e10vq
UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, DC 20549
FORM 10-Q
(Mark One)
|
|
|
þ |
|
QUARTERLY REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the quarterly period ended September 30, 2010
|
|
|
o |
|
TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(D) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 |
For the transition period from to
COMMISSION FILE NUMBER 001-14793
FIRST BANCORP.
(EXACT NAME OF REGISTRANT AS SPECIFIED IN ITS CHARTER)
|
|
|
Puerto Rico
|
|
66-0561882 |
(State or other jurisdiction of
incorporation or organization)
|
|
(I.R.S. employer
identification number) |
|
|
|
1519 Ponce de León Avenue, Stop 23
|
|
00908 |
Santurce, Puerto Rico
|
|
(Zip Code) |
(Address of principal executive offices) |
|
|
(787) 729-8200
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
Not applicable
(Former name, former address and former fiscal year, if changed since last report)
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 þ No o
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 o No o
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 the definitions of large accelerated
filer, accelerated filer and smaller reporting company in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.
(Check one):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Large accelerated filer o
|
|
Accelerated filer þ
|
|
Non-accelerated filer o
(Do not check if a smaller reporting company)
|
|
Smaller reporting company o |
Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in rule 12b-2 of the
Exchange Act).
Yes
o No þ
Indicate the number of shares outstanding of each of the issuers classes of common stock, as of
the latest practicable date.
Common stock: 319,557,932 outstanding as of October 31, 2010.
FIRST BANCORP.
INDEX PAGE
2
Forward Looking Statements
This Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of
the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. When used in this Form 10-Q or future
filings by First BanCorp (the Corporation) with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC),
in the Corporations press releases, in other public or stockholder communications, or in oral
statements made with the approval of an authorized executive officer, the word or phrases would
be, will allow, intends to, will likely result, are expected to, should, anticipate
and similar expressions are meant to identify forward-looking statements.
First BanCorp wishes to caution readers not to place undue reliance on any such
forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date made, and represent First BanCorps
expectations of future conditions or results and are not guarantees of future performance. First
BanCorp advises readers that various factors could cause actual results to differ materially from
those contained in any forward-looking statement. Such factors include, but are not limited to,
the following:
|
|
|
uncertainty about whether the Corporation will be able to fully comply with the written
agreement dated June 3, 2010 (the Agreement) that the Corporation entered into with the
Federal Reserve Bank of New York (the FED or Federal Reserve) and the order dated June
2, 2010 (the Order and collectively with the Agreement, the Agreements) that the
Corporations banking subsidiary, FirstBank Puerto Rico (FirstBank or the Bank) entered
into with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Office of the
Commissioner of Financial Institutions of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (OCIF) that,
among other things, require the Bank to attain certain capital levels and reduce its
special mention, classified, delinquent and non-accrual assets; |
|
|
|
|
uncertainty as to whether the Corporation will be able to issue $500 million of equity
so as to meet the remaining substantive condition necessary to compel the United States Department of the Treasury (the U.S. Treasury) to convert into common stock the shares of
the Corporations Fixed Rate Cumulative Mandatorily Convertible Preferred Stock, Series G
(the Series G Preferred Stock), that the Corporation issued to the U.S. Treasury; |
|
|
|
|
uncertainty as to whether the Corporation will be able to complete future
capital-raising efforts; |
|
|
|
|
uncertainty as to the availability of certain funding sources, such as retail brokered
certificates of deposit (CDs); |
|
|
|
|
the risk of not being able to fulfill the Corporations cash obligations or pay
dividends in the future to the Corporations stockholders due to the Corporations
inability to receive approval from the FED to receive dividends from the Corporations main
banking subsidiary; |
|
|
|
|
the risk of being subject to possible additional regulatory action; |
|
|
|
|
