|
Fair Value Measurements (Policies)
|
6 Months Ended |
|---|---|
|
Jun. 30, 2012
|
|
| Fair Value Measurements and Off-Balance Sheet Commitments [Abstract] | |
| Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures |
FASB ASC 820, “Fair Value Measurements and Disclosures,” defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and expands disclosures about fair value measurements. It also establishes a fair value hierarchy about the assumptions used to measure fair value and clarifies assumptions about risk and the effect of a restriction on the sale or use of an asset. FASB ASC 825, “Financial Instruments,” provides additional guidance for estimating fair value in accordance with FASB ASC 820 when the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability have significantly decreased. It also includes guidance on identifying circumstances that indicate a transaction is not orderly. FASB ASC 825 emphasizes that even if there has been a significant decrease in the volume and level of activity for the asset or liability and regardless of the valuation technique(s) used, the objective of a fair value measurement remains the same. FASB ASC 825 also requires additional disclosures relating to fair value measurement inputs and valuation techniques, as well as disclosures of all debt and equity investment securities by major security types rather than by major security categories that should be based on the nature and risks of the securities during both interim and annual periods. FASB ASC 825 became effective for interim and annual reporting periods ending after June 15, 2009 and did not require disclosures for earlier periods presented for comparative purposes at initial adoption. In periods after initial adoption, FASB ASC 825 requires comparative disclosures only for periods ending after initial adoption. We adopted FASB ASC 825 in the second quarter of 2009. The adoption of FASB ASC 825 resulted in additional disclosures that are presented in “Note 4 – Investment Securities.” FASB ASU 2011-04, “Amendments to Achieve Common Fair Value Measurement and Disclosure Requirements in U.S. GAAP and IFRSs (Topic 820),” provides guidance on fair value measurement and disclosure requirements that the FASB deemed largely identical across U.S. GAAP and IFRS. The requirements do not extend the use of fair value accounting, but provide guidance on how it should be applied where its use is already required or allowed. ASU 2011-04 supersedes most of the guidance in ASC topic 820, but many of the changes are clarifications of existing guidance or wording changes to reflect IFRS 13. Amendments in FASB ASU 2011-04 change the wording used to describe U.S. GAAP requirements for fair value and disclosing information about fair value measurements. FASB ASU 2011-04 became effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2011, and early application was not permitted. Our adoption of FASB ASU 2011-04 did not have a significant impact on our financial condition or result of operations. |
| Financial Instruments |
The estimated fair value of financial instruments has been determined by using available market information and appropriate valuation methodologies. However, considerable judgment is required to interpret market data in order to develop estimates of fair value. Accordingly, the estimates presented herein are not necessarily indicative of the amounts that we could realize in a current market exchange. The use of different market assumptions and/or estimation methodologies may have a material effect on the estimated fair value amounts. |
| Receivables |
Impaired Loans – FASB ASC 820 applies to loans measured for impairment using the practical expedients permitted by FASB ASC 310, “Receivables,” including impaired loans measured at an observable market price (if available), or at the fair value of the loan’s collateral (if the loan is collateral dependent). Fair value of the loan’s collateral, when the loan is dependent on collateral, is determined by appraisals or independent valuation. These loans are classified as Level 2. |
| Investments - Debt and Equity Securities |
FASB ASC 320, “Investments – Debt and Equity Securities,” amended current other-than-temporary-impairment (“OTTI”) guidance in GAAP for debt securities by requiring a write-down when fair value is below amortized cost in circumstances where: (1) an entity has the intent to sell a security; (2) it is more likely than not that an entity will be required to sell the security before recovery of its amortized cost basis; or (3) an entity does not expect to recover the entire amortized cost basis of the security. If an entity intends to sell a security or if it is more likely than not the entity will be required to sell the security before recovery, an OTTI write-down is recognized in earnings equal to the entire difference between the security’s amortized cost basis and its fair value. If an entity does not intend to sell the security or it is not more likely than not that it will be required to sell the security before recovery, the OTTI write-down is separated into an amount representing credit loss, which is recognized in earnings, and the amount related to all other factors, which is recognized in other comprehensive income. FASB ASC 320 did not amend existing recognition and measurement guidance related to OTTI write-downs of equity securities. FASB ASC 320 also extended disclosure requirements about debt and equity securities to interim reporting periods. FASB ASC 320 does not require disclosures for earlier periods presented for comparative purposes at initial adoption. In periods after initial adoption, FASB ASC 320 requires comparative disclosures only for periods ending after initial adoption. |
