Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2011

or

For the Transition Period From                      To                     

Commission File Number:                 000-30421        

HANMI FINANCIAL CORPORATION

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

(213) 382-2200

(Registrant’s Telephone Number, Including Area Code)

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Securities Registered Pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act:

None

(Title of Class)

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act.    Yes  ¨         No  x

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act.    Yes  ¨        No  x

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days.    Yes  x        No   ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically and posted on its corporate Web site, if any, every Interactive Data File required to be submitted and posted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files).    Yes  ¨        No  ¨

Indicate by check mark if disclosure of delinquent filers pursuant to Item 405 of Regulation S-K is not contained herein, and will not be contained, to the best of Registrant’s knowledge, in definitive proxy or information statements incorporated by reference in Part III of this Form 10-K or any amendment to this Form 10-K.    ¨

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer or a smaller reporting company. See definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer” and “smaller reporting company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act).    Yes  ¨         No  x

As of June 30, 2011, the aggregate market value of the common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant was approximately $154,053,000. For purposes of the foregoing calculation only, in addition to affiliated companies, all directors and officers of the Registrant have been deemed affiliates.

Number of shares of common stock of the Registrant outstanding as of March 1, 2012 was 32,067,095 shares.

Documents Incorporated By Reference Herein: Registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement for its 2012 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which will be filed within 120 days of the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011, is incorporated by reference into Part III of this report (or information will be provided by amendment to this Form 10-K).

Table of Contents

HANMI FINANCIAL CORPORATION

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2011

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

Some of the statements under “Item 1. Business,” “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this Form 10-K constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). All statements in this Form 10-K other than statements of historical fact are “forward-looking statements” for purposes of federal and state securities laws, including, but not limited to, statements about anticipated future operating and financial performance, our allowance for credit losses and conditions of our loan portfolio, financial position and liquidity, business strategies, regulatory and competitive outlook, investment and expenditure plans, capital and financing needs and availability, plans and objectives of management for future operations, and other similar forecasts and statements of expectation and statements of assumption underlying any of the foregoing. You can generally identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “expects,” “plans,” “intends,” “anticipates,” “believes,” “estimates,” “predicts,” “potential,” or “continue,” or the negative of such terms and other comparable terminology. Although we believe that the expectations reflected in the forward-looking statements are reasonable, we cannot guarantee future results, levels of activity, performance or achievements. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to differ from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statement. These risks, uncertainties and other factors include, but are not limited to, the following:

3

Table of Contents

For additional information concerning risks we face, see “Item 1A. Risk Factors,” “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations – Interest Rate Risk Management” and “– Capital Resources and Liquidity.” We undertake no obligation to update these forward-looking statements to reflect events or circumstances that occur after the date on which such statements were made, except as required by law.

4

Table of Contents

PART I

General

Hanmi Financial Corporation (“Hanmi Financial,” “we,” “us” or “our”) is a Delaware corporation incorporated on March 14, 2000 to be the holding company for the Hanmi Bank (the “Bank”) and is subject to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (“BHCA”). Hanmi Financial also elected financial holding company status under the BHCA in 2000. Our principal office is located at 3660 Wilshire Boulevard, Penthouse Suite A, Los Angeles, California 90010, and our telephone number is (213) 382-2200.

Hanmi Bank, our primary subsidiary, is a state chartered bank incorporated under the laws of the State of California on August 24, 1981, and licensed pursuant to the California Financial Code (“Financial Code”) on December 15, 1982. The Bank’s deposit accounts are insured under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (“FDI Act”) up to applicable limits thereof, and the Bank is a member of the Federal Reserve System. The Bank’s headquarters is located at 3660 Wilshire Boulevard, Penthouse Suite A, Los Angeles, California 90010.

The Bank is a community bank conducting general business banking, with its primary market encompassing the Korean-American community as well as other communities in the multi-ethnic populations of Los Angeles County, Orange County, San Bernardino County, San Diego County, the San Francisco Bay area, and the Silicon Valley area in Santa Clara County. The Bank’s full-service offices are located in business areas where many of the businesses are run by immigrants and other minority groups. The Bank’s client base reflects the multi-ethnic composition of these communities. At December 31, 2011, the Bank maintained a branch network of 27 full-service branch offices in California and one loan production office (“LPO”) in Washington.

Our other subsidiaries are Chun-Ha Insurance Services, Inc. (“Chun-Ha”) and All World Insurance Services, Inc. (“All World”), which were acquired in January 2007. Founded in 1989, Chun-Ha and All World are insurance agencies that offer a complete line of insurance products, including life, commercial, automobile, health, and property and casualty.

The Bank’s revenues are derived primarily from interest and fees on our loans, interest and dividends on our securities portfolio, and service charges on deposit accounts. A summary of revenues for the periods indicated follows:

Regulatory Enforcement Action

On November 2, 2009, the Board of Directors of the Bank consented to the issuance of a Final Order (the “Final Order”) from the California Department of Financial Institutions (“DFI”). On the same date, Hanmi Financial and the Bank entered into a Written Agreement (the “Written Agreement”) with the Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (“FRB”). The Final Order and the Written Agreement contain substantially similar provisions. Pursuant to the Final Order and the Written Agreement, the Board of Directors of the Bank prepared and submitted written

5

Table of Contents

plans to the DFI and the FRB that addressed the following items: (i) strengthening board oversight of the management and operation of the Bank; (ii) strengthening credit risk management practices; (iii) improving credit administration policies and procedures; (iv) improving the Bank’s position with respect to problem assets; (v) maintaining adequate reserves for loan and lease losses; (vi) improving the capital position of the Bank and, with respect to the Written Agreement, of Hanmi Financial; (vii) improving the Bank’s earnings through a strategic plan and a budget for 2010; (viii) improving the Bank’s liquidity position and funds management practices; and (ix) contingency funding.

In addition, the Final Order and the Written Agreement place restrictions on the Bank’s lending to borrowers who have adversely classified loans with the Bank and requires the Bank to charge off or collect certain problem loans. The Final Order and the Written Agreement also require the Bank to review and revise its allowance for loan and lease losses consistent with relevant supervisory guidance. The Bank is also prohibited from paying dividends, incurring, increasing or guaranteeing any debt, or making certain changes to its business without prior approval from the DFI, and the Bank and Hanmi Financial must obtain prior approval from the FRB prior to declaring and paying dividends. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank is in compliance with all requirements of the Final Order and the Written Agreement, and the Board and management intend to continue their efforts in cooperation with the FRB and the DFI to comply with all provisions in the Final Order and the Written Agreement.

Under the Final Order, the Bank was also required to increase its capital and maintain certain regulatory capital ratios prior to certain dates specified in the Order. By July 31, 2010, the Bank was required to increase its contributed equity capital by not less than an additional $100 million. The Bank was required to maintain a ratio of tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets as follows:

If the Bank was not able to maintain the capital ratios identified in the Final Order, it was required to notify the DFI, and Hanmi Financial and the Bank are required to notify the FRB if their respective capital ratios fall below those set forth in the capital plan submitted to the FRB. On July 27, 2010, we completed a registered rights and best efforts public offering of our common stock by which we raised $116.8 million in net proceeds. As a result, we satisfied the $100 million capital contribution requirement set forth in the Final Order, but our ratio of tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets was below 9.5 percent as of December 31, 2010. On November 18, 2011, we completed an underwritten public offering of our common stock by which we raised $77.1 million in net proceeds. As a result, we satisfied the tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets ratio requirement of not less than 9.5 percent set forth in the Final Order as of December 31, 2011. Based on submissions to and consultations with our regulators, we believe that the Bank has taken the required corrective action and has complied with substantially all of the requirements of the Final Order and the Written Agreement. For a further discussion of the Bank’s capital condition and capital resources, see “Capital Resources and Liquidity.”

Overview of Asset Quality and Liquidity

We have made continuous efforts to improve our asset quality through proactive loan monitoring, accelerated problem loan resolutions, and sales of non-performing assets. In accordance with our liquidity preservation strategy, funds raised from the secondary stock offerings and sales of loans were placed into highly liquid assets. As a result, we maintained a strong liquidity position with $700.4 million in cash and marketable securities as of December 31, 2011.

6

Table of Contents

Significant financial highlights include:

Agreement with Woori

On June 15, 2011, Hanmi Financial (the “Company”) and Woori Finance Holdings Co., Ltd. (“Woori”) terminated the Securities Purchase Agreement dated May 25, 2010, as previously amended, by mutual agreement. The Securities Purchase Agreement contemplated a potential private placement of the Company’s common stock to Woori subject to certain terms and conditions.

On June 15, 2011, the Company and Woori entered into a non-binding Memorandum of Business Alliance (the “Memorandum”). The Memorandum sets forth certain proposed mutually beneficial and non-exclusive business alliance programs between the parties. Such programs include: mutual efforts to expand the parties’ international trade finance businesses; mutual efforts to create a correspondent banking relationship for international remittances; exploring ways to provide services to each other’s VIP customers; providing mutual support and assistance in benchmarking studies related to best practices; cooperation and communication in connection with personnel training; sharing of industry and economic information, and information regarding potential capital investments in the Company (when legally permitted); and potential business activities between the companies’ respective subsidiaries.

In our November 2011 underwritten public offering of our common stock, Woori purchased approximately 4.0 percent of our common stock outstanding after the offering.

Market Area

The Bank historically has provided its banking services through its branch network to a wide variety of small- to medium-sized businesses. Throughout the Bank’s service areas, competition is intense for both loans and deposits. While the market for banking services is dominated by a few nationwide banks with many offices operating over wide geographic areas, the Bank’s primary competitors are relatively smaller community banks that focus their marketing efforts on Korean-American businesses in the Bank’s service areas. Substantially all of our assets are located in, and substantially all of our revenues are derived from clients located within California.

7

Table of Contents

Lending Activities

The Bank originates loans for its own portfolio and for sale in the secondary market. Lending activities include real estate loans (commercial property, construction and residential property), commercial and industrial loans (commercial term loans, commercial lines of credit, SBA loans and international trade finance), and consumer loans.

Real Estate Loans

Real estate lending involves risks associated with the potential decline in the value of the underlying real estate collateral and the cash flow from income-producing properties. Declines in real estate values and cash flows can be caused by a number of factors, including adversity in general economic conditions, rising interest rates, changes in tax and other laws and regulations affecting the holding of real estate, environmental conditions, governmental and other use restrictions, development of competitive properties and increasing vacancy rates. When real estate values decline, the Bank’s real estate dependence increases the risk of loss both in the Bank’s loan portfolio and any holdings of other real estate owned (“OREO”) because of foreclosures on loans.

Commercial Property

The Bank offers commercial real estate loans. These loans are generally collateralized by first deeds of trust. For these commercial real estate loans, the Bank generally obtains formal appraisals in accordance with applicable regulations to support the value of the real estate collateral. All appraisal reports on commercial mortgage loans are reviewed by an Appraisal Review Officer. The review generally covers an examination of the appraiser’s assumptions and methods that were used to derive a value for the property, as well as compliance with the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (“USPAP”). The Bank first looks to cash flow from the borrower to repay the loan and then to cash flow from other sources. The majority of the properties securing these loans are located in Los Angeles County and Orange County.

The Bank’s commercial real estate loans are principally secured by investor-owned commercial buildings and owner-occupied commercial and industrial buildings. Generally, these types of loans are made for a period of up to seven years based on a longer amortization period. These loans usually have a loan-to-value ratio at time of origination of 65 percent or less, using an adjustable rate indexed to the prime rate appearing in the West Coast edition of The Wall Street Journal (“WSJ Prime Rate”) or the Bank’s prime rate (“Bank Prime Rate”), as adjusted from time to time. The Bank also offers fixed-rate commercial real estate loans, including hybrid-fixed rate loans that are fixed for one to five years and convert to adjustable rate loans for the remaining term. Amortization schedules for commercial real estate loans generally do not exceed 25 years.

Payments on loans secured by investor-owned and owner-occupied properties are often dependent upon successful operation or management of the properties. Repayment of such loans may be subject to a greater extent to the risk of adverse conditions in the real estate market or the economy. The Bank seeks to minimize these risks in a variety of ways, including limiting the size of such loans in relation to the market value of the property and strictly scrutinizing the property securing the loan. The Bank manages these risks in a variety of ways, including vacancy and interest rate hike sensitivity analysis at the time of loan origination and quarterly risk assessment of the total commercial real estate secured loan portfolio that includes most recent industry trends. When possible, the Bank also obtains corporate or individual guarantees from financially capable parties. Representatives of the Bank visit all of the properties securing the Bank’s real estate loans before the loans are approved.

8

Table of Contents

The Bank requires title insurance insuring the status of its lien on all of the real estate secured loans when a trust deed on the real estate is taken as collateral. The Bank also requires the borrower to maintain fire insurance, extended coverage casualty insurance and, if the property is in a flood zone, flood insurance, in an amount equal to the outstanding loan balance, subject to applicable laws that may limit the amount of hazard insurance a lender can require to replace such improvements. We cannot assure that these procedures will protect against losses on loans secured by real property.

Construction

The Bank finances the construction of multifamily, low-income housing, commercial and industrial properties within its market area. The future condition of the local economy could negatively affect the collateral values of such loans. The Bank’s construction loans typically have the following characteristics:

The Bank does, on a case-by-case basis, commit to making permanent loans on the property with loan conditions that command strong project stability and debt service coverage. Construction loans involve additional risks compared to loans secured by existing improved real property. These include the following:

Because of these uncertainties, construction lending often involves the disbursement of substantial funds with repayment dependent, in part, on the success of the ultimate project rather than the ability of the borrower or guarantor to repay principal and interest. If the Bank is forced to foreclose on a project prior to or at completion due to a default, there can be no assurance that the Bank will be able to recover all of the unpaid balance of, or accrued interest on, the loans as well as the related foreclosure and holding costs. In addition, the Bank may be required to fund additional amounts to complete a project and may have to hold the property for an indeterminable period. The Bank has underwriting procedures designed to identify what it believes to be acceptable levels of risk in construction lending. Among other things, qualified and bonded third parties are engaged to provide progress reports and recommendations for construction disbursements. No assurance can be given that these procedures will prevent losses arising from the risks described above.

