XML 24 R10.htm IDEA: XBRL DOCUMENT v3.10.0.1
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
12 Months Ended
Dec. 31, 2018
Organization, Consolidation and Presentation of Financial Statements [Abstract]  
Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
3.
SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
Business Segments
 — We regularly assess our strategic plans, operations and reporting structures to identify our reportable segments. Changes to our reportable segments are expected to be infrequent. For the years ended December 31, 2016 through December 31, 2017, we operated as two reportable segments: Banking Centers and Dairy & Livestock and Agribusiness. As a result of the Community Bank acquisition, along with changes in personnel, reporting structure, and operations, we re-evaluated our segment reporting for the third quarter ended September 30, 2018.
 
As of December 31, 2018, we operated as one reportable segment. The factors considered in making this determination include the nature of products and offered services, geographic regions in which we operate, the applicable regulatory environment, and the materiality of discrete financial information reviewed by our key decision makers. Through our network of banking centers, we provide relationship-based banking products, services and solutions for small to mid-sized companies, real estate investors, non-profit organizations, professionals and other individuals. Our products include loans for commercial businesses, commercial real estate, multi-family, construction, land, dairy & livestock and agribusiness, consumer and government-guaranteed small business loans. We also provide business deposit products and treasury cash management services, as well as deposit products to the owners and employees of the businesses we serve. The decision to combine our two reportable segments was made to align the segment reporting with the changes in our operations and reporting structure, and to be consistent with the level and materiality of information reviewed by our key decision makers.
Cash and cash equivalents
— Cash on hand, cash items in the process of collection, and amounts due from correspondent banks, the Federal Reserve Bank and interest-bearing balances due from depository institutions with initial terms of ninety days or less, are included in Cash and cash equivalents.
Investment Securities
— The Company classifies as held-to-maturity (“HTM”) those debt securities that the Company has the positive intent and ability to hold to maturity. Securities classified as trading are those securities that are bought and held principally for the purpose of selling them in the near term. All other debt and equity securities are classified as available-for-sale (“AFS”). Securities held-to-maturity are accounted for at cost and adjusted for amortization of premiums and accretion of discounts. Trading securities are accounted for at fair value with the unrealized gains and losses being included in current earnings. Available-for-sale securities are accounted for at fair value, with the net unrealized gains and losses, net of income tax effects, presented as a separate component of stockholders’ equity. Realized gains and losses on sales of securities are recognized in earnings at the time of sale and are determined on a specific-identification basis. Purchase premiums and discounts are recognized in interest income using the effective-yield method over the estimated terms of the securities. For mortgage-backed securities (“MBS”), the amortization or accretion is based on estimated average lives of the securities. The lives of these securities can fluctuate based on the amount of prepayments received on the underlying collateral of the securities. The Company’s investment in the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco (“FHLB”) stock is carried at cost.
At each reporting date, securities are assessed to determine whether there is an other-than-temporary impairment (“OTTI”). Other-than-temporary impairment on investment securities is not recognized in earnings when there are credit losses on a debt security for which management does not intend to sell and for which it is more-likely-than-not that the Company will not have to sell prior to recovery of the noncredit impairment. Otherwise, the portion of the total impairment that is attributable to the credit loss would be recorded in earnings, and the remaining difference between the debt security’s amortized cost and its fair value would be included in other comprehensive income.
Loans and Lease Finance Receivables
— Loans and lease finance receivables that management has the intent and ability to hold for the foreseeable future or until maturity or payoff are reported at the principal balance outstanding, less deferred net loan origination fees and purchase price discounts. Purchase Credit Impaired (“PCI”) loans are those loans that when we acquired them were deemed to be impaired. PCI loans are included in total loans and lease finance receivables as of December 31, 2018. Refer to Note 7 — 
Loans and Lease Finance Receivables and Allowance for Loan Losses
for total loans, excluding PCI loans, by type and to Note 6 —
Acquired SJB Assets and FDIC Loss Sharing Asset
for PCI loans by type.
In the ordinary course of business, the Company enters into commitments to extend credit to its customers. To the extent that such commitments are unfunded, the related unfunded amounts are not reflected in the accompanying consolidated financial statements.
The Company receives collateral to support loans, lease finance receivables, and commitments to extend credit for which collateral is deemed necessary. The most significant categories for which collateral is deemed necessary are real estate, principally commercial and industrial income-producing properties, Small Business Administration (“SBA”) loans, real estate mortgages, assets utilized in dairy & livestock and agribusiness, and various personal property assets utilized in commercial and industrial business governed by the Uniform Commercial Code.
Nonrefundable fees and direct costs associated with the origination or purchase of loans are deferred and netted against outstanding loan balances. The deferred net loan fees and costs and purchase price discounts are recognized in interest income over the loan term using the effective-yield method.
