inputs other than quoted prices that are observable for the asset or liability or inputs that are derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data by correlation or other means.
•
Level 3 - significant unobservable inputs that reflect the Company’s own assumptions that market participants would use in pricing the assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include financial instruments whose value is determined using pricing models, discounted cash flow methodologies, or similar techniques, as well as instruments for which the determination of fair value requires significant management judgment or estimation.
A financial instrument’s categorization within the above valuation hierarchy is based upon the lowest level of input that is significant to the fair value measurement. The Company’s assessment of the significance of a particular input to the fair value measurement in its entirety requires judgment, and considers factors specific to the assets or liabilities. Following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for the Company’s assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis.
Available-for-sale and trading account securities-Fair values for available-for-sale and trading securities are typically based on prices obtained from independent pricing vendors. Securities measured with these valuation techniques are generally classified as Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy. Typically, standard inputs such as benchmark yields, reported trades for similar securities, issuer spreads, benchmark securities, bids, offers and reference data including market research publications are used to fair value a security. When these inputs are not available, broker/dealer quotes may be obtained by the vendor to determine the fair value of the security. We review the vendor’s pricing methodologies to determine if observable market information is being used, versus unobservable inputs. Fair value measurements using significant inputs that are unobservable in the market due to limited activity or a less liquid market are classified as Level 3 in the fair value hierarchy.
The Company’s Investment Operations Department is responsible for the valuation of Level 3 available-for-sale securities. The methodology and variables used as inputs in pricing Level 3 securities are derived from a combination of observable and unobservable inputs. The unobservable inputs are determined through internal assumptions that may vary from period to period due to external factors, such as market movement and credit rating adjustments.
At December 31, 2015, the Company classified $68.6 million of municipal securities as Level 3. These municipal securities are bond issues for various municipal government entities primarily located in the Chicago metropolitan area and southern Wisconsin
and are privately placed, non-rated bonds without CUSIP numbers. The Company’s methodology for pricing the non-rated bonds focuses on three distinct inputs: equivalent rating, yield and other pricing terms. To determine the rating for a given non-rated municipal bond, the Investment Operations Department references a publicly issued bond by the same issuer if available. A reduction is then applied to the rating obtained from the comparable bond, as the Company believes if liquidated, a non-rated bond would be valued less than a similar bond with a verifiable rating. The reduction applied by the Company is one complete rating grade (i.e. a “AA” rating for a comparable bond would be reduced to “A” for the Company’s valuation). In 2015, all of the ratings derived in the above process by Investment Operations were "BBB" or better, for both bonds with and without comparable bond proxies. The fair value measurement of municipal bonds is sensitive to the rating input, as a higher rating typically results in an increased valuation. The remaining pricing inputs used in the bond valuation are observable. Based on the rating determined in the above process, Investment Operations obtains a corresponding current market yield curve available to market participants. Other terms including coupon, maturity date, redemption price, number of coupon payments per year, and accrual method are obtained from the individual bond term sheets. Certain municipal bonds held by the Company at December 31, 2015 have a call date that has passed, and are now continuously callable. When valuing these bonds, the fair value is capped at par value as the Company assumes a market participant would not pay more than par for a continuously callable bond.
At December 31, 2015, the Company held $25.2 million of equity securities classified as Level 3. The securities in Level 3 are primarily comprised of auction rate preferred securities. The Company utilizes an independent pricing vendor to provide a fair market valuation of these securities. The vendor’s valuation methodology includes modeling the contractual cash flows of the underlying preferred securities and applying a discount to these cash flows by a credit spread derived from the market price of the securities underlying debt. At December 31, 2015, the vendor considered five different securities whose implied credit spreads were believed to provide a proxy for the Company’s auction rate preferred securities. The credit spreads ranged from 1.85%-2.12% with an average of 2.01% which was added to three-month LIBOR to be used as the discount rate input to the vendor’s model. Fair value of the securities is sensitive to the discount rate utilized as a higher discount rate results in a decreased fair value measurement.