9

Table of Contents

Residential Property

The Bank originates fixed-rate and variable-rate mortgage loans secured by one- to four-family properties with amortization schedules of 15 to 30 years and maturities of up to 30 years. The loan fees charged, interest rates and other provisions of the Bank’s residential loans are determined by an analysis of the Bank’s cost of funds, cost of origination, cost of servicing, risk factors and portfolio needs. The Bank may sell some of the mortgage loans that it originates to secondary market participants. The typical turn-around time from origination to sale is between 30 and 90 days. The interest rate and the price of the loan are typically agreed to prior to the loan origination.

Commercial and Industrial Loans

The Bank offers commercial loans for intermediate and short-term credit. Commercial loans may be unsecured, partially secured or fully secured. The majority of the origination of commercial loans is in Los Angeles County and Orange County, and loan maturities are normally 12 to 60 months. The Bank requires a credit underwriting before considering any extension of credit. The Bank finances primarily small and middle market businesses in a wide spectrum of industries. Commercial and industrial loans consist of credit lines for operating needs, loans for equipment purchases and working capital, and various other business purposes.

As compared to consumer lending, commercial lending entails significant additional risks. These loans typically involve larger loan balances, are generally dependent on the cash flow of the business and may be subject to adverse conditions in the general economy or in a specific industry. Short-term business loans generally are intended to finance current operations and typically provide for principal payment at maturity, with interest payable monthly. Term loans normally provide for floating interest rates, with monthly payments of both principal and interest.

In general, it is the intent of the Bank to take collateral whenever possible, regardless of the loan purpose(s). Collateral may include liens on inventory, accounts receivable, fixtures and equipment, leasehold improvements and real estate. When real estate is the primary collateral, the Bank obtains formal appraisals in accordance with applicable regulations to support the value of the real estate collateral. Typically, the Bank requires all principals of a business to be co-obligors on all loan instruments and all significant stockholders of corporations to execute a specific debt guaranty. All borrowers must demonstrate the ability to service and repay not only their obligations to the Bank debt, but also all outstanding business debt, without liquidating the collateral, based on historical earnings or reliable projections.

Commercial Term Loans

The Bank finances small and middle-market businesses in a wide spectrum of industries throughout California. The Bank offers term loans for a variety of needs, including loans for working capital, purchases of equipment, machinery or inventory, business acquisitions, renovation of facilities, and refinancing of existing business-related debts. These loans have repayment terms of up to seven years.

Commercial Lines of Credit

The Bank offers lines of credit for a variety of short-term needs, including lines of credit for working capital, account receivable and inventory financing, and other purposes related to business operations. Commercial lines of credit usually have a term of 12 months or less.

10

Table of Contents

SBA Loans

The Bank originates loans qualifying for guarantees issued by the U.S. SBA, an independent agency of the Federal Government. The SBA guarantees on such loans currently range from 75 percent to 85 percent of the principal. The Bank typically requires that SBA loans be secured by business assets and by a first or second deed of trust on any available real property. When the loan is secured by a first deed of trust on real property, the Bank generally obtains appraisals in accordance with applicable regulations. SBA loans have terms ranging from 5 to 20 years depending on the use of the proceeds. To qualify for a SBA loan, a borrower must demonstrate the capacity to service and repay the loan, without liquidating the collateral, based on historical earnings or reliable projections.

The Bank normally sells to unrelated third parties a substantial amount of the guaranteed portion of the SBA loans that it originates. When the Bank sells a SBA loan, it has a right to repurchase the loan if the loan defaults. If the Bank repurchases a loan, the Bank will make a demand for guarantee purchase to the SBA. The Bank retains the right to service the SBA loans, for which it receives servicing fees. The unsold portions of the SBA loans that remain owned by the Bank are included in loans receivable on the Consolidated Balance Sheets. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank had $122.1 million of SBA loans in its portfolio, and was servicing $218.5 million of SBA loans sold to investors.

International Trade Finance

The Bank offers a variety of international finance and trade services and products, including letters of credit, import financing (trust receipt financing and bankers’ acceptances) and export financing. Although most of our trade finance activities are related to trade with Asian countries, all of our loans are made to companies domiciled in the United States (“U.S.”). A substantial portion of this business involves California-based customers engaged in import activities.

Consumer Loans

Consumer loans are extended for a variety of purposes, including automobile loans, secured and unsecured personal loans, home improvement loans, home equity lines of credit, overdraft protection loans, unsecured lines of credit and credit cards. Management assesses the borrower’s creditworthiness and ability to repay the debt through a review of credit history and ratings, verification of employment and other income, review of debt-to-income ratios and other measures of repayment ability. Although creditworthiness of the applicant is of primary importance, the underwriting process also includes a comparison of the value of the collateral, if any, to the proposed loan amount. Most of the Bank’s loans to individuals are repayable on an installment basis.

Any repossessed collateral for a defaulted consumer loan may not provide an adequate source of repayment of the outstanding loan balance, because the collateral is more likely to suffer damage or depreciation. The remaining deficiency often does not warrant further collection efforts against the borrower beyond obtaining a deficiency judgment. In addition, the collection of loans to individuals is dependent on the borrower’s continuing financial stability, and thus is more likely to be adversely affected by job loss, divorce, illness or personal bankruptcy. Furthermore, various federal and state laws, including bankruptcy and insolvency laws, often limit the amount that the lender can recover on loans to individuals. Loans to individuals may also give rise to claims and defenses by a consumer borrower against the lender on these loans, and a borrower may be able to assert against any assignee of the note these claims and defenses that the borrower has against the seller of the underlying collateral.

11

Table of Contents

Off-Balance Sheet Commitments

As part of its service to its small- to medium-sized business customers, the Bank from time to time issues formal commitments and lines of credit. These commitments can be either secured or unsecured. They may be in the form of revolving lines of credit for seasonal working capital needs or may take the form of commercial letters of credit or standby letters of credit. Commercial letters of credit facilitate import trade. Standby letters of credit are conditional commitments issued by the Bank to guarantee the performance of a customer to a third party.

Lending Procedures and Loan Limits

Loan applications may be approved by the Board of Directors’ Loan Committee, or by the Bank’s management or lending officers to the extent of their lending authority. Individual lending authority is granted to the Chief Credit Officer and certain additional officers, including District Leaders. Loans for which direct and indirect borrower liability exceeds an individual’s lending authority are referred to the Bank’s Management Credit Committee and, for those in excess of the Management Credit Committee’s approval limits, to the Board of Directors’ Loan Committee.

Legal lending limits are calculated in conformance with the California Financial Code, which prohibits a bank from lending to any one individual or entity or its related interests on an unsecured basis any amount that exceeds 15 percent of the sum of stockholders’ equity plus the allowance for loan losses, capital notes and any debentures, plus an additional 10 percent on a secured basis. At December 31, 2011, the Bank’s authorized legal lending limits for loans to one borrower were $64.1 million for unsecured loans plus an additional $42.7 million for specific secured loans. However, the Bank has established internal loan limits that are lower than the legal lending limits.

The Bank seeks to mitigate the risks inherent in its loan portfolio by adhering to certain underwriting practices. The review of each loan application includes analysis of the applicant’s experience, prior credit history, income level, cash flow, financial condition, tax returns, cash flow projections, and the value of any collateral to secure the loan, based upon reports of independent appraisers and/or audits of accounts receivable or inventory pledged as security. In the case of real estate loans over a specified amount, the review of collateral value includes an appraisal report prepared by an independent Bank-approved appraiser. All appraisal reports on commercial real property secured loans are reviewed by an Appraisal Review Officer. The review generally covers an examination of the appraiser’s assumptions and methods that were used to derive a value for the property, as well as compliance with the USPAP.

Allowance for Loan Losses, Allowance for Off-Balance Sheet Items and Provision for Credit Losses

The Bank maintains an allowance for loan losses at a level considered by management to be adequate to cover the inherent risks of loss associated with its loan portfolio under prevailing economic conditions. In addition, the Bank maintains an allowance for off-balance sheet items associated with unfunded commitments and letters of credit, which is included in other liabilities on the Consolidated Balance Sheets.

The Bank analyzes its allowance for loan losses on a quarterly basis. As an integral part of the quarterly credit review process of the Bank, the allowance for loan losses and allowance for off-balance sheet items are reviewed for adequacy. The California Department of Financial Institutions (the “DFI”) and/or the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System may require the Bank to recognize additions to the allowance for loan losses through a provision for credit losses based upon their assessment of the information available to them at the time of their examinations.

12

Table of Contents

Deposits

The Bank raises funds primarily through its network of branches and broker deposits. The Bank attracts deposits by offering a wide variety of transaction and term accounts and personalized customer service. Accounts offered include business and personal checking accounts, savings accounts, negotiable order of withdrawal (“NOW”) accounts, money market accounts and certificates of deposit.

Website

We maintain an Internet website at www.hanmi.com. We make available free of charge on the website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and any amendments thereto, as soon as reasonably practicable after we file such reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). None of the information on or hyperlinked from our website is incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These reports and other information on file can be inspected and copied at the public reference facilities of the SEC at 100 F Street, N.E., Washington D.C., 20549. The public may obtain information on the operation of the Public Reference Room by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330. The SEC maintains a website that contains the reports, proxy and information statements and other information we file with them. The address of the site is www.sec.gov.

Employees

As of December 31, 2011, the Bank had 419 full-time employees and 24 part-time employees, and Chun-Ha and All World had 38 full-time employees and 2 part-time employees. Our employees are not represented by a union or covered by a collective bargaining agreement. We believe that our employee relations are satisfactory.

Insurance

We maintain financial institution bond and commercial insurance at levels deemed adequate by management to protect Hanmi Financial from certain litigation and other losses.

Competition

The banking and financial services industry in California generally, and in the Bank’s market areas specifically, are highly competitive. The increasingly competitive environment faced by banks is primarily the result of changes in laws and regulation, changes in technology and product delivery systems, new competitors in the market, and the accelerating pace of consolidation among financial service providers. We compete for loans, deposits and customers with other commercial banks, savings institutions, securities and brokerage companies, mortgage companies, real estate investment trusts, insurance companies, finance companies, money market funds, credit unions and other non-bank financial service providers. Some of these competitors are larger in total assets and capitalization, have greater access to capital markets, including foreign-ownership, and/or offer a broader range of financial services.

Among the advantages that the major banks have over the Bank is their ability to finance extensive advertising campaigns and to allocate their investment assets to the regions with the highest yield and demand. Many of the major commercial banks operating in the Bank’s service areas offer specific services (for instance, trust services) that are not offered directly by the Bank. By virtue of their greater total capitalization, these banks also have substantially higher lending limits.

Other institutions, including brokerage firms, credit card companies and retail establishments, offer banking services to consumers in competition with the Bank, including money market funds with check access and cash

13

Table of Contents

advances on credit card accounts. In addition, other entities (both public and private) seeking to raise capital through the issuance and sale of debt or equity securities compete with banks for the acquisition of deposits.

The Bank’s major competitors are relatively smaller community banks that focus their marketing efforts on Korean-American businesses in the Bank’s service areas. These banks compete for loans primarily through the interest rates and fees they charge and the convenience and quality of service they provide to borrowers. The competition for deposits is primarily based on the interest rate paid and the convenience and quality of service.

In order to compete with other financial institutions in its service area, the Bank relies principally upon local promotional activity, including advertising in the local media, personal contacts, direct mail and specialized services. The Bank’s promotional activities emphasize the advantages of dealing with a locally owned and headquartered institution attuned to the particular needs of the community.

Economic Legislative and Regulatory Developments

Future profitability, like that of most financial institutions, is primarily dependent on interest rate differentials and credit quality. In general, the difference between the interest rates paid by us on interest-bearing liabilities, such as deposits and other borrowings, and the interest rates received by us on our interest-earning assets, such as loans extended to our customers and securities held in our investment portfolio, will comprise the major portion of our earnings. These rates are highly sensitive to many factors that are beyond our control, such as inflation, recession and unemployment, and the impact that future changes in domestic and foreign economic conditions might have on us cannot be predicted.

Our business is also influenced by the monetary and fiscal policies of the Federal Government and the policies of regulatory agencies, particularly the FRB. The FRB implements national monetary policies (with objectives such as curbing inflation and combating recession) through its open-market operations in U.S. Government securities, by adjusting the required level of reserves for depository institutions subject to its reserve requirements, and by varying the target federal funds and discount rates applicable to borrowings by depository institutions. The actions of the FRB in these areas influence the growth of bank loans, investments and deposits and affect interest earned on interest-earning assets and interest paid on interest-bearing liabilities. The nature and impact on us of any future changes in monetary and fiscal policies cannot be predicted.

From time to time, federal and state legislation is enacted that may have the effect of materially increasing the cost of doing business, limiting or expanding permissible activities, or affecting the competitive balance between banks and other financial services providers, such as recent federal legislation permitting affiliations among commercial banks, insurance companies and securities firms. We cannot predict whether or when any potential legislation will be enacted, and if enacted, the effect that it, or any implementing regulations, would have on our financial condition or results of operations. In addition, the outcome of any investigations initiated by state authorities or litigation raising issues may result in necessary changes in our operations, additional regulation and increased compliance costs.

The U.S. economy has recently been in a downturn. Business activity across a wide range of industries and regions in the U.S. has been reduced. Although economic conditions have improved in certain sectors, real estate remains weak. Local governments and many businesses are still in difficulty due to reduced consumer spending and continued liquidity challenges in the credit markets. In response to this economic downturn and financial industry instability, legislative and regulatory initiatives were, and are expected to continue to be, introduced and implemented, which substantially intensify the regulation of the financial services industry.