Interest on loans and lease finance receivables, excluding PCI loans, is credited to income based on the principal amounts of such loans or receivables outstanding. Loans are considered delinquent when principal or interest payments are past due 30 days or more and generally remain on accrual status between 30 and 89 days past due. Interest income is not recognized on loans and lease finance receivables when collection of interest is deemed by management to be doubtful. Loans, excluding PCI loans, on which the accrual of interest has been discontinued are designated as nonaccrual loans. In general, interest shall not accrue on any loan, excluding PCI loans, for which payment in full of principal and interest is not expected, or when the loan becomes 90 days past due, unless the loan is both well secured and in the process of collection. Factors considered in determining that the full collection of principal and interest is no longer probable include cash flow and liquidity of the borrower or property, the financial position of the guarantors and their willingness to support the loan as well as other factors, and this determination involves significant judgment. When an asset is placed on nonaccrual status, previously accrued but unpaid interest is reversed against income. Subsequent collections of cash are applied as reductions to the principal balance unless the loan is returned to accrual status. Interest is not recognized using a cash-basis method. Nonaccrual loans may be restored to accrual status when principal and interest become current and when the borrower is able to demonstrate payment performance for a sustained period, typically for six months. A nonaccrual loan may return to accrual status sooner based on other significant events or mitigating circumstances. This policy is consistently applied to all types of loans and lease finance receivables, excluding PCI loans.
Troubled Debt Restructurings
— Loans are reported as a Troubled Debt Restructuring (“TDR”) if the Company for economic or legal reasons related to the debtor’s financial difficulties grants a concession to the debtor that it would not otherwise consider. Types of modifications that may be considered concessions, which in turn result in a TDR include, but are not limited to, (i) a reduction of the stated interest rate for the remaining original life of the debt, (ii) an extension of the maturity date or dates at a stated interest rate lower than the current market rate for new debt with similar risk, (iii) a reduction of the face amount or maturity amount of the debt as stated in the instrument or other agreement, or (iv) a reduction of interest. As a result of these concessions, restructured loans are considered impaired, and the measurement of impairment is based on the Company’s policy for impaired loans. In addition, the Company may provide a concession to the debtor where it offers collateral and the value of such collateral is significant in proportion to the nature of the concession requested, and it substantially reduces the Company’s risk of loss. In such cases, these modifications are not considered a TDR as, in substance, no concession was made as a result of the significant additional collateral obtained.
When determining whether or not a loan modification is a TDR under ASC 310-40, the Company evaluates loan modification requests from borrowers experiencing financial difficulties on a case-by-case basis. Any such modifications granted are unique to the borrower’s circumstances. Because of the Company’s focus on the commercial lending sector, each business customer has unique attributes, which in turn means that modifications of loans to those customers are not easily categorized by type, key features, or other terms, but are evaluated individually based on all relevant facts and circumstances pertaining to the modification request and the borrower’s/guarantor’s financial condition at the time of the request. The evaluation of whether or not a borrower is experiencing financial difficulties will include, among other relevant factors considered by the Company, a review of significant factors such as (i) whether the borrower is in default on any of its debt, (ii) whether the borrower is experiencing payment delinquency, (iii) whether the global cash flows of the borrower and the owner guarantor(s) of the borrower have diminished below what is necessary to service existing debt obligations, (iv) whether the borrower’s forecasted cash flows will be insufficient to service the debt in future periods or in accordance with the contractual terms of the existing agreement through maturity, (v) whether the borrower is unable to refinance the subject debt from other financing sources with similar terms, and (vi) whether the borrower is in jeopardy as a going-concern and/or considering bankruptcy. In any case, the debtor is presumed to be experiencing financial difficulties if the Company determines it is probable the debtor will default on the original loan if the modification is not granted.
The types of loans subject to modification vary greatly, but during the subject period are concentrated in commercial and industrial loans, dairy & livestock and agribusiness loans, and term loans to commercial real estate investors. Some examples of key features include payment deferrals and delays, interest rate reductions, and extensions or renewals where the contract rate may or may not be below the market rate of interest for debt with similar characteristics as those of the modified debt. The typical length of the modified terms ranges from three (3) to twelve (12) months; however, all actual modified terms will depend on the facts, circumstances and attributes of the specific borrower requesting a modification. In general, after a careful evaluation of all relevant facts and circumstances taken together, including the nature of any concession, certain modification requests will result in troubled debt restructurings while certain other modifications will not, pursuant to the criteria and judgments as discussed throughout this report. In certain cases, modification requests for delays or deferrals of principal were evaluated and determined to be exempt from TDR reporting because they constituted insignificant delays under ASC 310-40-15.
In situations where the Company has determined that the borrower is experiencing financial difficulties and is evaluating whether a concession is insignificant, and therefore does not result in a TDR, such analysis is based on an evaluation of both the amount and the timing of the restructured payments, including the following factors:
 