Mortgage loans held-for-sale-The fair value of mortgage loans held-for-sale is determined by reference to investor price sheets for loan products with similar characteristics.
Mortgage servicing rights-Fair value for mortgage servicing rights is determined utilizing a third party valuation model which stratifies the servicing rights into pools based on product type and interest rate. The fair value of each servicing rights pool is calculated based on the present value of estimated future cash flows using a discount rate commensurate with the risk associated with that pool, given current market conditions. At December 31, 2015, the Company classified $9.1 million of mortgage servicing rights as Level 3. The weighted average discount rate used as an input to value the pool of mortgage servicing rights at December 31, 2015 was 9.13% with discount rates applied ranging from 9%-13%. The higher the rate utilized to discount estimated future cash flows, the lower the fair value measurement. Additionally, fair value estimates include assumptions about prepayment speeds which ranged from 8%-26% or a weighted average prepayment speed of 11.77% used as an input to value the pool of mortgage servicing rights at December 31, 2015. Prepayment speeds are inversely related to the fair value of mortgage servicing rights as an increase in prepayment speeds results in a decreased valuation.
Derivative instruments-The Company’s derivative instruments include interest rate swaps and caps, commitments to fund mortgages for sale into the secondary market (interest rate locks), forward commitments to end investors for the sale of mortgage loans and foreign currency contracts. Interest rate swaps and caps are valued by a third party, using models that primarily use market observable inputs, such as yield curves, and are validated by comparison with valuations provided by the respective counterparties. The credit risk associated with derivative financial instruments that are subject to master netting agreements is measured on a net basis by counterparty portfolio. The fair value for mortgage-related derivatives is based on changes in mortgage rates from the date of the commitments. The fair value of foreign currency derivatives is computed based on change in foreign currency rates stated in the contract compared to those prevailing at the measurement date.
Nonqualified deferred compensation assets-The underlying assets relating to the nonqualified deferred compensation plan are included in a trust and primarily consist of non-exchange traded institutional funds which are priced based by an independent third party service.
The following tables present the balances of assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis for the periods presented:
The aggregate remaining contractual principal balance outstanding as of December 31, 2015 and 2014 for mortgage loans held- for-sale measured at fair value under ASC 825 was $372.0 million and $327.1 million, respectively, while the aggregate fair value of mortgage loans held-for-sale was $388.0 million and $351.3 million, respectively, as shown in the above tables. There were no nonaccrual loans or loans past due greater than 90 days and still accruing in the mortgage loans held-for-sale portfolio measured at fair value as of December 31, 2015 and 2014.
The changes in Level 3 assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2015 are summarized as follows:
(1)
Changes in the balance of mortgage servicing rights are recorded as a component of mortgage banking revenue in non-interest income.
The changes in Level 3 assets measured at fair value on a recurring basis during the year ended December 31, 2014 are summarized as follows:
(1)
Changes in the balance of mortgage servicing rights are recorded as a component of mortgage banking revenue in non-interest income.
(2)
Transfers into Level 3 relate to a reclassification of municipal bonds in the third quarter of 2014.
Also, the Company may be required, from time to time, to measure certain other financial assets at fair value on a nonrecurring basis in accordance with GAAP. These adjustments to fair value usually result from impairment charges on individual assets. For assets measured at fair value on a nonrecurring basis that were still held in the balance sheet at the end of the period, the following table provides the carrying value of the related individual assets or portfolios at December 31, 2015.
(1)
Fair value losses recognized, net on other real estate owned include valuation adjustments and charge-offs during the respective period.