14

Table of Contents

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank”), which became law on July 21, 2010, significantly revised and expanded the rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement authority of federal bank regulators. Dodd-Frank followed other legislative and regulatory initiatives in 2008 and 2009 in response to the economic downturn and financial industry instability. Dodd-Frank impacts many aspects of the financial industry and, in many cases, will impact larger and smaller financial institutions and community banks differently over time. Dodd-Frank includes, among other things, the following:

15

Table of Contents

We cannot predict the extent to which the interpretations and implementation of this wide-ranging federal legislation by regulations and in supervisory policies and practices may affect us. Many of the requirements of Dodd-Frank will be implemented over time and most will be subject to regulations to be implemented or which will not become fully effective for several years. There can be no assurance that these or future reforms (such as possible new standards for commercial real estate (“CRE”) lending or new stress testing guidance for all banks) arising out of these regulations and studies and reports required by Dodd-Frank will not significantly increase our compliance or other operating costs and earnings or otherwise have a significant impact on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Dodd-Frank will likely result in more stringent capital, liquidity and leverage requirements on us and may otherwise adversely affect our business. For example, the provisions that affect the payment of interest on demand deposits and interchange fees are likely to increase the costs associated with deposits as well as place limitations on certain revenues those deposits may generate. Provisions that revoke the Tier 1 capital treatment of trust preferred securities and otherwise require revisions to the capital requirements of Hanmi Financial and the Bank could require Hanmi Financial and the Bank to seek other sources of capital in the future.

As a result of the changes required by Dodd-Frank, the profitability of our business activities may be impacted and we may be required to make changes to certain of our business practices. These changes may also require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes necessary to comply with new statutory and regulatory requirements.

Some of the regulations required by various sections of Dodd-Frank have been proposed and some adopted in final, including the following notices of proposed rulemakings (“NPRs”) and/or interim or final rules for the following sections of Dodd-Frank:

Federal Banking Agency Compensation Guidelines

Guidelines adopted by the federal banking agencies pursuant to the FDI Act prohibit excessive compensation as an unsafe and unsound practice and describe compensation as excessive when the amounts paid are unreasonable or disproportionate to the services performed by an executive officer, employee, director or principal stockholder. In June 2010, the federal bank regulatory agencies jointly issued additional comprehensive guidance

16

Table of Contents

on incentive compensation policies (the “Incentive Compensation Guidance”) intended to ensure that the incentive compensation policies of banking organizations do not undermine the safety and soundness of such organizations by encouraging excessive risk-taking. The Incentive Compensation Guidance, which covers all employees that have the ability to materially affect the risk profile of an organization, either individually or as part of a group, is based upon the key principles that a banking organization’s incentive compensation arrangements should (i) provide incentives that do not encourage risk-taking beyond the organization’s ability to effectively identify and manage risks, (ii) be compatible with effective internal controls and risk management, and (iii) be supported by strong corporate governance, including active and effective oversight by the organization’s board of directors.

Any deficiencies in compensation practices that are identified may be incorporated into the organization’s supervisory ratings, which can affect its ability to make acquisitions or perform other actions. The Incentive Compensation Guidance provides that enforcement actions may be taken against a banking organization if its incentive compensation arrangements or related risk-management control or governance processes pose a risk to the organization’s safety and soundness and the organization is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

On April 14, 2011, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (the “FDIC”), the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Board”) and other federal regulators, jointly published proposed regulations to implement Section 956 of the Dodd-Frank for covered financial institutions, including bank holding companies, with $1 billion or more in assets. Section 956 prohibits incentive-based compensation arrangements those encourages inappropriate risk taking by covered financial institutions and are deemed to be excessive, or that may lead to material losses. The proposed regulations would modify existing compensation standards by 1) requiring deferral of a substantial portion of incentive compensation for executive officers of particularly large institutions (generally banks and bank holding companies with $10 billion or more in assets); 2) prohibiting incentive-based compensation arrangements for covered persons that would encourage inappropriate risks by providing excessive compensation; 3) prohibiting incentive-based compensation arrangements for covered persons that would expose the institution to inappropriate risks by providing compensation that could lead to a material financial loss; 4) requiring policies and procedures for incentive-based compensation arrangements that are commensurate with the size and complexity of the institution; and 5) requiring annual reports on incentive compensation structures to the institution’s appropriate Federal regulator.

The scope, content and application of the U.S. banking regulators’ policies on incentive compensation continue to evolve in the aftermath of the economic downturn. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect the ability of Hanmi Financial and the Bank to hire, retain and motivate key employees.

The Small Business Jobs Act of 2010

The Small Business Jobs Act of 2010 makes available up to $30 billion of funds for preferred stock capital investments by the U.S. Treasury in banks with less than $10 billion assets as of December 31, 2009 through the Small Business Lending Fund (“SBLF”). Banks with up to $1 billion assets may apply for up to 5 percent and banks with more than $1 billion in assets, but less than $10 billion, may apply for up to 3 percent of their risk-weighted assets. In some cases, preferred stock issued under the SBLF may be exchanged for preferred stock issued to the U.S. Treasury for TARP CPP funds. Banks on or recently removed from the FDIC problem bank list may not apply and banks with other supervisory problems or enforcement actions may be required to raise matching capital or may have their application denied. The new law provides that the term of the preferred stock is a maximum of 10 years and that the capital is to receive Tier 1 treatment. The interest rate on the preferred stock starts at 5 percent

17

Table of Contents

and may later range between 1 percent and 9 percent, depending on, among other things, the amount of qualifying small business loans which the recipient bank makes. The Bank has not participated in the SBLF.

International Capital and Liquidity Initiatives

The international Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”) is a committee of central banks and bank supervisors and regulators from the major industrialized countries. The Basel Committee develops broad policy guidelines for use by each country’s supervisors in determining the supervisory policies they apply. In December 2009, the Basel Committee released two consultative documents proposing significant changes to bank capital, leverage and liquidity requirements in response to the economic downturn to enhance the Basel II framework which had not yet been fully implemented internationally and even less so in the United States. The Group of Twenty Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors (commonly referred to as the G-20), including the United States, endorsed the reform package, referred to as Basel III, and proposed phase in timelines in November, 2010. Basel III provides for increases in the minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio and the minimum requirement for the Tier 1 capital ratio. Basel III additionally includes a “capital conservation buffer” on top of the minimum requirement designed to absorb losses in periods of financial and economic distress; and an additional required countercyclical buffer percentage to be implemented according to a particular nation’s circumstances.

These capital requirements are further supplemented under Basel III by a non-risk-based leverage ratio. Basel III also reaffirms the Basel Committee’s intention to introduce higher capital requirements on securitization and trading activities at the end of 2011.

The Basel III liquidity proposals have three main elements: (i) a “liquidity coverage ratio” designed to meet the bank’s liquidity needs over a 30-day time horizon under an acute liquidity stress scenario, (ii) a “net stable funding ratio” designed to promote more medium and long-term funding over a one-year time horizon, and (iii) a set of monitoring tools that the Basel Committee indicates should be considered as the minimum types of information that banks should report to supervisors.

Implementation of Basel III in the United States will require regulations and guidelines by United States banking regulators, which may differ in significant ways from the recommendations published by the Basel Committee. It is unclear how United States banking regulators will define “well-capitalized” in their implementation of Basel III and to what extent and when smaller banking organizations in the United States will be subject to these regulations and guidelines. Basel III standards, if adopted, would lead to significantly higher capital requirements, higher capital charges and more restrictive leverage and liquidity ratios. United States banking regulators must also implement Basel III in conjunction with the provisions of Dodd-Frank related to increased capital and liquidity requirements. Further, Dodd-Frank required minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements on a consolidated basis for all depository institution holding companies and insured depository institutions which may not be less than the strictest requirements in effect for depository institutions as of the date of enactment, July 21, 2010.

Supervision and Regulation

General

We are extensively regulated under both federal and certain state laws. Regulation and supervision by the federal and state banking agencies is intended primarily for the protection of depositors and the Deposit Insurance Fund administered by the FDIC, and not for the benefit of stockholders. Set forth below is a summary description of the principal laws and regulations that relate to our operations. These descriptions are qualified in their entirety by reference to the applicable laws and regulations.

18

Table of Contents

Hanmi Financial

As a bank and financial holding company, we are subject to supervision and examination by the FRB under the BHCA. Accordingly, we are subject to the FRB’s authority to:

A bank holding company is required to file with the FRB annual reports and other information regarding its business operations and those of its non-banking subsidiaries. It is also subject to supervision and examination by the FRB. Examinations are designed to inform the FRB of the financial condition and nature of the operations of the bank holding company and its subsidiaries and to monitor compliance with the BHCA and other laws affecting the operations of bank holding companies. To determine whether potential weaknesses in the condition or operations of bank holding companies might pose a risk to the safety and soundness of their subsidiary banks, examinations focus on whether a bank holding company has adequate systems and internal controls in place to manage the risks inherent in its business, including credit risk, interest rate risk, market risk (for example, from changes in value of portfolio instruments and foreign currency), liquidity risk, operational risk, legal risk and reputation risk.

Bank holding companies may be subject to potential enforcement actions by the FRB for unsafe or unsound practices in conducting their businesses or for violations of any law, rule, regulation or any condition imposed in writing by the FRB. Enforcement actions may include the issuance of cease and desist orders, the imposition of

19

Table of Contents

civil money penalties, the requirement to meet and maintain specific capital levels for any capital measure, the issuance of directives to increase capital, formal and informal agreements, or removal and prohibition orders against officers or directors and other “institution-affiliated” parties.

Regulatory Restrictions on Dividends; Source of Strength

Hanmi Financial is regarded as a legal entity separate and distinct from its other subsidiaries. The principal source of our revenue is dividends received from the Bank. Various federal and state statutory provisions limit the amount of dividends the Bank can pay to Hanmi Financial without regulatory approval. It is the policy of the Federal Reserve Board that bank holding companies should pay cash dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. The policy provides that bank holding companies should not maintain a level of cash dividends that undermines the bank holding company’s ability to serve as a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries.

The Federal Reserve’s view is that in serving as a source of strength to its subsidiary banks, a bank holding company should stand ready to use available resources to provide adequate capital funds to its subsidiary banks during periods of financial stress or adversity and should maintain financial flexibility and capital-raising capacity to obtain additional resources for assisting its subsidiary banks. A bank holding company’s failure to meet its source-of-strength obligations may constitute an unsafe and unsound practice or a violation of the Federal Reserve Board’s regulations, or both. The source-of-strength doctrine most directly affects bank holding companies where a bank holding company’s subsidiary bank fails to maintain adequate capital levels. In such a situation, the subsidiary bank will be required by the bank’s federal regulator to take “prompt corrective action” including obtaining a guarantee by the bank holding company of a capital plan for and undercapitalized bank subsidiaries. See “Prompt Corrective Action Regulations” below. Additionally, if a bank holding company has more than one bank subsidiary, the FDI Act provides that each subsidiary bank may have “cross-guaranty” liability for any loss incurred by the FDIC in connection with the failure of another commonly-controlled bank.

Because Hanmi Financial is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank, its right to participate in the distribution of assets of any subsidiary upon the subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization will be subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary’s creditors. In the event of a liquidation or other resolution of the Bank, the claims of depositors and other general or subordinated creditors of the Bank would be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of holders of any obligation of the Bank to its stockholders, including any depository institution holding company (such as Hanmi Financial) or any stockholder or creditor of such holding company. In the event of a bank holding company’s bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the United States Bankruptcy Code, the trustee will be deemed to have assumed, and is required to cure immediately, any deficit under any commitment by the debtor holding company to any of the federal banking agencies to maintain the capital of an insured depository institution, and any claim for breach of such obligation will generally have priority over most other unsecured claims.

Regulatory Restrictions on Activities

Subject to prior notice or FRB approval, bank holding companies may generally engage in, or acquire shares of companies engaged in, activities determined by the FRB to be so closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Bank holding companies which elect and retain “financial holding company” status pursuant to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act of 1999 (“GLBA”) may engage in these nonbanking activities and broader securities, insurance, merchant banking and other activities that are determined to be “financial in nature” or are incidental or complementary to activities that are financial in nature without

20

Table of Contents

prior Federal Reserve approval. Pursuant to GLBA and Dodd-Frank, in order to elect and retain financial holding company status, a bank holding company and all depository institution subsidiaries of a bank holding company must be well capitalized, and well managed, and, except in limited circumstances, depository subsidiaries must be in satisfactory compliance with the Community Reinvestment Act (“CRA”), which requires banks to help meet the credit needs of the communities in which they operate. Failure to sustain compliance with these requirements or correct any non-compliance within a fixed time period could lead to divestiture of subsidiary banks or require all activities to conform to those permissible for a bank holding company. Hanmi Financial elected financial holding company status and Chun-Ha and All World are considered financial subsidiaries of Hanmi Financial. Hanmi Financial has agreed with the FRB to take certain corrective action pursuant to these GLBA requirements.

Hanmi Financial is also a bank holding company within the meaning of Section 3700 of the California Financial Code. Therefore, Hanmi Financial and any of its subsidiaries are subject to examination by, and may be required to file reports with, the DFI.

Privacy Policies

Under the GLBA, all financial institutions are required to adopt privacy policies, restrict the sharing of nonpublic customer data with nonaffiliated parties and establish procedures and practices to protect customer data from unauthorized access. Hanmi Financial and the Bank have established policies and procedures to assure our compliance with all privacy provisions of the GLBA.

Capital Adequacy Requirements

At December 31, 2011, Hanmi Financial and the Bank’s capital ratios exceeded the minimum percentage requirements to be deemed “well capitalized” for regulatory purposes. See “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements, Note 1 – Regulatory Matters.” The regulatory capital guidelines and the actual capital ratios for Hanmi Financial and the Bank as of December 31, 2011, were as follows:

Bank holding companies and banks are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Increased capital requirements are expected as a result of Dodd-Frank and the Basel III international supervisory developments. Capital adequacy guidelines and, additionally for banks, prompt corrective action regulations, involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities, and certain off-balance sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting, and other factors.

The current risk-based capital guidelines for bank holding companies and banks adopted by the federal banking agencies are expected to provide a measure of capital that reflects the degree of risk associated with a banking organization’s operations for both transactions reported on the balance sheet as assets, such as loans, and those recorded as off-balance sheet items, such as commitments, letters of credit and recourse arrangements. The risk-based capital ratio is determined by classifying assets and certain off-balance sheet financial instruments into weighted categories, with higher levels of capital being required for those categories perceived as representing greater risks and dividing its qualifying capital by its total risk-adjusted assets and off-balance sheet items.