 
1.
Whether the amount of the restructured payments subject to delay is insignificant relative to the unpaid principal balance or collateral value of the debt and will result in an insignificant shortfall in the contractual amount due; and
 
2.
The delay is insignificant relative to any of the following:
 
The frequency of payments due;
 
 
The debt’s original contractual maturity; or
 
 
The debt’s original expected duration.
Most modified loans not classified and accounted for as a TDR were performing and paying as agreed under their original terms in the six-month period immediately preceding a request for modification. Subsequently, these modified loans have continued to perform under the modified terms and deferrals that amounted to insignificant delays, which in turn is supported by the facts and circumstances of each individual customer and loan as described above. Payment performance continues to be monitored once modifications are made. The Company’s favorable experience regarding “re-defaults” under modified terms, or upon return of the loan to its original terms, indicates that such relief may improve ultimate collection and reduces the Company’s risk of loss.
Impaired Loans
— A loan is generally considered impaired when based on current events and information it is probable that the Company will be unable to collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the loan agreement. A loan, including a restructured loan, for which there is an insignificant delay relative to the frequency of payments due, and/or the original contractual maturity, is not considered an impaired loan. Generally, impaired loans include loans on nonaccrual status and TDRs.
The Company’s policy is to record a specific valuation allowance, which is included in the allowance for loan losses, or to charge off that portion of an impaired loan that represents the impairment or shortfall amount as determined utilizing one of the three methods described in ASC 310-10-35-22. Impairment on non-collateral dependent restructured loans is measured by comparing the present value of expected future cash flows on the restructured loans discounted at the interest rate of the original loan agreement to the loan’s carrying value. The impairment amount, if any, is generally charged off and recorded against the allowance for loan losses at the time impairment is measurable and a probable loss is determined. As a result, most of the TDRs have no specific allowance allocated because, consistent with the Company’s stated practice, any impairment is typically charged off in the period in which it is identified. The Company measures impairment based on the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the loan’s effective interest rate, except that as a practical expedient, the Company may also measure impairment based on an observable market price for the loan, or the value of the collateral, for collateral dependent loans. Impairment on collateral dependent restructured loans is measured by determining the amount by which our recorded investment in the impaired loan exceeds the fair value of the collateral less estimated selling costs. The fair value is generally determined by one or more appraisals of the collateral, performed by a Company-approved third-party independent appraiser. The majority of impaired loans that are collateral dependent are charged off down to their estimated fair value of the collateral (less selling costs) at each reporting date based on current appraised value.
Appraisals of the collateral for impaired collateral dependent loans are typically ordered at the time the loan is identified as showing signs of inherent weakness. These appraisals are normally updated at least annually, or more frequently, if there are concerns or indications that the value of the collateral may have changed significantly since the previous appraisal. On an exception basis, a specific valuation allowance is recorded on collateral dependent impaired loans when a current appraisal is not yet available, a recent appraisal is still under review or on single-family residential (“SFR”) mortgage loans if the loans are currently under review for a loan modification. Such valuation allowances are generally based on previous appraisals adjusted for current market conditions, based on preliminary appraisal values that are still being reviewed or for SFR mortgage loans under review for modification on an appraisal or indications of comparable home sales from external sources.
Charge-offs of unsecured consumer loans are recorded when the loan reaches 120 days past due or sooner as circumstances indicate. Except for the charge-offs of unsecured consumer loans, the charge-off policy is applied consistently across all portfolio segments. Impaired single-family mortgage loans that have been modified in accordance with the various government modification programs are also measured based on the present value of the expected cash flows discounted at the loan’s pre-modification interest rate. The Company recognizes the change in present value attributable to the passage of time as interest income on such performing SFR mortgage loans and the amount of interest income recognized to date has been insignificant.
Provision and Allowance for Loan Losses
— The allowance for loan losses is management’s estimate of probable losses inherent in the loan and lease receivables portfolio. The allowance is increased by the provision for loan losses and recoveries of prior loan losses, and it is decreased by recapture of provision for loan losses and by charge-offs taken when management believes the uncollectability of any loan is confirmed. Subsequent recoveries, if any, are added to the allowance. The determination of the balance in the allowance for loan losses is based on an analysis of the loan and lease finance receivables portfolio using a systematic methodology and reflects an amount that, in management’s judgment, is appropriate to provide for probable loan losses inherent in the portfolio, after giving consideration to the character of the loan portfolio, current economic conditions, past loan loss experience, and such other factors that would deserve current recognition in estimating inherent loan losses.
There are different qualitative risks for the loans in each portfolio segment. The construction and real estate segments’ predominant risk characteristic is the collateral and the geographic location of the property collateralizing the loan as well as the operating cash flow for commercial real estate properties. The commercial and industrial segment’s predominant risk characteristics are the cash flows of the businesses we lend to, the global cash flows and liquidity of the guarantors, as well as economic and market conditions. SBA 504 loans have risk characteristics that are similar to the real estate loan segment, while SBA 7(a) loans have risks that are similar to commercial and industrial loans. The dairy & livestock segment’s predominant risk characteristics are milk and beef prices in the market as well as the cost of feed and cattle. The Agribusiness segment’s predominant risk characteristics are the supply and demand conditions of the product, production seasonality, the scale of operations and ability to control costs, the availability and cost of water, and operator experience. The municipal lease segment’s predominant risk characteristics are the municipality’s general financial condition and tax revenues or if applicable the specific project related financial condition. The consumer, auto and other segment’s predominant risk characteristics are employment and income levels as they relate to consumers and cash flows of the businesses as they relate to equipment and vehicle leases to 
businesses.
The Company’s methodology is consistently applied across all portfolio segments taking into account the applicable historical loss rates and the qualitative factors applicable to each pool of loans. A key factor in the Company’s methodology is the loan risk rating (Pass, Special Mention, Substandard, Doubtful and Loss). Loan risk ratings are updated as facts related to the loan or borrower become available. In addition, all term loans in excess of $1.0 million are subject to an annual internal credit review process where all factors underlying the loan, borrower and guarantors are subject to review which may result in changes to the loan’s risk rating.
Our methodology for assessing the appropriateness of the allowance is conducted on a regular basis and considers the Bank’s overall loan portfolio. The Bank’s methodology consists of two major phases.
In the first phase, individual loans are reviewed to identify loans for impairment. Impairment is measured based on the Company’s policy. If an impaired loan is determined to be a collateral dependent loan, the Company determines the fair value of the loan and if it is less than the recorded investment in the loan, the Company either recognizes an impairment as a specific allowance, or charges off the impaired balance if it determined that such amount represents a confirmed loss. For non-collateral dependent loans, the Company measures impairment based on the comparison of the loan’s carrying value to the present value of expected future cash flows discounted at the interest rate on the original loan agreement. Loans determined to be impaired are excluded from the formula allowance so as not to double count the loss exposure.
The second phase is conducted by evaluating or segmenting the remainder of the loan portfolio into groups or pools of loans with similar characteristics. In this second phase, groups or pools of homogeneous loans are reviewed to determine a portfolio formula allowance. In the case of the portfolio formula allowance, homogeneous portfolios, such as small business loans, consumer loans, dairy & livestock and agribusiness loans, and real estate loans, are aggregated or pooled in determining the appropriate allowance. The Bank aggregates loans with similar risk characteristics into eight (8) segments in order to capture sufficient loss observations, and to produce more reliable historical loss rates for a given segment. The Bank’s methodology employs a look back period based on a through-the-cycle time frame beginning with the first quarter of 2009 through the fourth quarter of 2018. This time period continues to expand by one quarter until such time the current economic cycle ends, triggered by independent evidence that a recession has begun. The through-the-cycle look back period produces meaningful results that more appropriately reflect the level of incurred losses in the Bank’s loan portfolio given the current, extended credit cycle
.
 