Impaired loans-A loan is considered to be impaired when, based on current information and events, it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due pursuant to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. A loan modified in a TDR is an impaired loan according to applicable accounting guidance. Impairment is measured by estimating the fair value of the loan based on the present value of expected cash flows, the market price of the loan, or the fair value of the underlying collateral. Impaired loans are considered a fair value measurement where an allowance is established based on the fair value of collateral. Appraised values, which may require adjustments to market-based valuation inputs, are generally used on real estate collateral-dependent impaired loans.
The Company’s Managed Assets Division is primarily responsible for the valuation of Level 3 inputs of impaired loans. For more information on the Managed Assets Division review of impaired loans refer to Note 5 - Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Losses on Lending-Related Commitments and Impaired Loans. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $101.3 million of impaired loans classified as Level 3. Of the $101.3 million of impaired loans, $65.6 million were measured at fair value based on the underlying collateral of the loan as shown in the table above. The remaining $35.7 million were valued based on discounted cash flows in accordance with ASC 310.
Other real estate owned (including covered other real estate owned)-Other real estate owned is comprised of real estate acquired in partial or full satisfaction of loans and is included in other assets. Other real estate owned is recorded at its estimated fair value less estimated selling costs at the date of transfer, with any excess of the related loan balance over the fair value less expected selling costs charged to the allowance for loan losses. Subsequent changes in value are reported as adjustments to the carrying amount and are recorded in other non-interest expense. Gains and losses upon sale, if any, are also charged to other non-interest expense. Fair value is generally based on third party appraisals and internal estimates that are adjusted by a discount representing
the estimated cost of sale and is therefore considered a Level 3 valuation.
The Company’s Managed Assets Division is primarily responsible for the valuation of Level 3 inputs for non-covered other real estate owned and covered other real estate owned. At December 31, 2015, the Company had $65.3 million of other real estate owned classified as Level 3. The unobservable input applied to other real estate owned relates to the 10% reduction to the appraisal value representing the estimated cost of sale of the foreclosed property. A higher discount for the estimated cost of sale results in a decreased carrying value.
The valuation techniques and significant unobservable inputs used to measure both recurring and non-recurring Level 3 fair value measurements at December 31, 2015 were as follows:
The Company is required under applicable accounting guidance to report the fair value of all financial instruments on the consolidated statements of condition, including those financial instruments carried at cost. The table below presents the carrying amounts and estimated fair values of the Company’s financial instruments as of the dates shown:
Not all of the financial instruments listed in the table above are subject to the disclosure provisions of ASC Topic 820, as certain assets and liabilities result in their carrying value approximating fair value. These include cash and cash equivalents, interest bearing deposits with banks, brokerage customer receivables, FHLB and FRB stock, FDIC indemnification asset, accrued interest receivable and accrued interest payable, and non-maturity deposits.
The following methods and assumptions were used by the Company in estimating fair values of financial instruments that were not previously disclosed.
Held-to-maturity securities. Held-to-maturity securities include U.S. Government-sponsored agency securities and municipal bonds issued by various municipal government entities primarily located in the Chicago metropolitan area and southern Wisconsin. Fair values for held-to-maturity securities are typically based on prices obtained from independent pricing vendors. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized held-to-maturity securities as a Level 2 fair value measurement.
Loans. Fair values are estimated for portfolios of loans with similar financial characteristics. Loans are analyzed by type such as commercial, residential real estate, etc. Each category is further segmented by interest rate type (fixed and variable) and term. For variable-rate loans that reprice frequently, estimated fair values are based on carrying values. The fair value of residential loans is based on secondary market sources for securities backed by similar loans, adjusted for differences in loan characteristics. The fair value for other fixed rate loans is estimated by discounting scheduled cash flows through the estimated maturity using estimated market discount rates that reflect credit and interest rate risks inherent in the loan. The primary impact of credit risk on the present value of the loan portfolio, however, was assessed through the use of the allowance for loan losses, which is believed to represent
the current fair value of probable incurred losses for purposes of the fair value calculation. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized loans as a Level 3 fair value measurement.