the strength or weakness of the real estate market and of the consumer and commercial
credit sector and their impact on the credit quality of the Corporations loans and other
assets, including the construction and commercial real estate loan portfolios, which have
contributed and may continue to contribute to, among other things, the increase in the
levels of non-performing assets, charge-offs and the provision expense and may subject the
Corporation to further rise from loan defaults and foreclosures; |
|
|
|
|
adverse changes in general economic conditions in the United States and in Puerto Rico,
including the interest rate scenario, market liquidity, housing absorption rates, real
estate prices and disruptions in the U.S. capital markets, which may reduce interest
margins, impact funding sources and affect demand for all of the Corporations products and
services and the value of the Corporations assets, including the value of derivative
instruments used for protection from interest rate fluctuations; |
|
|
|
|
the Corporations reliance on brokered CDs and its ability to obtain, on a periodic
basis, approval to issue brokered CDs to fund operations and provide liquidity in
accordance with the terms of the Order; |
|
|
|
|
an adverse change in the Corporations ability to attract new clients and retain
existing ones; |
|
|
|
|
a decrease in demand for the Corporations products and services and lower revenues and
earnings because of the continued recession in Puerto Rico and the current fiscal problems
and budget deficit of the Puerto Rico government; |
|
|
|
|
a need to recognize additional impairments of financial instruments or goodwill
relating to acquisitions; |
|
|
|
|
uncertainty about regulatory and legislative changes for financial services companies
in Puerto Rico, the United States and the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, which could
affect the Corporations financial performance and could cause the Corporations actual
results for future periods to differ materially from prior results and anticipated or
projected results; |
3
|
|
|
uncertainty about the effectiveness of the various actions undertaken to stimulate the
U.S. economy and stabilize the U.S. financial markets, and the impact such actions may have
on the Corporations business, financial condition and results of operations; |
|
|
|
|
changes in the fiscal and monetary policies and regulations of the federal government,
including those determined by the FED, the FDIC, government-sponsored housing agencies and
local regulators in Puerto Rico and the U.S. and British Virgin Islands; |
|
|
|
|
the risk of possible failure or circumvention of controls and procedures and the risk
that the Corporations risk management policies may not be adequate; |
|
|
|
|
the risk that the FDIC may further increase the deposit insurance premium and/or
require special assessments to replenish its insurance fund, causing an additional increase
in the Corporations non-interest expense; |
|
|
|
|
risks of not being able to generate sufficient income to realize the benefit of the
deferred tax asset; |
|
|
|
|
risks of not being able to recover the assets pledged to Lehman Brothers Special
Financing, Inc.; |
|
|
|
|
risks relating to the impact on the price of the Corporations common stock of the
reverse stock split that the Corporation will effect, prior to requesting effectiveness of
the registration statement for the offering of shares of common stock; |
|
|
|
|
changes in the Corporations expenses associated with acquisitions and dispositions; |
|
|
|
|
the adverse effect of litigation; |
|
|
|
|
developments in technology; |
|
|
|
|
risks associated with further downgrades in the credit ratings of the Corporations
long-term senior debt; |
|
|
|
|
general competitive factors and industry consolidation; |
|
|
|
|
risks associated with the depression of the price of the Corporations common stock,
including the possibility of the Corporations common stock being delisted from the New
York Stock Exchange (NYSE); and |
|
|
|
|
the possible future dilution to holders of the Corporations common stock resulting
from additional issuances of common stock or securities convertible into common stock. |
The Corporation does not undertake, and specifically disclaims any obligation, to update any
of the forward- looking statements to reflect occurrences or unanticipated events or
circumstances after the date of such statements except as required by the federal securities laws.
Investors should refer to the Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as well as Part II, Item 1A, Risk Factors, in this Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for a discussion of such factors and certain risks and uncertainties to which the Corporation
is subject.