21

Table of Contents

Under the risk-based capital guidelines, the nominal dollar amounts of assets and credit-equivalent amounts of off-balance sheet items are multiplied by one of several risk adjustment percentages, which range from 0 percent for assets with low credit risk, such as certain U.S. Treasury securities, to 100 percent for assets with relatively high credit risk, such as business loans.

The risk-based capital requirements also take into account concentrations of credit (i.e., relatively large proportions of loans involving one borrower, industry, location, collateral or loan type) and the risks of “non-traditional” activities (those that have not customarily been part of the banking business). The risk-based capital regulations also include exposure to interest rate risk as a factor that the regulators will consider in evaluating a bank’s capital adequacy. Interest rate risk is the exposure of a bank’s current and future earnings and equity capital arising from adverse movements in interest rates. While interest rate risk is inherent in a bank’s role as financial intermediary, it introduces volatility to bank earnings and to the economic value of the institution. Bank holding companies and banks engaged in significant trading activity may also be subject to the market risk capital guidelines and be required to incorporate additional market and interest rate risk components into their risk-based capital standards. Neither Hanmi Financial nor the Bank is currently subject to the market risk capital rules.

Qualifying capital is classified depending on the type of capital:

Under the current capital guidelines, there are three fundamental capital ratios: a total risk-based capital ratio, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and a Tier 1 leverage ratio. To be deemed “well capitalized” a bank must have a total risk-based capital ratio, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio and a Tier 1 leverage ratio of at least 10 percent, 6 percent and 5 percent, respectively. At December 31, 2011, the respective capital ratios of Hanmi Financial and the Bank exceeded the minimum percentage requirements to be deemed “well-capitalized” for regulatory purposes.

In addition to the requirements of Dodd-Frank and Basel III, the federal banking agencies may change existing capital guidelines or adopt new capital guidelines in the future. Pursuant to federal regulations, banks must maintain capital levels commensurate with the level of risk to which they are exposed, including the volume and severity of problem loans. FRB guidelines also provide that banking organizations experiencing internal

22

Table of Contents

growth or making acquisitions will be expected to maintain strong capital positions, substantially above the minimum supervisory levels, without significant reliance on intangible assets. Federal banking regulators may set higher capital requirements when a bank’s particular circumstances warrant and have required many banks and bank holding companies subject to enforcement actions to maintain capital ratios in excess of the minimum ratios otherwise required to be deemed well capitalized. In such cases, the institutions may no longer be deemed well capitalized and may therefore additionally be subject to restrictions on taking brokered deposits. Hanmi Financial and the Bank are subject to such requirements and restrictions pursuant to the Written Agreement with the FRB.

Hanmi Financial and the Bank are also required to maintain a leverage capital ratio designed to supplement the risk-based capital guidelines. Banks and bank holding companies that have received the highest rating of the five categories used by regulators to rate banks and that are not anticipating or experiencing any significant growth must maintain a ratio of Tier 1 capital (net of all intangibles) to adjusted total assets of at least 3 percent. All other institutions are required to maintain a leverage ratio of at least 100 to 200 basis points above the 3 percent minimum, for a minimum of 4 percent to 5 percent. As of December 31, 2011, the Hanmi Financial’s leverage capital ratio was 13.34 percent, and the Bank’s leverage capital ratio was 12.50 percent, both ratios exceeding regulatory minimums.

As described previously, the Bank was required to increase its capital and maintain certain regulatory capital ratios prior to certain dates specified in the Final Order. See “Item 1. Business – Regulatory Enforcement Action.” for further details.

Imposition of Liability for Undercapitalized Subsidiaries

Bank regulators are required to take “prompt corrective action” to resolve problems associated with insured depository institutions whose capital declines below certain levels. In the event an institution becomes “undercapitalized,” it must submit a capital restoration plan. The capital restoration plan will not be accepted by the regulators unless each company having control of the undercapitalized institution guarantees the subsidiary’s compliance with the capital restoration plan up to a certain specified amount. Any such guarantee from a depository institution’s holding company is entitled to a priority of payment in bankruptcy.

The aggregate liability of the holding company of an undercapitalized bank is limited to the lesser of 5 percent of the institution’s assets at the time it became undercapitalized or the amount necessary to cause the institution to be “adequately capitalized.” The bank regulators have greater power in situations where an institution becomes “significantly” or “critically” undercapitalized or fails to submit a capital restoration plan. For example, a bank holding company controlling such an institution can be required to obtain prior Federal Reserve Board approval of proposed dividends, or might be required to consent to a consolidation or to divest the troubled institution or other affiliates.

Acquisitions by Bank Holding Companies

The Bank Holding Company Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the prior approval of the Federal Reserve Board before it may acquire all, or substantially all, of the assets of any bank, or ownership or control of any voting shares of any bank, if after such acquisition it would own or control, directly or indirectly, more than 5 percent of the voting shares of such bank. In approving bank acquisitions by bank holding companies, the Federal Reserve Board is required to consider the financial and managerial resources and future prospects of the bank holding company and the banks concerned the convenience and needs of the communities to be served, and various competitive factors.

23

Table of Contents

Control Acquisitions

The Change in Bank Control Act prohibits a person or group of persons from acquiring “control” of a bank holding company unless the Federal Reserve Board has been notified and has not objected to the transaction. Under a rebuttable presumption established by the Federal Reserve Board, the acquisition of 10 percent or more of a class of voting stock of a bank holding company with a class of securities registered under Section 12 of the Exchange Act would, under the circumstances set forth in the presumption, constitute acquisition of control.

In addition, any company is required to obtain the approval of the Federal Reserve Board under the Bank Holding Company Act before acquiring 25 percent (5 percent in the case of an acquirer that is a bank holding company) or more of the outstanding common stock of the company, or otherwise obtaining control or a “controlling influence” over the company.

Cross-guarantees

Under the Federal Deposit Insurance Act (”FDIA”), a depository institution (which definition includes both banks and savings associations), the deposits of which are insured by the FDIC, can be held liable for any loss incurred by, or reasonably expected to be incurred by, the FDIC in connection with (1) the default of a commonly controlled FDIC-insured depository institution or (2) any assistance provided by the FDIC to any commonly controlled FDIC-insured depository institution “in danger of default.” “Default” is defined generally as the appointment of a conservator or a receiver and “in danger of default” is defined generally as the existence of certain conditions indicating that default is likely to occur in the absence of regulatory assistance. In some circumstances (depending upon the amount of the loss or anticipated loss suffered by the FDIC), cross-guarantee liability may result in the ultimate failure or insolvency of one or more insured depository institutions in a holding company structure. Any obligation or liability owed by a subsidiary bank to its parent company is subordinated to the subsidiary bank’s cross-guarantee liability with respect to commonly controlled insured depository institutions. The Bank is currently the only FDIC-insured depository institution subsidiary of Hanmi Financial.

Because Hanmi Financial is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank, its right to participate in the distribution of assets of any subsidiary upon the subsidiary’s liquidation or reorganization will be subject to the prior claims of the subsidiary’s creditors. In the event of a liquidation or other resolution of the Bank, the claims of depositors and other general or subordinated creditors of the Bank would be entitled to a priority of payment over the claims of holders of any obligation of the Bank to its stockholders, including any depository institution holding company (such as Hanmi Financial) or any stockholder or creditor of such holding company.

Sarbanes-Oxley Act

The Company is subject to the accounting oversight and corporate governance requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, including, among other things, required executive certification of financial presentations, requirements for board audit committees and their members, and disclosure to stockholders of internal control reports and assessments by management regarding financial reporting.

Securities Registration

Hanmi Financial’s common stock is publicly held and listed on the NASDAQ Stock Market (“NASDAQ”), and we are subject to the periodic reporting, information, proxy solicitation, insider trading, corporate governance and other requirements and restrictions of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the regulations of the SEC promulgated thereunder as well as listing requirements of NASDAQ. Dodd-Frank includes the following provisions that affect corporate governance and executive compensation at most United States publicly traded companies,

24

Table of Contents

including Hanmi Financial: (1) stockholder advisory votes on executive compensation, (2) executive compensation “clawback” requirements for companies listed on national securities exchanges in the event of materially inaccurate statements of earnings, revenues, gains or other criteria similar to the requirements of the ARRA for TARP CPP recipients (3) enhanced independence requirements for compensation committee members, and (4) SEC authority to adopt proxy access rules which would permit stockholders of publicly traded companies to nominate candidates for election as director and have those nominees included in a company’s proxy statement.

The Bank

As a California commercial bank whose deposits are insured by the FDIC, the Bank is subject to regulation, supervision and regular examination by the DFI and by the FRB, as the Bank’s primary Federal regulator, and must additionally comply with certain applicable regulations of the Federal Reserve. Specific federal and state laws and regulations which are applicable to banks regulate, among other things, the scope of their business, their investments, their reserves against deposits, the timing of the availability of deposited funds, their activities relating to dividends, investments, loans, the nature and amount of and collateral for certain loans, borrowings, capital requirements, certain check-clearing activities, branching, and mergers and acquisitions. California banks are also subject to statutes and federal banking regulations including Regulation O and Federal Reserve Act Sections 23A and 23B and Regulation W, which restrict or limit loans or extensions of credit to “insiders”, including officers directors and principal stockholders, and loans or extension of credit by banks to affiliates or purchases of assets from affiliates, including parent bank holding companies, except pursuant to certain exceptions and terms and conditions at least as favorable to those prevailing for comparable transactions with unaffiliated parties.

Dodd-Frank expanded definitions and restrictions on transactions with affiliates and insiders under Section 23A and 23B and also lending limits for derivative transactions, repurchase agreements and securities lending and borrowing transactions

Pursuant to the FDI Act and the Financial Code, California state chartered commercial banks may generally engage in any activity permissible for national banks. Therefore, the Bank may form subsidiaries to engage in the many so-called “closely related to banking” or “nonbanking” activities commonly conducted by national banks in operating subsidiaries or by non-bank subsidiaries of bank holding companies. Further, pursuant to GLBA, California banks may conduct certain “financial” activities in a subsidiary to the same extent as may a national bank, provided the bank is and remains “well-capitalized,” “well-managed” and in satisfactory compliance with the CRA. The Bank currently has no financial subsidiaries.

If, as a result of an examination, the DFI or the FRB should determine that the financial condition, capital resources, asset quality, earnings prospects, management, liquidity or other aspects of the Bank’s operations are unsatisfactory or that the Bank or its management is violating or has violated any law or regulation, the DFI and the FRB, and separately the FDIC as insurer of the Bank’s deposits, have residual authority to:

25

Table of Contents

As discussed above, the Bank entered into the Final Order issued by the DFI, and the Written Agreement with the FRB, each of which were issued effective as of November 2, 2009.

Broker Deposits

Under the FDI Act, banks may be restricted in their ability to accept brokered deposits, depending on their capital classification. “Well-capitalized” banks are permitted to accept brokered deposits, but all banks that are not well-capitalized could be restricted to accept such deposits. The FDIC may, on a case-by-case basis, permit banks that are adequately capitalized to accept brokered deposits if the FDIC determines that acceptance of such deposits would not constitute an unsafe or unsound banking practice with respect to the bank. As of December 31, 2011, in compliance with the FRB Written Agreement, the Bank had no brokered deposits.

Community Reinvestment Act

Under the CRA, a financial institution has a continuing and affirmative obligation, consistent with its safe and sound operation, 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. The CRA requires federal examiners, in connection with the examination of a financial institution, to assess the institution’s record of meeting the credit needs of its community and to take such record into account in its evaluation of certain applications by such institution. The CRA also requires all institutions to make public disclosure of their CRA ratings. Hanmi Financial has a Compliance Committee, which oversees the planning of products, and services offered to the community, especially those aimed to serve low and moderate income communities. The Federal Reserve rated the Bank as “satisfactory” in meeting community credit needs under the CRA at its most recent examination for CRA performance.

Interstate Banking and Branching

Under the Riegle-Neal Interstate Banking and Branch Efficiency Act of 1994, as amended by Dodd-Frank, bank holding companies and banks generally have the ability to acquire or merge with banks in other states, and banks may also acquire or establish new branches outside their home states. Interstate branches are subject to certain laws of the states in which they are located. The Bank presently has no interstate branches.

Federal Home Loan Bank System

The Bank is a member and stockholder of the capital stock of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco. Among other benefits, each Federal Home Loan Bank (“FHLB”) serves as a reserve or central bank for its members within its assigned region and makes available loans or advances to its members. Each FHLB is financed primarily from the sale of consolidated obligations of the FHLB system. Each FHLB makes available loans or advances to its members in compliance with the policies and procedures established by the Board of Directors of the individual FHLB. Each member of the FHLB of San Francisco is required to own stock in an amount equal to the greater of (i) a membership stock requirement with an initial cap of $25 million (100 percent of “membership asset value” as defined), or (ii) an activity based stock requirement (based on percentage of outstanding advances). At December 31, 2011, the Bank was in compliance with the FHLB’s stock ownership requirement and our investment

26

Table of Contents

in FHLB capital stock totaled $22.9 million. The total borrowing capacity available based on pledged collateral and the remaining available borrowing capacity as of December 31, 2011 were $402.2 million and $398.9 million, respectively.

Federal Reserve System

The FRB requires all depository institutions to maintain noninterest-bearing reserves at specified levels against their transaction accounts (primarily checking and non-personal time deposits). At December 31, 2011, the Bank was in compliance with these requirements.

Prompt Corrective Action Regulations

The FDI Act requires the relevant federal banking regulator to take “prompt corrective action” with respect to a depository institution if that institution does not meet certain capital adequacy standards, including requiring the prompt submission of an acceptable capital restoration plan. Supervisory actions by the appropriate federal banking regulator under the prompt corrective action rules generally depend upon an institution’s classification within five capital categories as defined in the regulations. The relevant capital measures are the capital ratio, the Tier 1 capital ratio, and the leverage ratio. However, the federal banking agencies have also adopted non-capital safety and soundness standards to assist examiners in identifying and addressing potential safety and soundness concerns before capital becomes impaired. These include operational and managerial standards relating to: (i) internal controls, information systems and internal audit systems, (ii) loan documentation, (iii) credit underwriting, (iv) asset quality and growth, (v) earnings, (vi) risk management, and (vii) compensation and benefits.