Deposits with stated maturities. The fair value of certificates of deposit is based on the discounted value of contractual cash flows. The discount rate is estimated using the rates currently in effect for deposits of similar remaining maturities. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized deposits with stated maturities as a Level 3 fair value measurement.
Federal Home Loan Bank advances. The fair value of Federal Home Loan Bank advances is obtained from the Federal Home Loan Bank, which uses a discounted cash flow analysis based on current market rates of similar maturity debt securities to discount cash flows. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized Federal Home Loan Bank advances as a Level 3 fair value measurement.
Subordinated notes. The fair value of the subordinated notes is based on a market price obtained from an independent pricing
vendor. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized subordinated notes as a Level 2 fair value measurement.
Junior subordinated debentures. The fair value of the junior subordinated debentures is based on the discounted value of contractual cash flows. In accordance with ASC 820, the Company has categorized junior subordinated debentures as a Level 3 fair value measurement.
(22) Shareholders’ Equity
A summary of the Company’s common and preferred stock at December 31, 2015 and 2014 is as follows:
The Company reserves shares of its authorized common stock specifically for the 2007 Plan, the ESPP and the Directors Deferred Fee and Stock Plan ("the DDFS"). The reserved shares and these plans are detailed in Note 17 - Stock Compensation Plans and Other Employee Benefit Plans. The Company also reserves its authorized common stock for conversion of convertible preferred stock and common stock warrants.
Tangible Equity Units
In December 2010, the Company sold 4.6 million 7.50% TEU's at a public offering price of $50.00 per unit. The Company received net proceeds of $222.7 million after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses. Each tangible equity unit was composed of a prepaid common stock purchase contract and a junior subordinated amortizing note due December 15, 2013. The prepaid stock purchase contracts were recorded as surplus (a component of shareholders’ equity), net of issuance costs, and the junior subordinated amortizing notes were recorded as debt within other borrowings. Issuance costs associated with the debt component were recorded as a discount within other borrowings and were amortized over the term of the instrument to December 15, 2013 at which time they were paid off in full. The Company allocated the proceeds from the issuance of the TEU to equity and debt based on the relative fair values of the respective components of each unit.
The aggregate fair values assigned to each component of the TEU offering at the issuance date were as follows:
(1)
TEUs consisted of two components: one unit of the equity component and one unit of the debt component.
The fair value of the debt component was determined using a discounted cash flow model using the following assumptions: (1) quarterly cash payments of 7.5%; (2) a maturity date of December 15, 2013; and (3) an assumed discount rate of 9.5%. The discount rate used for estimating the fair value was determined by obtaining yields for comparably-rated issuers trading in the market. The debt component was recorded at fair value, and the discount was amortized using the level yield method over the term of the instrument to the settlement date of December 15, 2013.
The fair value of the equity component was determined using Black-Scholes valuation models applied to the range of stock prices contemplated by the terms of the TEU and using the following assumptions: (1) risk-free interest rate of 0.95%; (2) expected stock price volatility in the range of 35%-45%; (3) dividend yield plus stock borrow cost of 0.85%; and (4) term of 3.02 years.
Each junior subordinated amortizing note, which had an initial principal amount of $9.728182, had a stated interest rate of 9.50% per annum, and had a scheduled final installment payment date of December 15, 2013. On each March 15, June 15, September 15 and December 15, the Company paid equal quarterly installments of $0.9375 on each amortizing note. The quarterly installment payable at March 15, 2011, however, was $0.989583. Each payment constituted a payment of interest and a partial repayment of principal. The issuance costs were amortized to interest expense using the effective-interest method.
Each prepaid common stock purchase contract automatically settled on December 15, 2013 and the Company delivered 1.3333 shares of its common stock based on the applicable market value at that time (the average of the volume weighted average price of Company common stock for the twenty (20) consecutive trading days ending on the third trading day immediately preceding December 15, 2013). Upon settlement, an amount equal to $1.00 per common share issued was reclassified from surplus to common stock.