4
FIRST BANCORP
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
ASSETS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
689,132 |
|
|
$ |
679,798 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market investments: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Federal funds sold and securities purchased under agreements to resell |
|
|
5,769 |
|
|
|
1,140 |
|
Time deposits with other financial institutions |
|
|
1,746 |
|
|
|
600 |
|
Other short-term investments |
|
|
207,979 |
|
|
|
22,546 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total money market investments |
|
|
215,494 |
|
|
|
24,286 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities available for sale, at fair value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities pledged that can be repledged |
|
|
1,370,457 |
|
|
|
3,021,028 |
|
Other investment securities |
|
|
1,605,723 |
|
|
|
1,149,754 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities available for sale |
|
|
2,976,180 |
|
|
|
4,170,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities held to maturity, at amortized cost: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities pledged that can be repledged |
|
|
227,757 |
|
|
|
400,925 |
|
Other investment securities |
|
|
262,210 |
|
|
|
200,694 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities held to maturity, fair value of $513,569
(December 31, 2009 - $621,584) |
|
|
489,967 |
|
|
|
601,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other equity securities |
|
|
64,310 |
|
|
|
69,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, net of allowance for loan and lease losses of $608,526
(December 31, 2009 - $528,120) |
|
|
11,571,500 |
|
|
|
13,400,331 |
|
Loans held for sale, at lower of cost or market |
|
|
9,196 |
|
|
|
20,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans, net |
|
|
11,580,696 |
|
|
|
13,421,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Premises and equipment, net |
|
|
205,782 |
|
|
|
197,965 |
|
Other real estate owned |
|
|
82,706 |
|
|
|
69,304 |
|
Accrued interest receivable on loans and investments |
|
|
61,977 |
|
|
|
79,867 |
|
Due from customers on acceptances |
|
|
754 |
|
|
|
954 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
311,881 |
|
|
|
312,837 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
16,678,879 |
|
|
$ |
19,628,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LIABILITIES |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest-bearing deposits |
|
$ |
703,836 |
|
|
$ |
697,022 |
|
Interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
11,839,731 |
|
|
|
11,972,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total deposits |
|
|
12,543,567 |
|
|
|
12,669,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
900,000 |
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
1,400,000 |
|
|
|
3,076,631 |
|
Advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB) |
|
|
835,440 |
|
|
|
978,440 |
|
Notes payable (including $11,053 and $13,361 measured at fair value
as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively) |
|
|
25,057 |
|
|
|
27,117 |
|
Other borrowings |
|
|
231,959 |
|
|
|
231,959 |
|
Bank acceptances outstanding |
|
|
754 |
|
|
|
954 |
|
Accounts payable from investment purchases |
|
|
159,390 |
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
|
160,733 |
|
|
|
145,237 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
15,356,900 |
|
|
|
18,029,385 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock, authorized 50,000,000 shares: issued and outstanding 2,946,046 shares
(December 31, 2009 - 22,404,000 shares issued and outstanding)
aggregate liquidation value of $487,221 (December 31, 2009 - $950,100) |
|
|
411,876 |
|
|
|
928,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock, $0.10 par value (December 31, 2009 - $1 par value), authorized 2,000,000,000 shares
(December 31, 2009 - 250,000,000 shares authorized);
issued 329,455,732 shares (December 31, 2009 - 102,440,522 shares issued) |
|
|
32,946 |
|
|
|
102,440 |
|
Less: Treasury stock (at par value) |
|
|
(990 |
) |
|
|
(9,898 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock outstanding, 319,557,932 shares outstanding (December 31, 2009 - 92,542,722 shares outstanding) |
|
|
31,956 |
|
|
|
92,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional paid-in capital |
|
|
289,640 |
|
|
|
134,223 |
|
Legal surplus |
|
|
299,006 |
|
|
|
299,006 |
|
Retained earnings |
|
|
259,206 |
|
|
|
118,291 |
|
Accumulated
other comprehensive income, net of tax expense of $6,517 (December 31, 2009 - $4,628) |
|
|
30,295 |
|
|
|
26,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholdersequity |
|
|
1,321,979 |
|
|
|
1,599,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities and stockholdersequity |
|
$ |
16,678,879 |
|
|
$ |