A depository institution’s capital tier under the prompt corrective action regulations will depend upon how its capital levels compare with various relevant capital measures and the other factors established by the regulations. A bank will be: (i) “well capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 10.0 percent or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 6.0 percent or greater, and a leverage ratio of 5.0 percent or greater and is not subject to any order or written directive by any such regulatory authority to meet and maintain a specific capital level for any capital measure; (ii) “adequately capitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of 8.0 percent or greater, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of 4.0 percent or greater, and a leverage ratio of 4.0 percent or greater and is not “well capitalized”; (iii) “undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio that is less than 8.0 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 4.0 percent, or a leverage ratio of less than 4.0 percent; (iv) “significantly undercapitalized” if the institution has a total risk-based capital ratio of less than 6.0 percent, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of less than 3.0 percent, or a leverage ratio of less than 3.0 percent; and (v) “critically undercapitalized” if the institution’s tangible equity is equal to or less than 2.0 percent of average quarterly tangible assets. An institution may be downgraded to, or deemed to be in, a capital category that is lower than indicated by its capital ratios if it is determined to be in an unsafe or unsound condition or if it receives an unsatisfactory examination rating with respect to certain matters.

The FDI Act generally prohibits a depository institution from making any capital distributions (including payment of a dividend) or paying any management fee to its parent holding company if the depository institution would thereafter be “undercapitalized.” “Undercapitalized” institutions are subject to growth limitations and are required to submit a capital restoration plan. The regulatory agencies may not accept such a plan without determining, among other things, that the plan is based on realistic assumptions and is likely to succeed in restoring the depository institution’s capital. In addition, for a capital restoration plan to be acceptable, the depository institution’s parent holding company must guarantee that the institution will comply with such capital

27

Table of Contents

restoration plan. The bank holding company must also provide appropriate assurances of performance. The aggregate liability of the parent holding company is limited to the lesser of (i) an amount equal to 5.0 percent of the depository institution’s total assets at the time it became undercapitalized and (ii) the amount which is necessary (or would have been necessary) to bring the institution into compliance with all capital standards applicable with respect to such institution as of the time it fails to comply with the plan. If a depository institution fails to submit an acceptable plan, it is treated as if it is “significantly undercapitalized.” “Significantly undercapitalized” depository institutions may be subject to a number of requirements and restrictions, including orders to sell sufficient voting stock to become “adequately capitalized,” requirements to reduce total assets, and cessation of receipt of deposits from correspondent banks. “Critically undercapitalized” institutions are subject to the appointment of a receiver or conservator.

The appropriate federal banking agency may, under certain circumstances, reclassify a well-capitalized insured depository institution as adequately capitalized. The FDI Act provides that an institution may be reclassified if the appropriate federal banking agency determines (after notice and opportunity for a hearing) that the institution is in an unsafe or unsound condition or deems the institution to be engaging in an unsafe or unsound practice. The appropriate agency is also permitted to require an adequately capitalized or undercapitalized institution to comply with the supervisory provisions as if the institution were in the next lower category (but not treat a significantly undercapitalized institution as critically undercapitalized) based on supervisory information other than the capital levels of the institution.

FDIC Deposit Insurance

The FDIC is an independent federal agency that insures deposits, up to prescribed statutory limits, of federally insured banks and savings institutions and safeguards the safety and soundness of the banking and savings industries. The FDIC insures our customer deposits through the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) up to prescribed limits for each depositor. Pursuant to Dodd-Frank, the maximum deposit insurance amount has been permanently increased to $250,000, and all non-interest-bearing transaction accounts are insured. The amount of FDIC assessments paid by each DIF member institution is based on its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other supervisory factors. Due to the greatly increased number of bank failures and losses incurred by DIF, as well as the recent extraordinary programs in which the FDIC has been involved to support the banking industry generally, the FDIC’s DIF was substantially depleted and the FDIC has incurred substantially increased operating costs.

In November, 2009, the FDIC adopted a requirement for institutions to prepay in 2009 their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011, and 2012. The Bank prepaid its assessments based on the calculations of the projected assessments at that time.

Dodd-Frank changed the base for FDIC insurance assessments to a bank’s average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity, rather than upon its deposit base alone, and requires the FDIC to increase the DIF’s reserves against future losses. This will necessitate increased deposit insurance premiums that are expected to be borne primarily by institutions with assets of greater than $10 billion and with significant balance sheet debt obligations in addition to deposits liabilities.

As required by Dodd-Frank, the FDIC adopted a new DIF restoration plan which became effective on January 1, 2011. Among other things, the plan: (1) raises the minimum designated reserve ratio, which the FDIC is required to set each year, to 1.35 percent (from the former minimum of 1.15 percent) and removes the upper limit on the designated reserve ratio (which was formerly capped at 1.5 percent) and consequently on the size of the fund; (2) requires that the fund reserve ratio reach 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020 (rather than 1.15 percent

28

Table of Contents

by the end of 2016, as formerly required); (3) requires that, in setting assessments, the FDIC offset the effect of requiring that the reserve ratio reach 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020, rather than 1.15 percent by the end of 2016 on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of less than $10 million; (4) eliminates the requirement that the FDIC provide dividends from the fund when the reserve ratio is between 1.35 percent and 1.5 percent; and (5) continues the FDIC’s authority to declare dividends when the reserve ratio at the end of a calendar year is at least 1.5 percent, but grants the FDIC sole discretion in determining whether to suspend or limit the declaration or payment of dividends. The FDI Act continues to require that the FDIC’s Board of Directors consider the appropriate level for the designated reserve ratio annually and, if changing the designated reserve ratio, engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking before the beginning of the calendar year. The FDIC has set a long-term goal of getting its reserve ratio up to 2 percent of insured deposits by 2027.

On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule, as mandated by Dodd-Frank, changing the deposit insurance assessment system from one that is based on total domestic deposits to one that is based on average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity. In addition, the final rule creates a scorecard-based assessment system for larger banks (those with more than $10 billion in assets) and suspends dividend payments if the Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio exceeds 1.5 percent, but provides for decreasing assessment rates when the Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio reaches certain thresholds. Larger insured depository institutions will likely pay higher assessments to the Deposit Insurance Fund than under the old system. Additionally, the final rule includes a new adjustment for depository institution debt whereby an institution would pay an additional premium equal to 50 basis points on every dollar of long-term, unsecured debt held as an asset that was issued by another insured depository institution (excluding debt guaranteed under the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program) to the extent that all such debt exceeds 3 percent of the other insured depository institution’s Tier 1 capital. The new rule took effect for the quarter beginning April 1, 2011.

Our FDIC insurance expense totaled $6.3 million for 2011. FDIC insurance expense includes deposit insurance assessments and Financing Corporation (“FICO”) assessments related to outstanding FICO bonds to fund interest payments on bonds to recapitalize the predecessor to the DIF. These assessments will continue until the FICO bonds mature in 2017. The FICO assessment rate, which is determined quarterly, was 0.00165% of insured deposits for the year ended December 31, 2011. The total FICO assessment in 2011 was $157,000.

We are generally unable to control the amount of premiums that we are required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failures or if the FDIC otherwise determines, we may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the recently increased levels. These announced increases and any future increases in FDIC insurance premiums may have a material and adverse effect on our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on the value of, or market for, our common stock.

Loans-to-One-Borrower

With certain limited exceptions, the maximum amount that a California bank may lend to any borrower at any one time (including the obligations to the bank of certain related entities of the borrower) may not exceed 25 percent (and unsecured loans may not exceed 15 percent) of the bank’s stockholders’ equity, allowance for loan losses, and any capital notes and debentures of the bank.

29

Table of Contents

Extensions of Credit to Insiders and Transactions with Affiliates

The Federal Reserve Act and FRB Regulation O place limitations and conditions on loans or extensions of credit to:

Such loans and leases:

California has laws and the DFI has regulations that adopt and apply Regulation O to the Bank.

The Bank also is subject to certain restrictions imposed by Federal Reserve Act Sections 23A and 23B, as amended by Dodd-Frank, and FRB Regulation W on any extensions of credit to, or the issuance of a guarantee or letter of credit on behalf of, any affiliates, the purchase of, or investments in, stock or other securities thereof, the taking of such securities as collateral for loans, and the purchase of assets of any affiliates. Affiliates include parent holding companies, sister banks, sponsored and advised companies, financial subsidiaries and investment companies where the Bank’s affiliate serves as investment advisor. Sections 23A and 23B and Regulation W generally:

Additional restrictions on transactions with affiliates may be imposed on the Bank under the FDI Act’s prompt corrective action regulations and the supervisory authority of the federal and state banking agencies discussed above.

30

Table of Contents

Dividends

Holders of Hanmi Financial common stock and preferred stock are entitled to receive dividends as and when declared by the Board of Directors out of funds legally available therefore under the laws of the State of Delaware. Delaware corporations such as Hanmi Financial may make distributions to their stockholders out of their surplus, or out of their net profits for the fiscal year in which the dividend is declared and for the preceding fiscal year. However, dividends may not be paid out of a corporation’s net profits if, after the payment of the dividend, the corporation’s capital would be less than the capital represented by the issued and outstanding stock of all classes having a preference upon the distribution of assets.

The FRB has advised bank holding companies that it believes that payment of cash dividends in excess of current earnings from operations is inappropriate and may be cause for supervisory action. As a result of this policy, banks and their holding companies may find it difficult to pay dividends out of retained earnings from historical periods prior to the most recent fiscal year or to take advantage of earnings generated by extraordinary items such as sales of buildings or other large assets in order to generate profits to enable payment of future dividends. In a February 2009 guidance letter, the FRB directed that a bank holding company should inform the FRB if it is planning to pay a dividend that exceeds earnings for a given quarter or that could affect the bank’s capital position in an adverse way.

Further, the FRB’s position that holding companies are expected to provide a source of managerial and financial strength to their subsidiary banks potentially restricts a bank holding company’s ability to pay dividends. Hanmi Financial has agreed with the FRB that it will not declare or pay any dividends or make any payments on its trust preferred securities or any other capital distributions without the prior written consent of the FRB.

The Bank is a legal entity that is separate and distinct from its holding company. Hanmi Financial receives income through dividends paid by the Bank. Subject to the regulatory restrictions described below, future cash dividends by the Bank will depend upon management’s assessment of future capital requirements, contractual restrictions and other factors.

The powers of the Board of Directors of the Bank to declare a cash dividend to its holding company is subject to California law as set forth in the Financial Code, which restricts the amount available for cash dividends to the lesser of a bank’s retained earnings or net income for its last three fiscal years (less any distributions to stockholders made during such period). Where the above test is not met, cash dividends may still be paid, with the prior approval of the DFI, in an amount not exceeding the greatest of: 1) retained earnings of the bank; 2) the net income of the bank for its last fiscal year; or 3) the net income of the bank for its current fiscal year. Due to the Bank’s retained deficit of $218.6 million as of December 31, 2011, the Bank is restricted under the Financial Code from making dividends to Hanmi Financial without the prior approval of the DFI. See “Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities – Dividends” for a further discussion of restrictions on the Bank’s ability to pay dividends to Hanmi Financial.

Under the terms of the FRB Written Agreement and the DFI Final Order, the Bank is also prohibited from paying dividends, incurring, increasing or guaranteeing any debt, or making certain changes to its business without prior approval from the FRB and DFI, and the Bank and Hanmi Financial must obtain prior approval from the FRB and DFI prior to declaring and paying dividends.

Bank regulators also have authority to prohibit a bank from engaging in business practices considered to be unsafe or unsound. It is possible, depending upon the financial condition of a bank and other factors, that regulators could assert that the payment of dividends or other payments might, under certain circumstances, be an unsafe or unsound practice, even if technically permissible.

31

Table of Contents

Bank Secrecy Act and USA PATRIOT Act

The Bank Secrecy Act (“BSA”) is a disclosure law that forms the basis of the Federal Government’s framework to prevent and detect money laundering and to deter other criminal enterprises. Under the BSA, financial institutions such as the Bank are required to maintain certain records and file certain reports regarding domestic currency transactions and cross-border transportations of currency. Among other requirements, the BSA requires financial institutions to report imports and exports of currency in the amount of $10,000 or more and, in general, all cash transactions of $10,000 or more. The Bank has established a BSA compliance policy under which, among other precautions, the Bank keeps currency transaction reports to document cash transactions in excess of $10,000 or in multiples totaling more than $10,000 during one business day, monitors certain potentially suspicious transactions such as the exchange of a large number of small denomination bills for large denomination bills, and scrutinizes electronic funds transfers for BSA compliance. The BSA also requires that financial institutions report to relevant law enforcement agencies any suspicious transactions potentially involving violations of law.

The USA PATRIOT Act and its implementing regulations significantly expanded the anti-money laundering and financial transparency laws in response to the terrorist attacks in September 2001. The Bank has adopted additional comprehensive policies and procedures to address the requirements of the USA PATRIOT Act. Material deficiencies in anti-money laundering compliance can result in public enforcement actions by the banking agencies, including the imposition of civil money penalties and supervisory restrictions on growth and expansion. Such enforcement actions could also have serious reputation consequences for us and the Bank.

Consumer Laws

The Bank must comply with numerous consumer protection statutes and implementing regulations, including the CRA, the Fair Credit Reporting Act, as amended by the Fair and Accurate Credit Transactions Act, the Equal Credit Opportunity Act, the Truth in Lending Act, the Fair Housing Act, the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, the Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act, the National Flood Insurance Act, the Americans with Disabilities Act and various federal and state privacy protection laws. Effective July 1, 2010, a new federal banking rule under the Electronic Fund Transfer Act prohibits financial institutions from charging consumers fees for paying overdrafts on automated teller machines and one-time debit card transactions, submit to certain exceptions, unless a consumer consents, or opts in, to the overdraft service for those type of transactions. Noncompliance with these laws could subject the Bank to lawsuits and could also result in administrative penalties, including, fines and reimbursements. The Bank and Hanmi Financial are also subject to federal and state laws prohibiting unfair or fraudulent business practices, untrue or misleading advertising and unfair competition.