Series A Preferred Stock
In August 2008, the Company issued and sold 50,000 shares of non-cumulative perpetual convertible preferred stock, Series A, liquidation preference $1,000 per share (the "Series A Preferred Stock") for $50 million in a private transaction. Dividends on the Series A Preferred Stock were payable quarterly in arrears at a rate of 8.00% per annum. The Series A Preferred Stock was convertible into common stock at the option of the holder at a conversion rate of 38.88 shares of common stock per share of Series A Preferred Stock. On July 19, 2013, pursuant to such terms, the holder of the Series A Preferred Stock elected to convert all 50,000 shares of Series A Preferred Stock into 1,944,000 shares of the Company's common stock, no par value.
Series C Preferred Stock
In March 2012, the Company issued and sold 126,500 shares of non-cumulative perpetual convertible preferred stock, Series C, liquidation preference $1,000 per share (the “Series C Preferred Stock”) for $126.5 million in a public offering. When, as and if declared, dividends on the Series C Preferred Stock are payable quarterly in arrears at a rate of 5.00% per annum. The Series C Preferred Stock is convertible into common stock at the option of the holder at a conversion rate of 24.3132 shares of common stock per share of Series C Preferred Stock subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments. In 2015, pursuant to such terms, 180 shares of the Series C Preferred Stock were converted at the option of the respective holders into 4,374 shares of the Company's common stock. In 2014, 10 shares of the Series C Preferred Stock were converted at the option of the respective holders into 244 shares of the Company's common stock. On and after April 15, 2017, the Company will have the right under certain circumstances to cause the Series C Preferred Stock to be converted into common stock if the closing price of the Company’s common stock exceeds a certain amount.
Series D Preferred Stock
In June 2015, the Company issued and sold 5,000,000 shares of fixed-to-floating non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, Series D, liquidation preference $25 per share (the “Series D Preferred Stock”) for $125.0 million in a public offering. When, as and if declared, dividends on the Series D Preferred Stock are payable quarterly in arrears at a fixed rate of 6.50% per annum from the original issuance date to, but excluding, July 15, 2025, and from (and including) that date at a floating rate equal to three-month LIBOR plus a spread of 4.06% per annum.
Common Stock Warrants
Pursuant to the U.S. Department of the Treasury’s (the “U.S. Treasury”) Capital Purchase Program, on December 19, 2008, the Company issued to the U.S. Treasury a warrant to exercise 1,643,295 warrant shares of Wintrust common stock at a per share exercise price of $22.82, subject to customary anti-dilution adjustments, and with a term of 10 years. In February 2011, the U.S. Treasury sold all of its interest in the warrant issued to it in a secondary underwritten public offering. During 2015, certain holders of the interest in the warrant exercised 569,985 warrant shares, which resulted in 313,751 shares of common stock issued. At December 31, 2015, all remaining holders of the interest in the warrant were able to exercise 367,432 warrant shares.
Other
In July 2015, the Company issued 388,573 shares of its common stock in the acquisition of CFIS. In January 2015, the Company issued 422,122 shares of its common stock in the acquisition of Delavan. In May 2013, the Company issued 648,286 shares of its common stock in the acquisition of FNBI.
At the January 2016 Board of Directors meeting, a quarterly cash dividend of $0.12 per share ($0.48 on an annualized basis) was
declared. It was paid on February 25, 2016 to shareholders of record as of February 11, 2016.
The following tables summarize the components of other comprehensive income (loss), including the related income tax effects, for the years ending December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013:
(23) Segment Information
The Company’s operations consist of three primary segments: community banking, specialty finance and wealth management.
The three reportable segments are strategic business units that are separately managed as they offer different products and services and have different marketing strategies. In addition, each segment’s customer base has varying characteristics and each segment has a different regulatory environment. While the Company’s management monitors each of the fifteen bank subsidiaries’ operations and profitability separately, these subsidiaries have been aggregated into one reportable operating segment due to the similarities in products and services, customer base, operations, profitability measures and economic characteristics.