Included in this second phase is our consideration of qualitative factors, including, all known relevant internal and external factors that may affect the collectability of a loan. This includes our estimates of the amounts necessary for concentrations, economic uncertainties, the volatility of the market value of collateral, and other relevant factors. Quantitative metrics are applied to each of the factors utilizing a comparison of current measurements to historical results within the range of the look back period. These qualitative factors are used to adjust the historical loan loss rates for each pool of loans to determine the probable loan losses inherent in the portfolio.
Periodically, we assess various attributes utilized in adjusting our historical loss factors to reflect current economic conditions. The methodology is consistently applied across all the portfolio segments taking into account the applicable historical loss rates and the qualitative factors applicable to each pool of loans.
 
Performing loans acquired through business combinations are evaluated separately by each acquired portfolio using the ALLL methodology. The results of the ALLL methodology are compared to the remaining fair value discounts by portfolio. If the remaining fair value discounts are determined to be insufficient, the allowance will be increased to reflect the additional risk in the portfolio. The ALLL methodology includes documentation, controls, validation and governance processes that ensure that the overall ALLL process is structured, transparent and repeatable. The Bank updates its ALLL methodology at least annually to ensure the relevance and reliability of key measures and assumptions that produce the allowance each quarter.
 
Reserve for Unfunded Loan Commitments — 
We record a liability for probable and estimable losses associated with our unfunded loan commitments being funded and subsequently being charged off. Each quarter, every unfunded client loan commitment is allocated to a credit risk-rating in accordance with each client’s credit risk rating. We use the historical loan loss factors described under our allowance for loan losses to calculate the loan loss experience if unfunded loan commitments are funded. Separately, we use historical trends to calculate a probability of an unfunded loan commitment being funded. We apply the loan funding probability factor to risk-factor adjusted unfunded loan commitments by credit risk-rating to derive the reserve for unfunded loan commitments, similar to funded loans. The reserve for unfunded loan commitments also includes certain qualitative allocations as deemed appropriate by management. We include the reserve for unfunded loan commitments in other liabilities and the related provision in other noninterest expense.
Purchase Credit Impaired Loans
— PCI loans are those loans that we acquired in the San Joaquin Bank (“SJB”) acquisition for which we were “covered” for reimbursement for a substantial portion of any future losses under the terms of the FDIC loss sharing agreement. We account for PCI loans under ASC 310-30, Loa
ns and Debt Securities Acquired with Deteriorated Credit Quality
(“acquired impaired loan accounting”) when (i) we acquire loans deemed to be impaired when there is evidence of credit deterioration since their origination and it is probable at the date of acquisition that we would be unable to collect all contractually required payments and (ii) as a general policy election for non-impaired loans that we acquire in a distressed bank acquisition. Acquired impaired loans are accounted for individually or in pools of loans based on common risk characteristics. The excess of the loan’s or pool’s scheduled contractual principal and interest payments over all cash flows expected at acquisition is the nonaccretable difference. The remaining amount, representing the excess of the loan’s cash flows expected to be collected over the fair value is the accretable yield (accreted into interest income over the remaining life of the loan or pool). Refer to Note 6 —
Acquired SJB Assets and FDIC Loss Sharing Asset
for PCI loans by type at December 31, 2018.
Provision for loan losses on the PCI portfolio will be recorded if there is deterioration in the expected cash flows on PCI loans as a result of deteriorated credit quality. Assumptions utilized in this process include projections related to probability of default, loss severity, prepayment and recovery lag. Decreases in expected cash flows on the acquired impaired loans as of the measurement date compared to previously estimated are recognized by recording a provision for loan losses on acquired impaired loans. Loans accounted for as part of a pool are measured based on the expected cash flows of the entire pool.
Other Real Estate Owned 
— Other real estate owned (“OREO”) represents real estate acquired through foreclosure in lieu of repayment of commercial and real estate loans and is stated at fair value, less estimated costs to sell (fair value at time of foreclosure). Loan balances in excess of fair value of the real estate acquired at the date of acquisition are charged against the allowance for loan losses. Any subsequent operating expenses or income, reduction in estimated values, and gains or losses on disposition of such properties are charged to current operations. Gain recognition upon disposition of a property is dependent on the sale having met certain criteria relating to the buyer’s initial investment in the property sold.
Premises and Equipment
— Premises and equipment are stated at cost, less accumulated depreciation, which is provided for in amounts sufficient to relate the cost of depreciable assets to operations over the estimated service lives of the respective asset and are computed on a straight-line basis. The ranges of useful lives of the principal classes of assets are as follows:
 