These laws and regulations mandate certain disclosure requirements and regulate the manner in which financial institutions must deal with customers when taking deposits, making loans, collecting loans, and providing other services. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations can subject the Bank to various penalties, including, but not limited to, enforcement actions, injunctions, fines or criminal penalties, punitive damages to consumers, and the loss of certain contractual rights.

Dodd-Frank provides for the creation of the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection as an independent entity within the Federal Reserve. This bureau is a new regulatory agency for United States banks. It will have broad rulemaking, supervisory and enforcement authority over consumer financial products and services, including deposit products, residential mortgages, home-equity loans and credit cards, and contains provisions on mortgage-related matters such as steering incentives, determinations as to a borrower’s ability to repay and prepayment penalties. The bureau’s functions include investigating consumer complaints, conducting market

32

Table of Contents

research, rulemaking, supervising and examining banks consumer transactions, and enforcing rules related to consumer financial products and services. It is anticipated that the bureau will begin regulating activities in 2011. Banks with less than $10 billion in assets, such as the Bank, will continue to be examined for compliance by their primary federal banking agency.

Regulation of Subsidiaries

Non-bank subsidiaries are subject to additional or separate regulation and supervision by other state, federal and self-regulatory bodies. Chun-Ha and All World are subject to the licensing and supervisory authority of the California Commissioner of Insurance.

Together with the other information on the risks we face and our management of risk contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Report”) or in our other SEC filings, the following presents significant risks that may affect us. Events or circumstances arising from one or more of these risks could adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results and prospects and the value and price of our common stock could decline. The risks identified below are not intended to be a comprehensive list of all risks we face and additional risks that we may currently view as not material may also adversely impact our financial condition, business operations and results of operations.

Risks Relating to our Business

Our operations and regulatory capital needs require us to enhance our capital position in the near term and may also require us to raise additional capital in the future. We are required by federal regulatory authorities to maintain adequate levels of capital to support our operations. As part of the Final Order, the Bank was required to increase its capital prior to certain dates, and is required to maintain certain regulatory capital ratios, as specified in the Final Order. The Bank is required to maintain a ratio of tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets as follows:

At December 31, 2011, the Bank had a tangible stockholders’ equity to total tangible assets ratio of 12.48 percent. Accordingly, we are in compliance with the Final Order. Pursuant to the Written Agreement, we were also required to increase, and are required to maintain, sufficient capital at the Company and at the Bank that is satisfactory to the Federal Reserve Bank. Should our asset quality erode and require significant additional provision for credit losses, resulting in consistent net operating losses at the Bank, our capital levels will decline and we will need to raise capital to satisfy our agreements with the regulators and any future regulatory orders or agreements we may be subject to.

The Bank is subject to additional regulatory oversight as a result of a formal regulatory enforcement action issued by the Federal Reserve Bank and the California Department of Financial Institutions. On November 2, 2009, the members of the Board of Directors of the Bank consented to the issuance of the Final Order from the California Department Financial Institutions. On the same date, we and the Bank entered into the Written Agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank. Under the terms of the Final Order and the Written Agreement, the Bank is required to implement certain corrective and remedial measures under strict time frames.

33

Table of Contents

These regulatory actions will remain in effect until modified, terminated, suspended or set aside by the Federal Reserve Bank or the California Department of Financial Institutions, as applicable. Failure to comply with the terms of these regulatory actions within the applicable time frames provided or any extended deadlines could result in additional orders or penalties from the Federal Reserve Bank and the California Department of Financial Institutions, which could include further restrictions on our business, assessment of civil money penalties on us and the Bank, as well as our respective directors, officers and other affiliated parties, termination of deposit insurance, removal of one or more officers and/or directors, the liquidation or other closure of the Bank and our ability to continue as a going concern. Generally, these enforcement actions will be lifted only after subsequent examinations substantiate complete correction of the underlying issues.

We may become subject to additional regulatory restrictions in the event that our regulatory capital levels were to decline. We cannot provide any assurance that our total risk-based capital ratio or other regulatory capital ratios will not decline in the future such that the Bank may be considered to be “undercapitalized” for regulatory purposes. If a state member bank, like the Bank, is classified as undercapitalized, the bank is required to submit a capital restoration plan to the Federal Reserve Bank. Pursuant to Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act, an undercapitalized bank is prohibited from increasing its assets, engaging in a new line of business, acquiring any interest in any company or insured depository institution, or opening or acquiring a new branch office, except under certain circumstances, including the acceptance by the Federal Reserve Bank of a capital restoration plan for the bank. Pursuant to Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act and Federal Reserve Board Regulation H, the Bank was previously required to submit a capital restoration plan to the Federal Reserve Bank that must be guaranteed by the Company as a result of the previous decline in the Bank’s capital position. the Bank is also subject to other restrictions pursuant to Section 38 and Federal Reserve Board Regulation H, including restrictions on dividends, asset growth and expansion through acquisitions, branching or new lines of business and is prohibited from paying certain management fees until its improving capital ratios are deemed satisfactory by its regulators. The Federal Reserve Bank also has the discretion to impose certain other corrective actions pursuant to Section 38 and Regulation H.

If a bank is classified as significantly undercapitalized, the Federal Reserve Bank would be required to take one or more prompt corrective actions. These actions would include, among other things, requiring sales of new securities to bolster capital; improvements in management; limits on interest rates paid; prohibitions on transactions with affiliates; termination of certain risky activities and restrictions on compensation paid to executive officers. These actions may also be taken by the Federal Reserve Bank at any time on an undercapitalized bank if it determines those restrictions are necessary. If a bank is classified as critically undercapitalized, in addition to the foregoing restrictions, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act prohibits payment on any subordinated debt and requires the bank to be placed into conservatorship or receivership within 90 days, unless the Federal Reserve Bank determines that other action would better achieve the purposes of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act regarding prompt corrective action with respect to undercapitalized banks.

Liquidity risk could impair our ability to fund operations and jeopardize our financial condition. Liquidity is essential to our business. An inability to raise funds through deposits, including brokered deposits, borrowings, the sale of loans and other sources could have a material adverse effect on our liquidity. Our access to funding sources in amounts adequate to finance our activities could be impaired by factors that affect us specifically or the financial services industry in general. Factors that could detrimentally impact our access to liquidity sources include a decrease in the level of our business activity due to a market downturn or adverse regulatory action against us.

34

Table of Contents

Our ability to acquire deposits or borrow could also be impaired by factors that are not specific to us, such as a severe disruption of the financial markets or negative views and expectations about the prospects for the financial services industry as a whole as a result of the recent turmoil faced by banking organizations in the domestic and worldwide credit markets.

We may be required to make additional provisions for credit losses and charge off additional loans in the future, which could adversely affect our results of operations and capital levels. There has been a general slowdown in the economy and in particular, in the housing market in areas of Southern California where a majority of our loan customers are based, along with high unemployment. This slowdown reflects declining prices and excess inventories of homes to be sold, which has contributed to a financial strain on homebuilders and suppliers, as well as an overall decrease in the collateral value of real estate securing loans. As of December 31, 2011, we had $749.9 million in real estate loans. Continuing deterioration in the real estate market generally and in the residential property and construction segment in particular, along with high levels of unemployment, could result in additional loan charge-offs and provisions for credit losses in the future, which could have an adverse effect on our net income and capital levels.

Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual losses. A significant source of risk arises from the possibility that we could sustain losses because borrowers, guarantors and related parties may fail to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans. The underwriting and credit monitoring policies and procedures that we have adopted to address this risk may not prevent unexpected losses that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. We maintain an allowance for loan losses to provide for loan defaults and non-performance. The allowance is also increased for new loan growth. While we believe that our allowance for loan losses is adequate to cover inherent losses, we cannot assure you that we will not increase the allowance for loan losses further or that our regulators will not require us to increase this allowance.

Our Southern California business focus and economic conditions in Southern California could adversely affect our operations. The Bank’s operations are located primarily in Los Angeles and Orange counties. Because of this geographic concentration, our results depend largely upon economic conditions in these areas. The continued deterioration in economic conditions in the Bank’s market areas, continued high unemployment or a significant natural or man-made disaster in these market areas, could have a material adverse effect on the quality of the Bank’s loan portfolio, the demand for its products and services and on its overall financial condition and results of operations.

Our concentration in loans collateralized by commercial real estate property located primarily in Southern California could have adverse effects on credit quality. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank’s loan portfolio included commercial property, construction, and commercial and industrial loans, which were collateralized by commercial real estate properties located primarily in Southern California, amounting to $1.6 billion, or 83.1 percent of total gross loans. Because of this concentration, a potential deterioration of the commercial real estate market in Southern California could affect the ability of borrowers, guarantors and related parties to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans. Among the factors that could contribute to such a potential decline are general economic conditions in Southern California, interest rates and local market construction and sales activity.

Our concentrations of loans in certain industries could have adverse effects on credit quality. As of December 31, 2011, the Bank’s loan portfolio included loans to: 1) lessors of non-residential buildings totaling $380.7 million, or 19.6 percent of total gross loans; 2) borrowers in the accommodation industry totaling $283.6 million, or 14.6 percent of total gross loans; and 3) gas stations totaling $260.1 million, or 13.4 percent of

35

Table of Contents

total gross loans. Most of these loans are in Southern California. Because of these concentrations of loans in specific industries, a continued deterioration of the Southern California economy overall, and specifically within these industries, could affect the ability of borrowers, guarantors and related parties to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans, which could have material and adverse consequences for the Bank.

Our focus on lending to small to mid-sized community-based businesses may increase our credit risk. Most of our commercial business and commercial real estate loans are made to small or middle market businesses. These businesses generally have fewer financial resources in terms of capital or borrowing capacity than larger entities and have a heightened vulnerability to economic conditions. If general economic conditions in the markets in which we operate negatively impact this important customer sector, our results of operations and financial condition and the value of our common stock may be adversely affected. Moreover, a portion of these loans have been made by us in recent years and the borrowers may not have experienced a complete business or economic cycle. Furthermore, the deterioration of our borrowers’ businesses may hinder their ability to repay their loans with us, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and cash flows.

Our use of appraisals in deciding whether to make loans secured by real property does not ensure that the value of the real property collateral will be sufficient to repay our loans. In considering whether to make a loan secured by real property, we require an appraisal of the property. However, an appraisal is only an estimate of the value of the property at the time the appraisal is made and requires the exercise of a considerable degree of judgment and adherence to professional standards. If the appraisal does not reflect the amount that may be obtained upon sale or foreclosure of the property, whether due to declines in property values after the date of the original appraisal or defective preparation, we may not realize an amount equal to the indebtedness secured by the property and may suffer losses.

We may still be subject to continued regulatory scrutiny. Even with the completion of the underwritten public offering of our common stock by which we raised $77.1 million in net proceeds in November 2011, and the satisfaction of the capital ratio requirements set forth in the regulatory agreements and orders we have entered into, we cannot assure you whether or when such regulatory agreements and orders will be lifted or terminated. Even if they are lifted or terminated in whole or in part, we may still be subject to supervisory enforcement actions that restrict our activities.

Difficult economic and market conditions have adversely affected our industry. Declines in the housing market, with decreasing home prices and increasing delinquencies and foreclosures, have negatively impacted the credit performance of mortgage and construction loans and resulted in significant write-downs of assets by many financial institutions. General downward economic trends, reduced availability of commercial credit and unemployment have negatively impacted the credit performance of commercial and consumer credit, resulting in additional write-downs. Concerns over the stability of the financial markets and the economy have resulted in decreased lending by financial institutions to their customers and to each other. This market turmoil and tightening of credit has led to increased commercial and consumer deficiencies, lack of customer confidence, increased market volatility and reduction in general business activity. The resulting economic pressure on consumers and businesses and the lack of confidence in the financial markets may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and stock price. A worsening of these conditions would likely exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult market conditions on us and others in the financial institutions industry. In particular, we may face the following risks in connection with these events:

36

Table of Contents

Instability in domestic and international financial markets could adversely affect us Global capital markets and economic conditions are still unstable and the resulting disruption has been particularly acute in the financial sector. As the European credit crisis continues, with the bailout of Greece, and problems in other countries such as Italy and Spain, there is a growing risk to the financial condition and stability of major European banks. During the past several years, several large European bank experienced financial difficulty and were either rescued by government assistance of by other large European banks.

Recent legislative and regulatory initiatives to address difficult market and economic conditions may not stabilize the U.S. banking system. There can be no assurance as to the actual impact regulatory initiatives will have on the financial markets, including the extreme levels of volatility and limited credit availability currently being experienced. The failure of regulatory initiatives to help stabilize the financial markets and a worsening of financial market conditions could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, access to capital, liquidity, the financial condition of our borrowers and credit or the value of our securities.

Our success depends on our key management. Our success depends in large part on our ability to attract key people who are qualified and have knowledge and experience in the banking industry in our markets and to retain those people to successfully implement our business objectives. The unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel or the inability to maintain consistent personnel in management could have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.

Our interest expense may increase following the repeal of the Federal prohibition on payment of interest on demand deposits. The federal prohibition on the ability of financial institutions to pay interest on demand deposit accounts was repealed as part of the Dodd-Frank Act. As a result, beginning on July 21, 2011, financial institutions could commence offering interest on demand deposits to compete for clients. We do not yet know what interest rates other institutions may offer. Our interest expense will increase and our net interest margin will decrease if the Bank begins offering interest on demand deposits to attract additional customers or maintain current customers, which could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, net income and results of operations.

Changes in economic conditions could materially hurt our business. Our business is directly affected by changes in economic conditions, including finance, legislative and regulatory changes and changes in government monetary and fiscal policies and inflation, all of which are beyond our control. The economic conditions in the markets in which many of our borrowers operate have deteriorated and the levels of loan delinquency and defaults that we experienced were substantially higher than historical levels.