19,628,448 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
5
FIRST BANCORP
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF LOSS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands, except per share information) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Interest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans |
|
$ |
171,204 |
|
|
$ |
179,956 |
|
|
$ |
523,707 |
|
|
$ |
553,219 |
|
Investment securities |
|
|
32,313 |
|
|
|
61,881 |
|
|
|
114,602 |
|
|
|
199,513 |
|
Money market investments |
|
|
511 |
|
|
|
185 |
|
|
|
1,571 |
|
|
|
393 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest income |
|
|
204,028 |
|
|
|
242,022 |
|
|
|
639,880 |
|
|
|
753,125 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
61,004 |
|
|
|
72,163 |
|
|
|
190,736 |
|
|
|
246,931 |
|
Loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
|
1,423 |
|
Federal funds purchased and securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
19,422 |
|
|
|
28,327 |
|
|
|
69,739 |
|
|
|
87,487 |
|
Advances from FHLB |
|
|
7,179 |
|
|
|
8,127 |
|
|
|
22,460 |
|
|
|
24,736 |
|
Notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
2,721 |
|
|
|
3,809 |
|
|
|
3,876 |
|
|
|
10,803 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
90,326 |
|
|
|
112,889 |
|
|
|
290,253 |
|
|
|
371,380 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
113,702 |
|
|
|
129,133 |
|
|
|
349,627 |
|
|
|
381,745 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
120,482 |
|
|
|
148,090 |
|
|
|
438,240 |
|
|
|
442,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest loss after provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(6,780 |
) |
|
|
(18,957 |
) |
|
|
(88,613 |
) |
|
|
(60,926 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other service charges on loans |
|
|
1,963 |
|
|
|
1,796 |
|
|
|
5,205 |
|
|
|
4,848 |
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
3,458 |
|
|
|
10,294 |
|
|
|
9,950 |
|
Mortgage banking activities |
|
|
6,474 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
11,114 |
|
|
|
6,179 |
|
Net gain (loss) on sale of investments |
|
|
48,281 |
|
|
|
34,274 |
|
|
|
103,885 |
|
|
|
62,417 |
|
Other-than-temporary impairment losses on investment securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total other-than-temporary impairment losses |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
(32,929 |
) |
Noncredit-related impairment portion on debt securities
not expected to be sold (recognized in other comprehensive income) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
31,271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment losses on investment securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
(1,658 |
) |
Rental income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,246 |
|
Loss on early extinguishment of repurchase agreements |
|
|
(47,405 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47,405 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other non-interest income |
|
|
6,628 |
|
|
|
7,280 |
|
|
|
21,627 |
|
|
|
20,475 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest income |
|
|
19,266 |
|
|
|
49,989 |
|
|
|
104,117 |
|
|
|
103,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Employees compensation and benefits |
|
|
29,849 |
|
|
|
34,403 |
|
|
|
92,535 |
|
|
|
103,117 |
|
Occupancy and equipment |
|
|
14,655 |
|
|
|
15,291 |
|
|
|
43,957 |
|
|
|
47,513 |
|
Business promotion |
|
|
3,226 |
|
|
|
2,879 |
|
|
|
8,771 |
|
|
|
9,831 |
|
Professional fees |
|
|
4,533 |
|
|
|
3,806 |
|
|
|
15,424 |
|
|
|
10,334 |
|
Taxes, other than income taxes |
|
|
3,316 |
|
|
|
3,893 |
|
|
|
10,954 |
|
|
|
11,911 |
|
Insurance and supervisory fees |
|
|
16,787 |
|
|
|
7,197 |
|
|
|
51,911 |
|
|
|
30,491 |
|
Net loss on real estate owned (REO) operations |
|
|
8,193 |
|
|
|
5,015 |
|
|
|
22,702 |
|
|
|
17,016 |
|
Other non-interest expenses |
|
|
8,123 |
|
|
|
10,293 |
|
|
|
32,401 |
|
|
|
33,080 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-interest expenses |
|
|
88,682 |
|
|
|
82,777 |
|
|
|
278,655 |
|
|
|
263,293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(76,196 |
) |
|
|
(51,745 |
) |
|
|
(263,151 |
) |
|
|
(220,762 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
(113,473 |
) |
|
|
(9,721 |
) |
|
|
(1,223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(75,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(165,218 |
) |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders basic |
|
$ |
357,787 |
|
|
$ |
(174,689 |
) |
|
$ |
147,826 |
|
|
$ |
(262,741 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders diluted |
|
$ |
363,413 |
|
|
$ |
(174,689 |
) |
|
$ |
153,452 |
|
|
$ |
(262,741 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per common share: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic |
|
$ |
2.09 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