Bank premises
    
15 - 39 years
Leasehold improvements
    
Shorter of estimated economic lives of 15 years or term of the lease.
Computer equipment
    
3 - 7 years
Furniture, fixtures and equipment
    
5  - 10 years
Long-lived assets are reviewed periodically for impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate that the carrying amount may not be recoverable. The existence of impairment is based on undiscounted cash flows. To the extent impairment exists, the impairment is calculated as the difference in fair value of assets and their carrying value. The impairment loss, if any, would be recorded in noninterest expense.
Long-lived assets classified as held-for-sale are measured at the lower of its carrying amount or fair value less cost to sell. Assets-held-for sale include long-lived assets transferred from our “held-and-used” portfolio in the period in which the following criteria are met:
 
 
Management, having the authority to approve the action, commits to a plan to sell the asset;
 
The asset is available for immediate sale, an active program to locate a buyer and other actions required to complete the plan to sell the asset have been initiated;
 
The sale of the asset is probable, and transfer of the asset is expected to qualify for recognition as a completed sale, within one year;
 
The asset is being actively marketed for sale at a price that is reasonable in relation to its current fair value;
 
Actions required to complete the plan indicate that it is unlikely that significant changes to the plan will be made or that the plan will be withdrawn.
Goodwill and Intangible Assets
— Goodwill resulting from business combinations prior to January 1, 2009, represents the excess of the purchase price over the fair value of the net assets of the businesses acquired. Goodwill resulting from business combinations after January 1, 2009, is generally determined as the excess of the fair value of the consideration transferred, plus the fair value of any non-controlling interest in the acquiree, over the fair value of the net assets acquired and liabilities assumed as of the acquisition date. Goodwill and intangible assets acquired in a purchase business combination and determined to have an indefinite useful life are not amortized, but is tested for impairment at least annually, or more frequently, if events and circumstances exist that indicate that a goodwill impairment test should be performed.
Intangible assets with definite useful lives are amortized over their estimated useful lives to their estimated residual values. Goodwill is the only intangible asset with an indefinite life on our balance sheets. Based on the Company’s annual impairment test, there was zero recorded impairment as of December 31, 2018.
Other intangible assets consist of core deposit intangible assets arising from business combinations and are amortized using an accelerated method over their estimated useful lives.
Use of Fair Value
— We use fair value measurements to record fair value adjustments to certain financial instruments and to determine fair value disclosures. Investment securities available-for-sale and interest-rate swaps are financial instruments recorded at fair value on a recurring basis. Additionally, from time to time, we may be required to record at fair value other assets on a non-recurring basis, such as impaired loans and OREO. These non-recurring fair value adjustments typically involve application of lower-of-cost-or-market accounting or write-downs of individual assets. Further, we include in Note 20 —
Fair Value Information
of the consolidated financial statements information about the extent to which fair value is used to measure assets and liabilities, the valuation methodologies used and its impact to earnings. Additionally, for financial instruments not recorded at fair value we disclose the estimate of their fair value.
Bank Owned Life Insurance
— The Company invests in Bank Owned Life Insurance (“BOLI”). BOLI involves the purchasing of life insurance by the Company on a select group of employees. The Company is the owner and primary beneficiary of these policies. BOLI is recorded as an asset at the cash surrender value. Increases in the cash value of these policies, as well as insurance proceeds received, are recorded in other noninterest income and are not subject to income tax for as long as they are held for the life of the covered employee.
Income Taxes
— Income taxes are accounted for under the asset and liability method. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are recognized for the future tax consequences attributable to differences between the financial statement carrying amounts of existing assets and liabilities and their respective tax bases and operating loss and tax credit carryforwards. Deferred tax assets and liabilities are measured using enacted tax rates expected to apply to taxable income in the years in which those temporary differences are expected to be recovered or settled. The effect on deferred tax assets and liabilities of a change in tax rates is recognized in income in the period that includes the enactment date. Future realization of deferred tax assets ultimately depends on the existence of sufficient taxable income of the appropriate character (for example, ordinary income or capital gain) within the carryback or carryforward periods available under the tax law. Based on historical and future expected taxable earnings and available strategies, the Company considers the future realization of these deferred tax assets more likely than not.