For purposes of internal segment profitability, management allocates certain intersegment and parent company balances. Management allocates a portion of revenues to the specialty finance segment related to loans originated by the specialty finance segment and sold to the community banking segment. Similarly, for purposes of analyzing the contribution from the wealth management segment, management allocates a portion of the net interest income earned by the community banking segment on deposit balances of customers of the wealth management segment to the wealth management segment. See Note 10 - Deposits, for more information on these deposits. Finally, expenses incurred at the Wintrust parent company are allocated to each segment based on each segment's risk-weighted assets.
The segment financial information provided in the following tables has been derived from the internal profitability reporting system used by management to monitor and manage the financial performance of the Company. The accounting policies of the segments are substantially similar to those described in the Summary of Significant Accounting Policies in Note 1. The Company evaluates segment performance based on after-tax profit or loss and other appropriate profitability measures common to each segment.
The following is a summary of certain operating information for reportable segments:
(24) Condensed Parent Company Financial Statements
Condensed parent company only financial statements of Wintrust follow:
Statements of Financial Condition
Statements of Income
Statements of Cash Flows
(25) Earnings Per Share
The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted earnings per common share for 2015 , 2014 and 2013:
Potentially dilutive common shares can result from stock options, restricted stock unit awards, stock warrants, the Company’s convertible preferred stock, tangible equity unit shares and shares to be issued under the ESPP and the DDFS Plan, being treated as if they had been either exercised or issued, computed by application of the treasury stock method. While potentially dilutive common shares are typically included in the computation of diluted earnings per share, potentially dilutive common shares are excluded from this computation in periods in which the effect would reduce the loss per share or increase the income per share. For diluted earnings per share, net income applicable to common shares can be affected by the conversion of the Company’s convertible preferred stock. Where the effect of this conversion would reduce the loss per share or increase the income per share, net income applicable to common shares is not adjusted by the associated preferred dividends.
(26) Quarterly Financial Summary (Unaudited)
The following is a summary of quarterly financial information for the years ended December 31, 2015 and 2014:
(27) Subsequent Events
On January 14, 2016, the Company announced the signing of a definitive agreement to acquire Generations Bancorp, Inc. ("Generations"). Generations is the parent company of Foundations Bank which operates one banking location in Pewaukee, Wisconsin. At September 30, 2015, Foundations Bank had approximately $125 million in assets, approximately $72 million in loans, and approximately $97 million in deposits.
On January 21, 2016, the Company acquired $15.0 million of trust preferred securities issued by Wintrust Capital Trust VIII from a third-party investor. The purchase effectively extinguished $15.0 million of junior subordinated debentures related to Wintrust Capital Trust VIII and resulted in a $4.3 million gain.
ITEM 9.
ITEM 9. CHANGES IN AND DISAGREEMENTS WITH ACCOUNTANTS ON ACCOUNTING AND FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE
The Company made no changes in or had no disagreements with its independent accountants during the two most recent fiscal years or any subsequent interim period.
ITEM 9A.
ITEM 9A. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Controls and Procedures
As of the end of the period covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K, management of the Company, under the supervision and with the participation of the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, carried out an evaluation of the effectiveness of the design and operation of the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures as defined under Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). Based upon, and as of the date of that evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer concluded that the Company’s disclosure controls and procedures were effective, in ensuring the information relating to the Company (and its consolidated subsidiaries) required to be disclosed by the Company in the reports it files or submits under the Exchange Act was recorded, processed, summarized and reported in a timely manner.
Changes in Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
There were no changes in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the quarter ended December 31, 2015 that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting.
Report on Management’s Assessment of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting
Wintrust Financial Corporation is responsible for the preparation, integrity, and fair presentation of the consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The consolidated financial statements and notes included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K have been prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States and necessarily include some amounts that are based on management’s best estimates and judgments.