37

Table of Contents

If economic conditions continue to deteriorate, it may exacerbate the following consequences:

If a significant number of borrowers, guarantors or related parties fail to perform as required by the terms of their loans, we could sustain losses. A significant source of risk arises from the possibility that losses will be sustained because borrowers, guarantors or related parties may fail to perform in accordance with the terms of their loans. We have adopted underwriting and credit monitoring procedures and credit policies, including the establishment and review of the allowance for loan losses, that management believe are appropriate to limit this risk by assessing the likelihood of non-performance, tracking loan performance and diversifying our credit portfolio.

Our loan portfolio is predominantly secured by real estate and thus we have a higher degree of risk from a downturn in our real estate markets. A downturn in the real estate markets could hurt our business because many of our loans are secured by real estate. Real estate values and real estate markets are generally affected by changes in national, regional or local economic conditions, fluctuations in interest rates and the availability of loans to potential purchasers, changes in tax laws and other governmental statutes, regulations and policies and acts of nature, such as earthquakes and national disasters particular to California. Substantially all of our real estate collateral is located in California. If real estate values continue to decline, the value of real estate collateral securing our loans could be significantly reduced. Our ability to recover on defaulted loans by foreclosing and selling the real estate collateral would then be diminished and we would be more likely to suffer material losses on defaulted loans.

We are exposed to risk of environmental liabilities with respect to properties to which we take title. In the course of our business, we may foreclose and take title to real estate, and could be subject to environmental liabilities with respect to these properties. We may be held liable to a governmental entity or to third parties for property damage, personal injury, investigation and clean-up costs incurred by these parties in connection with environmental contamination, or may be required to investigate or clean-up hazardous or toxic substances, or chemical releases at a property. The costs associated with investigation or 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. If we become subject to significant environmental liabilities, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Our earnings are affected by changing interest rates. Changes in interest rates affect the level of loans, deposits and investments, the credit profile of existing loans, the rates received on loans and securities and the rates paid on deposits and borrowings. Significant fluctuations in interest rates may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. The current historically low interest rate environment caused by the response to the financial market crisis and the global economic recession may affect our operating earnings negatively.

We are subject to government regulations that could limit or restrict our activities, which in turn could adversely affect our operations. The financial services industry is subject to extensive federal and state supervision and regulation. Significant new laws, including the recent enactment of Dodd-Frank Act, changes in existing laws, or repeals of existing laws may cause our results to differ materially from historical and projected

38

Table of Contents

performance. Further, federal monetary policy, particularly as implemented through the Federal Reserve Board, significantly affects credit conditions and a material change in these conditions could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and results of operations.

Additional requirements imposed by the Dodd-Frank Act and other regulations could adversely affect us. Recent government efforts to strengthen the U.S. financial system have resulted in the imposition of additional regulatory requirements, including expansive financial services regulatory reform legislation. Dodd-Frank, adopted in July 2010, sets out sweeping regulatory changes. Changes imposed by the Dodd-Frank include, among others: (i) new requirements on banking, derivative and investment activities, including modified capital requirements, the repeal of the prohibition on the payment of interest on business demand accounts, and debit card interchange fee requirements; (ii) corporate governance and executive compensation requirements; (iii) enhanced financial institution safety and soundness regulations, including increases in assessment fees and deposit insurance coverage; and (iv) the establishment of new regulatory bodies, such as the Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection. Certain provisions are effective immediately; however, much of the Financial Reform Act is subject to further rulemaking and/or studies. As such, while we are subject to the legislation, we cannot fully assess the impact of the Dodd-Frank until final rules are implemented, which depending on the rule, could be within six to twenty four months from the enactment of the Dodd-Frank, or later.

Current and future legal and regulatory requirements, restrictions and regulations, including those imposed under Dodd-Frank, may adversely impact our profitability and may have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations, may require us to invest significant management attention and resources to evaluate and make any changes required by the legislation and accompanying rules and may make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified executive officers and employees.

Our Tier 1 risk-based capital will be negatively impacted by the Collins Amendment provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act. The Collins Amendment provision of the Dodd-Frank Act imposes increased capital requirements in the future. The Collins Amendment also requires federal banking regulators to establish minimum leverage and risk-based capital requirements to apply to insured depository institutions, bank and thrift holding companies, and systemically important nonbank financial companies. These capital requirements must not be less than the Generally Applicable Risk Based Capital Requirements and the Generally Applicable Leverage Capital Requirements as of July 21, 2010, and must not be quantitatively lower than the requirements that were in effect for insured depository institution as of July 21, 2010. The Collins Amendment defines Generally Applicable Risk Based Capital Requirements and Generally Applicable Leverage Capital Requirements to mean the risk-based capital requirements and minimum ratios of Tier 1 risk-based capital to average total assets, respectively, established by the appropriate federal banking agencies to apply to insured depository institutions under the Prompt Corrective Action provisions, regardless of total consolidated asset size or foreign financial exposure. Over a three-year phase-out period effective January 1, 2013, trust preferred securities will no longer qualify as Tier 1 risk-based capital for certain bank holding companies, including us.

The Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. The Dodd-Frank Act created the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“Bureau”) within the Federal Reserve. The Bureau is tasked with establishing and implementing rules and regulations under certain federal consumer protection laws with respect to the conduct of providers of certain consumer financial products and services. The Bureau has rulemaking authority over many of the statutes governing products and services offered to bank consumers. In addition, the Dodd-Frank Act permits states to adopt consumer protection laws and regulations that are more stringent than those regulations promulgated by the Bureau, and state attorneys general are permitted to enforce consumer protection rules adopted by the Bureau against state-chartered institutions, including the Bank.

39

Table of Contents

The FDIC’s restoration plan and the related increased assessment rate could adversely affect our earnings. The FDIC insures our customer deposits through the Deposit Insurance Fund (the “DIF”) up to prescribed limits for each depositor. Pursuant to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act of 2010 (the “Dodd-Frank Act”), the maximum deposit insurance amount has been permanently increased to $250,000 and all non-interest-bearing transaction accounts are insured. The amount of FDIC assessments paid by each DIF member institution is based on its relative risk of default as measured by regulatory capital ratios and other supervisory factors. Due to the greatly increased number of bank failures and losses incurred by DIF, as well as the recent extraordinary programs in which the FDIC has been involved to support the banking industry generally, the FDIC’s DIF was substantially depleted and the FDIC has incurred substantially increased operating costs. In November, 2009, the FDIC adopted a requirement for institutions to prepay in 2009 their estimated quarterly risk-based assessments for the fourth quarter of 2009 and for all of 2010, 2011, and 2012. The Bank received a waiver from prepayment of the FDIC assessment.

As required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC adopted a new DIF restoration plan which became effective on January 1, 2011. Among other things, the plan: (1) raises the minimum designated reserve ratio, which the FDIC is required to set each year, to 1.35 percent (from the former minimum of 1.15 percent) and removes the upper limit on the designated reserve ratio (which was formerly capped at 1.5 percent) and consequently on the size of the fund; (2) requires that the fund reserve ratio reach 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020 (rather than 1.15 percent by the end of 2016, as formerly required); (3) requires that, in setting assessments, the FDIC offset the effect of requiring that the reserve ratio reach 1.35 percent by September 30, 2020, rather than 1.15 percent by the end of 2016 on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion; (4) eliminates the requirement that the FDIC provide dividends from the fund when the reserve ratio is between 1.35 percent and 1.5 percent; and (5) continues the FDIC’s authority to declare dividends when the reserve ratio at the end of a calendar year is at least 1.5 percent, but grants the FDIC sole discretion in determining whether to suspend or limit the declaration or payment of dividends. The Federal Deposit Insurance Act continues to require that the FDIC’s Board of Directors consider the appropriate level for the designated reserve ratio annually and, if changing the designated reserve ratio, engage in notice-and-comment rulemaking before the beginning of the calendar year. The FDIC has set a long-term goal of getting its reserve ratio up to 2 percent of insured deposits by 2027.

On February 7, 2011, the FDIC approved a final rule, as mandated by the Dodd-Frank Act, changing the deposit insurance assessment system from one that is based on total domestic deposits to one that is based on average consolidated total assets minus average tangible equity. In addition, the final rule creates a scorecard-based assessment system for larger banks (those with more than $10 billion in assets) and suspends dividend payments if the DIF reserve ratio exceeds 1.5 percent, but provides for decreasing assessment rates when the Deposit Insurance Fund reserve ratio reaches certain thresholds. Larger insured depository institutions will likely pay higher assessments to the DIF than under the old system. Additionally, the final rule includes a new adjustment for depository institution debt whereby an institution would pay an additional premium equal to 50 basis points on every dollar of long-term, unsecured debt held as an asset that was issued by another insured depository institution (excluding debt guaranteed under the FDIC’s Temporary Liquidity Guarantee Program) to the extent that all such debt exceeds 3 percent of the other insured depository institution’s Tier 1 capital.

Our FDIC insurance expense totaled $6.3 million for 2011. We are generally unable to control the amount of premiums that we are required to pay for FDIC insurance. If there are additional bank or financial institution failures or if the FDIC otherwise determines, we may be required to pay even higher FDIC premiums than the recently increased levels. These announced increases and any future increases in FDIC insurance premiums may have a material and adverse effect on our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on the value of, or market for, our common stock.

40

Table of Contents

The impact of the new Basel III capital standards will likely impose enhanced capital adequacy standards on us. On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision, the oversight body of the Basel Committee, announced agreement on the calibration and phase-in arrangements for a strengthened set of capital requirements, known as Basel III, which were approved in November 2010 by the G20 leadership. Basel III increases the minimum Tier 1 common equity ratio to 4.5 percent, net of regulatory deductions, and introduces a capital conservation buffer of an additional 2.5 percent of common equity to risk-weighted assets, raising the target minimum common equity ratio to 7 percent. Basel III increases the minimum Tier 1 capital ratio to 8.5 percent inclusive of the capital conservation buffer, increases the minimum total capital ratio to 10.5 percent inclusive of the capital buffer and introduces a countercyclical capital buffer of up to 2.5 percent of common equity or other fully loss absorbing capital for periods of excess credit growth. Basel III also introduces a non-risk adjusted Tier 1 leverage ratio of 3 percent, based on a measure of total exposure rather than total assets, and new liquidity standards. The Basel III capital and liquidity standards will be phased in over a multi-year period. The Federal Reserve will likely implement changes to the capital adequacy standards applicable to us and the Bank which will increase our capital requirements and compliance costs.

A failure by the U.S. government to meet the conditions of the August 2011 debt ceiling agreement or to reduce its budget deficit or a further downgrade of U.S. sovereign debt could have a material adverse effect on the availability of financing, our borrowing costs, the liquidity and valuation of securities in our investment portfolio, our financial condition and our results of operations. As widely reported, there continues to be concerns over the ability of the United States government to reduce its budget deficit and resolve its debt crisis. The U.S. sovereign debt was downgraded from AAA to AA+ in August 2011 and continues to be under review for a downgrade of its credit rating to account for the risk that U.S. lawmakers fail to meet the conditions of the August 2011 debt ceiling agreement and/or reduce its overall debt. Any such failures or a downgrade of the U.S. sovereign debt rating could have a material adverse effect both on the U.S. economy and on the global economy. In particular, this could cause disruption in the capital markets and impact the stability of future U.S. treasury auctions and the trading market for U.S. government securities, resulting in increased interest rates and borrowing costs. The Bank relies on customer deposits, brokered deposits and advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank to fund operations. The Bank’s financial flexibility will be severely constrained if it is unable to maintain its access to funding or if adequate financing is not available to accommodate future growth at acceptable interest rates. If the Bank is required to rely on more expensive funding sources to support future growth, revenues may not increase proportionately to cover costs. In this case, profitability would be adversely affected. Any of these factors could negatively impact our borrowing costs and our liquidity, which could have a material adverse impact on our financial condition and our results of operations.

We are subject to the risk that the global credit crisis, despite efforts by global governments to halt that crisis, may affect interest rates and the availability of financing in general, which could adversely affect our financing and our operating results. During the past several years, several large European banks experienced financial difficulty and were either rescued by government assistance or by other large European banks. Several European governments have coordinated plans to attempt to shore up their financial sectors through loans, credit guarantees, capital infusions, promises of continued liquidity funding and interest rate cuts. Additionally, other governments of the world’s largest economic countries also implemented interest rate cuts. There is no assurance that these and other plans and programs will be successful in halting the global credit crisis or in preventing other banks from failing. If unsuccessful, this could adversely affect our financing and operations as well as those of the entire banking sector in general.

41

Table of Contents

Competition may adversely affect our performance. The banking and financial services businesses in our market areas are highly competitive. We face competition in attracting deposits, making loans, and attracting and retaining employees, particularly in the Korean-American community. The increasingly competitive environment is a result of changes in regulation, changes in technology and product delivery systems, new competitors in the market, and the pace of consolidation among financial services providers. Our results in the future may be materially and adversely impacted depending upon the nature and level of competition.

We continually encounter technological change, and we may have fewer resources than many of our competitors to continue to invest in technological improvements. The financial services industry is undergoing rapid technological changes, with frequent introductions of new technology-driven products and services. The effective use of technology increases efficiency and enables financial institutions to better serve customers and to reduce costs. Our future success will depend, in part, upon our ability to address the needs of our clients by using technology to provide products and services that will satisfy client demands for convenience, as well as to create additional efficiencies in our operations. Many of our competitors have substantially greater resources to invest in technological improvements. We may not be able to effectively implement new technology-driven products and services or be successful in marketing these products and services to our customers.

We could be liable for breaches of security in our online banking services. Fear of security breaches could limit the growth of our online services. We offer various Internet-based services to our clients, including online banking services. The secure transmission of confidential information over the Internet is essential to maintain our clients’ confidence in our online services. Advances in computer capabilities, new discoveries or other developments could result in a compromise or breach of the technology we use to protect client transaction data. Although we have developed systems and processes that are designed to prevent security breaches and periodically test our security, failure to mitigate breaches of security could adversely affect our ability to offer and grow our online services and could harm our business.