The tax effects from an uncertain tax position are recognized in the financial statements only if, based on its merits, the position is more likely than not to be sustained on audit by the taxing authorities. Interest and penalties related to uncertain tax positions are recorded as part of other operating expense.
Earnings per Common Share
— The Company calculates earnings per common share (“EPS”) using the two-class method. The two-class method requires the Company to present EPS as if all of the earnings for the period are distributed to common shareholders and any participating securities. All outstanding unvested share-based payment awards that contain rights to non-forfeitable dividends are considered participating securities. The Company grants restricted shares under the 2008 Equity Incentive Plan that qualify as participating securities. Restricted shares issued under this plan are entitled to dividends at the same rate as common stock. A reconciliation of the numerator and the denominator used in the computation of basic and diluted earnings per common share is included in Note 17 —
Earnings Per Share Reconciliation
of these consolidated financial statements.
Stock-Based Compensation
— Consistent with the provisions of ASC 718,
Stock Compensation
, we recognize expense for the grant date fair value of stock options and restricted shares issued to employees, officers and non-employee directors over the requisite service periods (generally the vesting period). The service periods may be subject to performance conditions.
The fair value of each stock option grant is estimated as of the grant date using the Black-Scholes option-pricing model. Management assumptions used at the time of grant impact the fair value of the option calculated under the Black-Scholes option-pricing model, and ultimately, the expense that will be recognized over the life of the option.
The grant date fair value of restricted stock awards is measured at the fair value of the Company’s common stock as if the restricted share was vested and issued on the date of grant.
Additional information is included in Note 18 —
Stock Option Plans and Restricted Stock Awards
of the consolidated financial statements included herein.
Derivative Financial Instruments
— All derivative instruments, including certain derivative instruments embedded in other contracts, are recognized on the consolidated balance sheets at fair value. For derivatives designated as fair value hedges, changes in the fair value of the derivative and the hedged item related to the hedged risk are recognized in earnings. Changes in fair value of derivatives designated and accounted for as cash flow hedges, to the extent they are effective as hedges, are recorded in “Other Comprehensive Income,” net of deferred taxes, and are subsequently reclassified to earnings when the hedged transaction affects earnings. Any hedge ineffectiveness would be recognized in the income statement line item pertaining to the hedged item.
Statement of Cash Flows
— Cash and cash equivalents, as reported in the statements of cash flows, include cash and due from banks, interest-bearing balances due from depository institutions and federal funds sold with original maturities of three months or less. Cash flows from loans and deposits are reported net.
CitizensTrust
— This division provides trust, investment and brokerage related services and asset management, as well as financial planning, estate planning, retirement planning, and business succession planning services. CitizensTrust services its clients through three offices in Southern California: Pasadena, Ontario and Newport Beach. At December 31, 2018, CitizensTrust had approximately $2.54 billion in assets under management and administration, including $1.80 billion in assets under management. The amount of these funds and the related liability have not been recorded in the accompanying consolidated balance sheets because they are not assets or liabilities of the Bank or Company, with the exception of any funds held on deposit with the Bank.
Use of Estimates in the Preparation of Financial Statements
— The preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities and disclosures of contingent assets and liabilities at the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates. A material estimate that is particularly susceptible to significant change in the near term relates to the determination of the allowance for loan losses. Other significant estimates which may be subject to change include fair value determinations and disclosures, impairment of investments, goodwill, loans, as well as valuation of deferred tax assets.
Other Contingencies
— In the ordinary course of business, the Company becomes involved in litigation. Based upon the Company’s internal records and discussions with legal counsel, the Company records accruals as appropriate, for estimates of the probable outcome of all cases brought against the Company. Except as discussed in Note 15 —
Commitments and Contingencies
at December 31, 2018, the Company does not have any 
material
 