| A Creditor's Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring |
In April 2011, the FASB issued ASU No. 2011-02, “A Creditor’s Determination of Whether a Restructuring is a Troubled Debt Restructuring,” which clarifies the guidance for evaluating whether a restructuring constitutes a TDR. This guidance is effective for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011, and should be applied retrospectively to the beginning of the annual period of adoption. For the purposes of measuring impairment of loans that are newly considered impaired, the guidance should be applied prospectively for the first interim or annual period beginning on or after June 15, 2011. As a result of the amendments in ASU No. 2011-02, we reassessed all restructurings that occurred on or after the beginning of the annual period and identified certain receivables as TDRs. Upon identifying those receivables as TDRs, we considered them impaired and applied the impairment measurement guidance prospectively for those receivables newly identified as impaired. During the six months ended June 30, 2012, we restructured monthly payments on 40 loans, with a net carrying value of $7.7 million as of June 30, 2012, through temporary payment structure modifications or re-amortization. For the restructured loans on accrual status, we determined that, based on the financial capabilities of the borrowers at the time of the loan restructuring and the borrowers’ past performance in the payment of debt service under the previous loan terms, performance and collection under the revised terms are probable. As of June 30, 2012 and December 31, 2011, total TDR loans receivable, excluding loans held for sale, was $35.8 million and $51.6 million, respectively. A debt restructuring is considered a TDR if we grant a concession that we would not have otherwise considered to the borrower, for economic or legal reasons related to the borrower’s financial difficulties. Loans are considered to be TDRs if they were restructured through payment structure modifications such as reducing the amount of principal and interest due monthly and/or allowing for interest only monthly payments for six months or less. All TDR loans are impaired, and are individually evaluated for specific impairment using one of these three criteria: (1) the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate; (2) the loan’s observable market price; or (3) the fair value of the collateral if the loan is collateral dependent. At June 30, 2012, TDR loans, excluding loans held for sale, were subjected to specific impairment analysis and a $6.3 million reserve relating to these loans was included in the allowance for loan losses. At December 31, 2011, TDR loans, excluding loans held for sale, were subjected to specific impairment analysis and the related allowance for loan losses was $14.2 million. |
| Derivatives and Hedging - Contracts in Entity's Own Stock |
As part of the agreement executed on July 27, 2010 with Cappello Capital Corp., the placement agent in connection with our best efforts offering and the financial advisor in connection with our completed rights offering, we issued warrants to purchase 250,000 shares of our common stock for services performed. The warrants have an exercise price of $9.60 per share. According to the agreement, the warrants vested on October 14, 2010 and are exercisable until its expiration on October 14, 2015. The Company followed the guidance of FASB ASC Topic 815- 40, “Derivatives and Hedging—Contracts in Entity's Own Stock” (“ASC 815- 40”), which establishes a framework for determining whether certain freestanding and embedded instruments are indexed to a company's own stock for purposes of evaluation of the accounting for such instruments under existing accounting literature. Under GAAP, the issuer is required to measure the fair value of the equity instruments in the transaction as of earlier of i) the date at which a commitment for performance by the counterparty to earn the equity instruments is reached or ii) the date at which the counterparty’s performance is complete. The fair value of the warrants at the date of issuance totaling $2.0 million was recorded as a liability and a cost of equity, which was determined by the Black-Scholes option pricing model. The expected stock volatility is based on historical volatility of our common stock over the expected term of the warrants. We used a weighted average expected stock volatility of 111.46 percent. The expected life assumption is based on the contract term of five years. The dividend yield of zero is based on the fact that we have no present intention to pay cash dividends. The risk free rate of 2.07 percent used for the warrant is equal to the zero coupon rate in effect at the time of the grant. |