The soundness of other financial institutions could adversely affect us. 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 we routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial industry, including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, mutual and hedge funds, and other institutional clients. Many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of default of our counterparty or client. In addition, our credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by us cannot be realized upon or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the financial instrument exposure due us. Any such losses could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

We rely on communications, information, operating and financial control systems technology from third party service providers, and we may suffer an interruption in those systems. We rely heavily on third-party service providers for much of our communications, information, operating and financial control systems technology, including our internet banking services and data processing systems. Any failure or interruption of these services or systems or breaches in security of these systems could result in failures or interruptions in our customer relationship management, general ledger, deposit, servicing and/or loan origination systems. The occurrence of any failures or interruptions may require us to identify alternative sources of such services, and we cannot assure you that we could negotiate terms that are as favorable to us, or could obtain services with similar functionality as found in our existing systems without the need to expend substantial resources, if at all.

Negative publicity could damage our reputation. Reputation risk, or the risk to our earnings and capital from negative publicity or public opinion, is inherent in our business. Negative publicity or public opinion could adversely affect our ability to keep and attract customers and expose us to adverse legal and regulatory

42

Table of Contents

consequences. Negative public opinion could result from our actual or perceived conduct in any number of activities, including lending practices, corporate governance, regulatory compliance, mergers and acquisitions, and disclosure, sharing or inadequate protection of customer information, and from actions taken by government regulators and community organizations in response to that conduct.

We are dependent on key personnel and the loss of one or more of those key personnel may materially and adversely affect our prospects. Competition for qualified employees and personnel in the banking industry is intense and there are a limited number of qualified persons with knowledge of, and experience in, the California community banking industry. The process of recruiting personnel with the combination of skills and attributes required to carry out our strategies is often lengthy. In addition, legislation and regulations which impose restrictions on executive compensation may make it more difficult for us to retain and recruit key personnel. Our success depends to a significant degree upon our ability to attract and retain qualified management, loan origination, and finance, administrative, marketing and technical personnel and upon the continued contributions of our management and personnel. Failure to attract or retain such employees could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations.

Our controls and procedures could fail or be circumvented. Management regularly reviews and updates our internal controls, disclosure controls and procedures and corporate governance policies and procedures. Any system of controls, however well designed and operated, is based in part on certain assumptions and can provide only reasonable, but not absolute, assurances of the effectiveness of these systems and controls, and that the objectives of these controls have been met. Any failure or circumvention of our controls and procedures, and any failure to comply with regulations related to controls and procedures could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our ability to use some or all of our net operating loss carryforwards may be impaired. Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code imposes restrictions on the use of a corporation’s NOLs, as well as certain recognized built-in losses and other carryforwards, after an “ownership change” occurs. A Section 382 “ownership change” occurs if one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5 percent of our stock increase their ownership by more than 50 percentage points over their lowest ownership percentage within a rolling three-year period. If an “ownership change” occurs, Section 382 would impose an annual limit on the amount of pre-change NOLs and other losses we can use to reduce our taxable income generally equal to the product of the total value of our outstanding equity immediately prior to the “ownership change” and the applicable federal long-term tax-exempt interest rate for the month of the “ownership change.”

Risks Relating to Ownership of Our Common Stock

The Bank is currently restricted from paying dividends to us and we are restricted from paying dividends to stockholders and from making any payments on our trust preferred securities. The primary source of our income from which we pay our obligations and distribute dividends to our stockholders is from the receipt of dividends from the Bank. The availability of dividends from the Bank is limited by various statutes and regulations. The Bank currently has a retained deficit of $218.6 million as of December 31, 2011 and has suffered net losses in 2010, 2009 and 2008, largely caused by provision for credit losses and goodwill impairments. As a result, the California Financial Code does not provide authority for the Bank to declare a dividend to us, with or without Commissioner approval. In addition, the Bank is prohibited from paying dividends to us unless it receives prior regulatory approval. Furthermore, we agreed that we will not pay any dividends or make any payments on our outstanding $82.4 million of trust preferred securities or any other capital distributions without the prior written consent of the Federal Reserve Bank.

43

Table of Contents

We began to defer interest payment on our trust preferred securities commencing with the interest payment that was due on January 15, 2009. If we defer interest payments for more than 20 consecutive quarters under any of our outstanding trust preferred instruments, then we would be in default under such trust preferred arrangements and the amounts due under the agreements pursuant to which we issued our trust preferred securities would be immediately due and payable.

The price of our common stock may be volatile or may decline. The trading price of our common stock may fluctuate widely because of a number of factors, many of which are outside our control. In addition, the stock market is subject to fluctuations in the share prices and trading volumes that affect the market prices of the shares of many companies. These broad market fluctuations could adversely affect the market price of our common stock. Among the factors that could affect our stock price are:

The stock market and, in particular, the market for financial institution stocks, has experienced significant volatility recently. As a result, the market price of our common stock may be volatile. In addition, the trading volume in our common stock may fluctuate more than usual and cause significant price variations to occur. The trading price of the shares of our common stock and the value of our other securities will depend on many factors, which may change from time to time, including, without limitation, our financial condition, performance, creditworthiness and prospects, future sales of our equity or equity-related securities, and other factors identified above in “Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Current levels of market volatility are unprecedented. The capital and credit markets have been experiencing volatility and disruption for more than a year. In recent months, the volatility and disruption has reached unprecedented levels. In some cases, the markets have produced downward pressure on stock prices and credit availability for certain issuers without regard to those issuers’ underlying financial strength. A significant decline in our stock price could result in substantial losses for individual stockholders and could lead to costly and disruptive securities litigation and potential delisting from the NASDAQ.

Your share ownership may be diluted by the issuance of additional shares of our common stock in the future. Your share ownership may be diluted by the issuance of additional shares of our common stock in the future. We may decide to raise additional funds through public or private debt or equity financings for a number

44

Table of Contents

of reasons, including in response to regulatory or other requirements to meet our liquidity and capital needs, to finance our operations and business strategy or for other reasons. If we raise funds by issuing equity securities or instruments that are convertible into equity securities, the percentage ownership of our existing stockholders will further be reduced, the new equity securities may have rights, preferences and privileges superior to those of our common stock, and the market of our common stock could decline.

In addition, we have adopted a stock option plan that provides for the granting of stock options to our directors, executive officers and other employees. As of December 31, 2011, 383,361 shares of our common stock were issuable under options granted in connection with our stock option plans and stock warrants issued in connection with the registered rights and best efforts offerings. In addition, 183,920 shares of our common stock are reserved for future issuance to directors, officers and employees under our stock option plans. It is probable that the stock options will be exercised during their respective terms if the fair market value of our common stock exceeds the exercise price of the particular option. If the stock options are exercised, your share ownership will be diluted.

Furthermore, as of December 31, 2011, our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation authorizes the issuance of up to an additional 32,500,000 shares of common stock. Our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation does not provide for preemptive rights to the holders of our common stock. Any authorized but unissued shares are available for issuance by our Board of Directors. As a result, if we issue additional shares of common stock to raise additional capital or for other corporate purposes, you may be unable to maintain your pro rata ownership in the Company.

Future sales of common stock by existing stockholders may have an adverse impact on the market price of our common stock. Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market, or the perception that large sales could occur, could cause the market price of our common stock to decline or limit our future ability to raise capital through an offering of equity securities.

Holders of our junior subordinated debentures have rights that are senior to those of our stockholders. As of December 31, 2011, we had outstanding $82.4 million of trust preferred securities issued by our subsidiary trusts. Payments of the principal and interest on the trust preferred securities are conditionally guaranteed by us. The junior subordinated debentures underlying the trust preferred securities are senior to our shares of common stock. As a result, we must make payments on the junior subordinated debentures before any dividends can be paid on our common stock and, in the event of our bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the junior subordinated debentures must be satisfied before any distributions can be made on our common stock. We have the right to defer distributions on the junior subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities) for up to five years, during which time no dividends may be paid on our common stock. We commenced deferring distributions on the junior subordinated debentures (and the related trust preferred securities) with the payment that was due on January 15, 2009.

Anti-takeover provisions and state and federal law may limit the ability of another party to acquire us, which could cause our stock price to decline. Various provisions of our Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and By-laws could delay or prevent a third-party from acquiring us, even if doing so might be beneficial to our stockholders. These provisions provide for, among other things, supermajority voting approval for certain actions, limitation on large stockholders taking certain actions and the authorization to issue “blank check” preferred stock by action of the Board of Directors acting alone, thus without obtaining stockholder approval. The Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended, and the Change in Bank Control Act of 1978, as amended, together with federal regulations, require that, depending on the particular circumstances, either Federal Reserve Bank approval must be obtained or notice must be furnished to the Federal Reserve Bank and not disapproved

45

Table of Contents

prior to any person or entity acquiring “control” of a state member bank, such as the Bank. These provisions may prevent a merger or acquisition that would be attractive to stockholders and could limit the price investors would be willing to pay in the future for our common stock.

None.

46

Table of Contents

Hanmi Financial’s principal office is located at 3660 Wilshire Boulevard, Penthouse Suite A, Los Angeles, California. The office is leased pursuant to a five-year term, which expires on November 30, 2013.

The following table sets forth information about our offices as of December 31, 2011:

47

Table of Contents

As of December 31, 2011, our consolidated investment in premises and equipment, net of accumulated depreciation and amortization, totaled $16.6 million. Our lease expense was $5.6 million for the year ended December 31, 2011. Hanmi Financial and its subsidiaries consider their present facilities to be sufficient for their current operations.

From time to time, Hanmi Financial and its subsidiaries are parties to litigation that arises in the ordinary course of business, such as claims to enforce liens, claims involving the origination and servicing of loans, and other issues related to the business of Hanmi Financial and its subsidiaries. In the opinion of management and in consultation with external legal counsel, the resolution of any such issues would not have a material adverse impact on the financial condition, results of operations, or liquidity of Hanmi Financial or its subsidiaries.

Not applicable.

48

Table of Contents

PART II

Market Information

The following table sets forth, for the periods indicated, the high and low trading prices of Hanmi Financial’s common stock for the last two years as reported on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “HAFC”:

Holders

Hanmi Financial had 575 registered stockholders of record as of February 1, 2012.

Dividends

Hanmi Financial has agreed with the FRB that it will not pay any cash dividends to its stockholders without the prior consent of the FRB. The Bank is also required to seek prior approval from its regulators to pay cash dividends to Hanmi Financial. The ability of Hanmi Financial to pay dividends to its stockholders is also directly dependent on the ability of the Bank to pay dividends to us. Section 642 of the California Financial Code provides that neither a California state-chartered bank nor a majority-owned subsidiary of a bank can pay dividends to its stockholders in an amount which exceeds the lesser of (a) the retained earnings of the bank or (b) the net income of the bank for its last three fiscal years, in each case less the amount of any previous distributions made during such period.

As a result of the net loss incurred by the Bank in recent years, the Bank is currently not able to pay dividends to Hanmi Financial under Section 642. Financial Code Section 643 provides, alternatively, that, notwithstanding the foregoing restriction set forth in Section 642, dividends in an amount not exceeding the greatest of (a) the retained earnings of the bank; (b) the net income of the bank for its last fiscal year or (c) the net income of the bank for its current fiscal year may be declared with the prior approval of the California Commissioner of Financial Institutions. The Bank had a retained deficit of $218.6 million as of December 31, 2011 and is not able to pay dividends under Section 643.

FRB Regulation H Section 208.5 provides that the Bank must obtain FRB approval to declare and pay a dividend if the total of all dividends declared during the calendar year, including the proposed dividend, exceeds the sum of the Bank’s net income during the current calendar year and the retained net income of the prior two calendar years. On August 29, 2008, we announced the suspension of our quarterly cash dividend. As a result of our existing regulatory agreements, we are required to obtain regulatory approval prior to the Bank or Hanmi Financial declaring any dividends to its respective stockholders.

49

Table of Contents

It is the Federal Reserve’s policy that bank holding companies should generally pay dividends on common stock only out of income available over the past year, and only if prospective earnings retention is consistent with the organization’s expected future needs and financial condition. It is also the Federal Reserve’s policy that bank holding companies should not maintain dividend levels that undermine their ability to be a source of strength to its banking subsidiaries. Additionally, in consideration of the current financial and economic environment, the Federal Reserve has indicated that bank holding companies should carefully review their dividend policy and has discouraged payment ratios that are at maximum allowable levels unless both asset quality and capital are very strong.

The junior subordinated debentures underlying our trust preferred securities are senior to our shares of common stock. As a result, we must make payments on the junior subordinated debentures before any dividends can be paid on our common stock and, in the event of our bankruptcy, dissolution or liquidation, the holders of the junior subordinated debentures must be satisfied before any distributions can be made on our common stock. We began to defer distributions on our $82.4 million of outstanding junior subordinated debentures (and related trust preferred securities) commencing with the interest payment that was due on January 15, 2009.

We currently do not have any present intention of paying cash dividends to Hanmi Financial stockholders.

50

Table of Contents

Performance Graph

The following graph shows a comparison of stockholder return on Hanmi Financial’s common stock with the cumulative total returns for: 1) the Nasdaq Composite^® (U.S.) Index; 2) the Standard and Poor’s (“S&P”) 500 Financials Index; and 3) the SNL Bank $1B-$5B Index, which was compiled by SNL Financial LC of Charlottesville, Virginia. The graph assumes an initial investment of $100 and reinvestment of dividends. The graph is historical only and may not be indicative of possible future performance. The performance graph shall not be deemed incorporated by reference to any general statement incorporating by reference this Report into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or under the Exchange Act, except to the extent that we specifically incorporate this information by reference, and shall not otherwise be deemed filed under such Acts.

Purchases of Equity Securities by the Issuer and Affiliated Purchasers

During the fourth quarter of 2011, there were no purchases of Hanmi Financial’s equity securities by Hanmi Financial or its affiliates. As of December 31, 2011, there was no current plan authorizing purchases of Hanmi Financial’s equity securities by Hanmi Financial or its affiliates.

51

Table of Contents

The following table presents selected historical financial information, including per share information as adjusted for the stock dividends and stock splits declared by us. This selected historical financial data should be read in conjunction with our consolidated financial statements and the notes thereto appearing elsewhere in this Report and the information contained in “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” The selected historical financial data as of and for each of the years in the five years ended December 31, 2011 is derived from our audited financial statements. In the opinion of management, the information presented reflects all adjustments, including normal and recurring accruals, considered necessary for a fair presentation of the results of such periods.

52

Table of Contents