litigation accruals and is not aware of any material pending legal action or complaints asserted against the Company.
Adoption of New Accounting Standard 
—In May 2014, the FASB issued ASU No. 2014-09, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606)”, which provides revenue recognition guidance that is intended to create greater consistency with respect to how and when revenue from contracts with customers is shown in the income statement. This update to the ASC requires an entity to recognize the amount of revenue to which it expects to be entitled for the transfer of promised goods or services to customers. The ASU replaces most existing revenue recognition guidance in U.S. GAAP. In applying the revenue model to contracts within its scope, an entity should apply the following steps: (1) Identify the contract(s) with a customer, (2) Identify the performance obligations in the contract, (3) Determine the transaction price, (4) Allocate the transaction price to the performance obligations in the contract, and (5) Recognize revenue when (or as) the entity satisfies a performance obligation. The standard applies to all contracts with customers except those that are within the scope of other topics in the FASB Codification. The standard also requires significantly expanded disclosures about revenue recognition. In August 2015, the FASB issued ASU No. 2015-14, “Revenue from Contracts with Customers (Topic 606) - Deferral of the Effective Date”, which deferred the effective date of ASU No. 2014-09 to January 1, 2018. The Company adopted the ASU during the first quarter of 2018, as required, using the modified retrospective approach. The adoption of this ASU did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements, as substantially all of the Company’s revenues are excluded from the scope of the new standard. Since there was no net income impact upon adoption of this ASU, a cumulative effect adjustment to opening retained earnings was not deemed necessary. See Note 24 – 
Revenue Recognition
 for more information.
In January 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-01, “Financial Instruments—Overall (Subtopic 825-10): Recognition and Measurement of Financial Assets and Financial Liabilities”, which addresses certain aspects of recognition, measurement, presentation and disclosure of financial instruments. The guidance in this ASU among other things, (i) requires equity investments with certain exceptions, to be measured at fair value with changes in fair value recognized in net income, (ii) simplifies the impairment assessment of equity investments without readily determinable fair values by requiring a qualitative assessment to identify impairment, (iii) eliminates the requirement for public entities to disclose the methods and significant assumptions used to estimate the fair value that is required to be disclosed for financial instruments measured at amortized cost on the balance sheet, (iv) requires public business entities to use the exit price notion when measuring the fair value of financial instruments for disclosure purposes, (v) requires an entity to present separately in other comprehensive income the portion of the change in fair value of a liability resulting from a change in the instrument-specific credit risk when the entity has elected to measure the liability at fair value in accordance with the fair value option for financial instruments, (vi) requires separate presentation of financial assets and financial liabilities by measurement category and form of financial asset on the balance sheet or in the accompanying notes to the financial statements and (vii) clarifies that an entity should evaluate the need for a valuation allowance on a deferred tax asset related to available-for-sale securities. This amendment is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017, including interim periods within those fiscal years. Entities are required to apply the amendment by means of a cumulative-effect adjustment as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption, with the exception of the amendment related to equity securities without readily determinable fair values, which should be applied prospectively to equity investments that exist as of the date of adoption. The Company adopted ASU 2016-01 effective January 1, 2018 and it did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements. In accordance with (iv) above, the Company measured the fair value of its loan portfolio at December 31, 2018 using an exit price notion. See Note 20 – 
Fair Value Information
.
In August 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-15, “Statement of Cash Flows (Topic 230): Classification of Certain Cash Receipts and Cash Payments.” The new guidance clarifies the classification within the statement of cash flows for certain transactions, including debt extinguishment costs, zero-coupon debt, and contingent consideration related to business combinations, insurance proceeds, equity method distributions and beneficial interests in securitizations. The guidance also clarifies that cash flows with aspects of multiple classes of cash flows, or that cannot be separated by source or use, should be classified based on the activity that is likely to be the predominant source or use of cash flows for the item. This guidance is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2017 and will require application using a retrospective transition method. The Company adopted this ASU retrospectively effective January 1, 2018 and it did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In May 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-09, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Scope of Modification Accounting.” The amendments in ASU 2017-09 provide guidance about which changes to the terms or conditions of a share-based payment award require an entity to apply modification accounting. An entity should account for the effects of a modification unless all the following are met: (1) the fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the modified award is the same as the fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the modified award is the same as the fair value (or calculated value or intrinsic value, if such an alternative measurement method is used) of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. If the modification does not affect any of the inputs to the valuation technique that the entity uses to value the award, the entity is not required to estimate the value immediately before and after the modification. (2) the vesting conditions of the modified award are the same as the vesting conditions of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. (3) the classification of the modified award as an equity instrument or a liability instrument is the same as the classification of the original award immediately before the original award is modified. The amendments in ASU No. 2017-09 are effective for annual periods, and interim within those annual reporting periods, beginning after December 15, 2017; early adoption is permitted. The amendments in this ASU should be applied prospectively to an award modified on or after the adoption date. The Company adopted this ASU and it did not have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In February 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-02, “Income Statement—Reporting Comprehensive Income (Topic 220): Reclassification of Certain Tax Effects from Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income.” The amendments in ASU 2018-02 allow a reclassification from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings for stranded tax effects resulting from the Tax Cuts and Job Act (“Tax Reform Act”). The amendments in this update also require entities to disclose their accounting policy for releasing income tax effects from accumulated other comprehensive income. The ASU is effective for annual periods, and interim periods within those annual periods, beginning after December 15, 2018. Early adoption is permitted, and the provisions of the amendment should be applied either in the period of adoption or retrospectively to each period (or periods) in which the effect of the change in the U.S. federal corporate income tax rate in the Tax Reform Act is recognized. The Company elected to early adopt ASU 2018-02 in the first quarter of 2018 and reclassified $356,000 related to the stranded tax effects from accumulated other comprehensive income to retained earnings within our consolidated statements of stockholders’ equity.
Recent Accounting Pronouncements