We, as management of Wintrust Financial Corporation, are responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting that is designed to produce reliable financial statements in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States. The system of internal control over financial reporting as it relates to the financial statements is evaluated for effectiveness by management and tested for reliability through a program of internal audits. Actions are taken to correct potential deficiencies as they are identified. Any system of internal control, no matter how well designed, has inherent limitations, including the possibility that a control can be circumvented or overridden and misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. Also, because of changes in conditions, internal control effectiveness may vary over time. Accordingly, even an effective system of internal control will provide only reasonable assurance with respect to financial statement preparation.
Management assessed the Company’s system of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, in relation to criteria for the effective internal control over financial reporting as described in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (COSO Criteria). Based on this assessment, management concludes that, as of December 31, 2015, its system of internal control over financial reporting is effective and meets the criteria of the COSO Criteria. Ernst & Young LLP, the independent registered public accounting firm, that audited the Company's financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, has issued an attestation report on management’s assessment of the Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting. Their report expresses an unqualified opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015.
/s/ Edward J. Wehmer
/s/ David L. Stoehr
Edward J. Wehmer
David L. Stoehr
President and
Executive Vice President &
Chief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer
Rosemont, Illinois
February 29, 2016
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
The Board of Directors and Shareholders of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries
We have audited Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries’ internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on criteria established in Internal Control-Integrated Framework issued by the Committee of Sponsoring Organizations of the Treadway Commission (2013 framework) (the COSO criteria). Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries’ management is responsible for maintaining effective internal control over financial reporting, and for its assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting included in the accompanying Report on Management’s Assessment of Internal Control Over Financial Reporting. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on the company’s internal control over financial reporting based on our audit.
We conducted our audit in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether effective internal control over financial reporting was maintained in all material respects. Our audit included obtaining an understanding of internal control over financial reporting, assessing the risk that a material weakness exists, testing and evaluating the design and operating effectiveness of internal control based on the assessed risk, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our audit provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.
A company’s internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. A company’s internal control over financial reporting includes those policies and procedures that (1) pertain to the maintenance of records that, in reasonable detail, accurately and fairly reflect the transactions and dispositions of the assets of the company; (2) provide reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles, and that receipts and expenditures of the company are being made only in accordance with authorizations of management and directors of the company; and (3) provide reasonable assurance regarding prevention or timely detection of unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition of the company’s assets that could have a material effect on the financial statements.
Because of its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting may not prevent or detect misstatements. Also, projections of any evaluation of effectiveness to future periods are subject to the risk that controls may become inadequate because of changes in conditions, or that the degree of compliance with the policies or procedures may deteriorate.
In our opinion, Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries maintained, in all material respects, effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2015, based on the COSO criteria.
We also have audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the 2015 consolidated financial statements of condition of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2015 and 2014, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, shareholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the three years in the period ended December 31, 2015 of Wintrust Financial Corporation and subsidiaries and our report dated February 29, 2016 expressed an unqualified opinion thereon.
/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
Chicago, Illinois
February 29, 2016
ITEM 9B.
ITEM 9B. OTHER INFORMATION
None.
PART III
ITEM 10.
ITEM 10. DIRECTORS, EXECUTIVE OFFICERS AND CORPORATE GOVERNANCE
The information required in response to this item will be contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement for its Annual Meeting of Shareholders to be held May 26, 2016 (the “Proxy Statement”) under the captions “Election of Directors,” “Executive Officers of the Company,” “Board of Directors’ Committees and Governance” and “Section 16(a) Beneficial Ownership Reporting Compliance” and is incorporated herein by reference.