1.24 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted |
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared per common share |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.14 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
6
FIRST BANCORP
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Cash flows from operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Adjustments to reconcile net loss to net cash provided by operating activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Depreciation |
|
|
14,879 |
|
|
|
15,722 |
|
Amortization and impairment of core deposit intangible |
|
|
1,927 |
|
|
|
6,689 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
438,240 |
|
|
|
442,671 |
|
Deferred income tax expense |
|
|
4,584 |
|
|
|
19,202 |
|
Stock-based compensation recognized |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Gain on sale of investments, net |
|
|
(103,885 |
) |
|
|
(62,417 |
) |
Loss on early extiguishment of repurchase agreements |
|
|
47,405 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other-than-temporary impairments on investment securities |
|
|
603 |
|
|
|
1,658 |
|
Derivatives instruments and hedging activities gain |
|
|
(212 |
) |
|
|
(13,228 |
) |
Net gain on sale of loans and impairments |
|
|
(4,969 |
) |
|
|
(5,919 |
) |
Net amortization of premiums and discounts on deferred loan fees and costs |
|
|
1,643 |
|
|
|
724 |
|
Net increase in mortgage loans held for sale |
|
|
(2,240 |
) |
|
|
(21,145 |
) |
Amortization of broker placement fees |
|
|
15,948 |
|
|
|
17,434 |
|
Net amortization of premium and discounts on investment securities |
|
|
4,423 |
|
|
|
5,706 |
|
Increase (decrease) in accrued income tax payable |
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
(21,919 |
) |
Decrease in accrued interest receivable |
|
|
17,890 |
|
|
|
19,010 |
|
Decrease in accrued interest payable |
|
|
(8,881 |
) |
|
|
(24,472 |
) |
Decrease in other assets |
|
|
8,342 |
|
|
|
41,716 |
|
Increase (decrease) in other liabilities |
|
|
12,572 |
|
|
|
(4,521 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total adjustments |
|
|
448,563 |
|
|
|
416,981 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by operating activities |
|
|
175,691 |
|
|
|
194,996 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from investing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal collected on loans |
|
|
3,047,448 |
|
|
|
2,267,772 |
|
Loans originated |
|
|
(1,986,355 |
) |
|
|
(3,362,850 |
) |
Purchases of loans |
|
|
(114,089 |
) |
|
|
(142,446 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of loans |
|
|
204,369 |
|
|
|
9,510 |
|
Proceeds from sale of repossessed assets |
|
|
72,043 |
|
|
|
50,035 |
|
Proceeds from sale of available-for-sale securities |
|
|
2,353,364 |
|
|
|
1,038,814 |
|
Purchases of securities held to maturity |
|
|
(8,475 |
) |
|
|
(8,460 |
) |
Purchases of securities available for sale |
|
|
(2,350,520 |
) |
|
|
(2,781,394 |
) |
Proceeds from principal repayments and maturities of securities held to maturity |
|
|
118,032 |
|
|
|
1,066,778 |
|
Proceeds from principal repayments of securities available for sale |
|
|
1,613,491 |
|
|
|
721,056 |
|
Additions to premises and equipment |
|
|
(22,696 |
) |
|
|
(32,625 |
) |
Proceeds from sale of other investment securities |
|
|
10,668 |
|
|
|
4,032 |
|
Decrease (increase) in other equity securities |
|
|
5,370 |
|
|
|
(14,785 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash provided by (used in) investing activities |
|
|
2,942,650 |
|
|
|
(1,184,563 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash flows from financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net decrease in deposits |
|
|
(142,678 |
) |
|
|
(758,078 |
) |
Net (decrease) increase in loans payable |
|
|
(900,000 |
) |
|
|
700,000 |
|
Net (repayments) proceeds and cancellation costs of securities
sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
(1,724,036 |
) |
|
|
361,092 |
|
Net FHLB advances (paid) taken |
|
|
(143,000 |
) |
|
|
140,000 |
|
Dividends paid |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(43,066 |
) |
Issuance of preferred stock and associated warrant |
|
|
|
|
|
|
400,000 |
|
Issuance costs of common stock issued in exchange for preferred stock Series A through E |
|
|
(8,085 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other financing activities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net cash (used in) provided by financing activities |
|
|
(2,917,799 |
) |
|
|
799,956 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net increase (decrease) in cash and cash equivalents |
|
|
200,542 |
|
|
|
(189,611 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at beginning of period |
|
|
704,084 |
|
|
|
405,733 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents at end of period |