 — In February 2016, FASB issued ASU No. 2016-02, “Leases (Topic 842)”. ASU 2016-02 establishes a right-of-use (“ROU”) model that requires a lessee to record a ROU asset and a lease liability on the balance sheet for all leases with terms longer than 12 months. Leases will be classified as either finance or operating, with classification affecting the pattern of expense recognition in the income statement. The new standard is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2018, including interim periods within those fiscal years. A modified retrospective transition approach is required for lessees for capital and operating leases existing at, or entered into after, the beginning of the earliest comparative period presented in the financial statements, with certain practical expedients available. In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU 2018-10, “Codification Improvements to Topic 842, Leases”, which clarifies and corrects errors in ASC 842. The effective date and transition requirements of ASU 2018-10 are the same as the effective date and transition requirements of 2016-02.
In July 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-11, “Leases (Topic 842): Targeted Improvements”, which creates a new optional transition method for implementing the new standard on leases, ASU No. 2016-02, and provides lessors with a practical expedient for separating lease and non-lease components. Specifically, under the amendments in ASU 2018-11: (1) the transition option allows entities to not apply the new leases standard in the comparative periods presented when transitioning to the new accounting standard for leases, and (2) lessors may elect not to separate lease and non-lease components when certain conditions are met. The amendments have the same effective date as ASU 2016-02.
The Company established a project to consider the impact of Topic 842. The leasing portfolio consists of real estate leases, which are used for the banking operations of the Company. All leases in the current portfolio have been classified as operating leases, although this may change in the future. Management does not anticipate a material impact to the consolidated statement of earnings. Management estimates the ROU asset and liability to be between $15 million and $20 million. This amount is based on the present value of currently-committed cash flows from leases discounted at the Company’s incremental rate of borrowing on an arms-length basis. This liability includes the non-lease components as the Company has elected to include these components as a practical expedient.
In addition, there are a number of practical expedients that have been elected, which included electing not to adjust comparative financial statements at the effective date of the new accounting standard, with the effect of initially applying ASC 842 recognized as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings in the period of adoption.
In June 2016, the FASB issued ASU No. 2016-13, “Financial Instruments – Credit Losses (Topic 326): Measurement of Credit Losses on Financial Instruments.” This ASU significantly changes how entities will measure credit losses for most financial assets and certain other instruments that are not measured at fair value through net income. The standard will replace the current “incurred loss” approach with an “expected loss” model. The new model, referred to as the Current Expected Credit Loss (“CECL”) model, will apply to: (1) financial assets subject to credit losses and measured at amortized cost, and (2) certain off-balance sheet credit exposures. This includes, but is not limited to, loans, leases, held-to-maturity securities, loan commitments, and financial guarantees. The CECL model does not apply to AFS debt securities. For AFS debt securities with unrealized losses, entities will measure credit impairment in a manner similar to what they do today, except that the losses will be recognized as allowances rather than reductions in the amortized cost of the securities. As a result, entities will recognize improvements to estimated credit losses immediately in earnings rather than as interest income over time, as they do today. ASU No. 2016-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. Entities will apply the standard’s provisions as a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the first reporting period in which the guidance is effective (i.e., modified retrospective approach). The Company is currently evaluating the impact of adoption of this ASU on its consolidated financial statements. A cross-functional team, consisting of finance, credit management, and information technology is currently developing the allowance methodology, models and assumptions that will be used under the new life of loan methodology. In determining the appropriate methodology, the Company has reviewed portfolio segmentation, data quality and availability. The Company will continue to review and update assumptions and models, as appropriate.
In January 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-04, “Intangibles – Goodwill and Other (Topic 350): Simplifying the Test for Goodwill Impairment.” ASU 2017-04 eliminates the second step in the goodwill impairment test which requires an entity to determine the implied fair value of the reporting unit’s goodwill. Instead, an entity should recognize an impairment loss if the carrying value of the net assets assigned to the reporting unit exceeds the fair value of the reporting unit, with the impairment loss not to exceed the amount of goodwill allocated to the reporting unit. The standard will be effective for the Company beginning January 1, 2020, with early adoption permitted for goodwill impairment tests performed after January 1, 2017. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In August 2017, the FASB issued ASU No. 2017-12, “Derivatives and Hedging (Topic 815): Targeted Improvements to Accounting for Hedging Activities.” ASU 2017-12 changes the recognition and presentation requirements of hedge accounting and makes certain targeted improvements to simplify the application of the hedge accounting guidance in current GAAP. The amendments in this ASU better align an entity’s financial reporting and risk management activities for hedging relationships through changes to both the designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships through changes to both the designation and measurement guidance for qualifying hedging relationships and the presentation of hedge results. To meet that objective, the amendments expand and refine hedge accounting for both non-financial and financial risk components and align the recognition and presentation of the effects of the hedging instrument and the hedged item in the financial statements. ASU No. 2017-12 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2018; early adoption is permitted. The Company currently does not designate any derivative financial instruments as qualifying hedging relationships, and therefore, does not utilize hedge accounting. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In June 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-07, “Compensation – Stock Compensation (Topic 718): Improvements to Nonemployees Share-Based Accounting.” The intention of ASU 2018-07 is to expand the scope of Topic 718 to include share-based payment transactions for acquiring goods and services from nonemployees. These share-based payments will now be measured at grant-date fair value of the equity instrument issued. Upon adoption, only liability-classified awards that have not been settled and equity-classified awards for which a measurement date has not been established should be re-measured through a cumulative-effect adjustment to retained earnings as of the beginning of the fiscal year of adoption. ASU 2018-07 is effective for fiscal years beginning after December 15, 2019 and is applied retrospectively. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.
In August 2018, the FASB issued ASU No. 2018-13, “Fair Value Measurement (Topic 820): Disclosure Framework - Changes to the Disclosure Requirements for Fair Value Measurement.” This ASU eliminates, adds and modifies certain disclosure requirements for fair value measurements. Among the changes, entities will no longer be required to disclose the amount of and reasons for transfers between Level 1 and Level 2 of the fair value hierarchy, but will be required to disclose the range and weighted average used to develop significant unobservable inputs for Level 3 fair value measurements. ASU No. 2018-13 is effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019; early adoption is permitted. Entities may early adopt any eliminated or modified disclosure requirements and delay adoption of the additional disclosure requirements until their effective date. The Company does not expect this ASU to have a material impact on the Company’s consolidated financial statements.