The Company has adopted a Corporate Code of Ethics which complies with the rules of the SEC and the listing standards of the NASDAQ Global Select Market. The code applies to all of the Company’s directors, officers and employees and is posted on the Company’s website (www.wintrust.com), under the "Corporate Governance" section of the "Investor Relations" tab. The Company will post on its website any amendments to, or waivers from, its Corporate Code of Ethics as the code applies to its directors or executive officers.
ITEM 11.
ITEM 11. EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION
The information required in response to this item will be contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement under the captions “Executive Compensation,” “Director Compensation” "Compensation Committee Interlocks and Insider Participation" and “Compensation Committee Report” and is incorporated herein by reference. The information included under the heading “Compensation Committee Report” in the Proxy Statement shall not be deemed “soliciting” materials or to be “filed” with the SEC or subject to Regulation 14A or 14C, or to the liabilities of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
ITEM 12.
ITEM 12. SECURITY OWNERSHIP OF CERTAIN BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND MANAGEMENT
Information with respect to security ownership of certain beneficial owners and management is incorporated by reference to the materials under the caption “Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners, Directors and Management” that will be included in the Company’s Proxy Statement.
The following table summarizes information as of December 31, 2015, relating to the Company’s equity compensation plans pursuant to which common stock is authorized for issuance:
(1)
Excludes 16,364 shares of the Company's common stock issuable pursuant to the exercise of options granted under the plan of Delavan Bancshares, Inc. The weighted average exercise price of these options is $21.18. No additional awards will be made under this plan.
ITEM 13.
ITEM 13. CERTAIN RELATIONSHIPS AND RELATED TRANSACTIONS AND DIRECTOR INDEPENDENCE
The information required in response to this item will be contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement under the caption “Related Party Transactions” and is incorporated herein by reference.
ITEM 14.
ITEM 14. PRINCIPAL ACCOUNTANT FEES AND SERVICES
The information required in response to this item will be contained in the Company’s Proxy Statement under the caption “Audit and Non-Audit Fees Paid” and is incorporated herein by reference.
PART IV
ITEM 15.
ITEM 15. EXHIBITS AND FINANCIAL STATEMENT SCHEDULES
(a) Documents filed as part of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Financial Statements
The following financial statements of Wintrust Financial Corporation, incorporated herein by reference to Item 8, Financial Statements and Supplementary Data:
•
Consolidated Statements of Condition as of December 31, 2015 and 2014
•
Consolidated Statements of Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
•
Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
•
Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
•
Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows for the Years Ended December 31, 2015, 2014 and 2013
•
Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements
•
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
Financial Statement Schedules
Financial statement schedules have been omitted as they are not applicable or the required information is shown in the Consolidated Financial Statements or notes thereto.
4.1
Certain instruments defining the rights of the holders of long-term debt of the Company and certain of its subsidiaries, none of which authorize a total amount of indebtedness in excess of 10% of the total assets of the Company and its subsidiaries on a consolidated basis, have not been filed as Exhibits. The Company hereby agrees to furnish a copy of any of these agreements to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
4.2
Warrant Agreement, dated as of February 8, 2011, between the Company and Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. as Warrant Agent (incorporated by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 9, 2011).
4.3
Form of Warrant (incorporated herein by reference to Exhibit 4.1 of the Company’s Registration Statement on Form 8-A filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 9, 2011).
(1)
Includes the following financial information included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2015, formatted in XBRL (eXtensible Business Reporting Language): (i) the Consolidated Statements of Condition, (ii) the Consolidated Statements of Income, (iii) the Consolidated Statements of Comprehensive Income, (iv) the Consolidated Statements of Changes in Shareholders’ Equity, (v) the Consolidated Statements of Cash Flows, and (vi) Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements.
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned, thereunto duly authorized.
WINTRUST FINANCIAL CORPORATION (Registrant)
February 29, 2016
By:
/s/ EDWARD J. WEHMER
Edward J. Wehmer, President and
Chief Executive Officer
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, this report has been signed below by the following persons on behalf of the registrant and in the capacities and on the dates indicated.