|
$ |
904,626 |
|
|
$ |
216,122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and cash equivalents include: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
689,132 |
|
|
$ |
124,131 |
|
Money market instruments |
|
|
215,494 |
|
|
|
91,991 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
904,626 |
|
|
$ |
216,122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
7
FIRST BANCORP
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF CHANGES IN STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Preferred Stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
928,508 |
|
|
$ |
550,100 |
|
Issuance of preferred stock Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
400,000 |
|
Preferred stock discount Series F |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(25,820 |
) |
Accretion of preferred stock discount Series F |
|
|
2,567 |
|
|
|
3,094 |
|
Exchange of
preferred stock Series A through E |
|
|
(487,053 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Exchange of preferred stock Series F |
|
|
(400,000 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Reversal of unaccreted preferred stock discount Series F |
|
|
19,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance of preferred stock Series G |
|
|
424,174 |
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock discount Series G |
|
|
(76,788 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accretion of preferred stock discount Series G |
|
|
1,443 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
|
411,876 |
|
|
|
927,374 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock outstanding: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at the beginning of the period |
|
|
92,542 |
|
|
|
92,546 |
|
Restricted stock forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4 |
) |
Change in par value (from $1.00 to $0.10) |
|
|
(83,287 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Common stock issued in exchange of Series A through E preferred stock |
|
|
22,701 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
|
31,956 |
|
|
|
92,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additional Paid-In-Capital: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
|
134,223 |
|
|
|
108,299 |
|
Issuance of common stock warrants |
|
|
|
|
|
|
25,820 |
|
Restricted stock forfeited |
|
|
|
|
|
|
4 |
|
Stock-based compensation recognized |
|
|
70 |
|
|
|
70 |
|
Fair value adjustment on amended common stock warrant |
|
|
1,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
Common stock issued in exchange of Series A through E preferred stock |
|
|
68,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
Issuance costs of common stock issued in exchange of Series A through E preferred stock |
|
|
(8,085 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Reversal of issuance costs of Series A through E preferred stock exchanged |
|
|
10,861 |
|
|
|
|
|
Change in par value (from $1.00 to$0.10) |
|
|
83,287 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
|
289,640 |
|
|
|
134,201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Legal Surplus |
|
|
299,006 |
|
|
|
299,006 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Retained Earnings: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
|
118,291 |
|
|
|
440,777 |
|
Net loss |
|
|
(272,872 |
) |
|
|
(221,985 |
) |
Cash dividends declared on common stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,966 |
) |
Cash dividends declared on preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(30,106 |
) |
Accretion of preferred stock discount Series F |
|
|
(2,567 |
) |
|
|
(3,095 |
) |
Stock dividend granted of Series F preferred stock |
|
|
(24,174 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Excess of carrying amount of Series A though E preferred stock exchanged
over fair value of new shares of common stock |
|
|
385,387 |
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock discount Series G |
|
|
76,788 |
|
|
|
|
|
Reversal of unaccreted discount Series F |
|
|
(19,025 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair value adjustment on amended common stock warrant |
|
|
(1,179 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Accretion of preferred stock discount Series G |
|
|
(1,443 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
|
259,206 |
|
|
|
172,625 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accumulated Other Comprehensive Income, net of tax: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
|
26,493 |
|
|
|
57,389 |
|
Other comprehensive income, net of tax |
|
|
3,802 |
|
|
|
15,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
|
30,295 |
|
|
|
73,095 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total stockholdersequity |
|
$ |
1,321,979 |
|
|
$ |
1,698,843 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
8
FIRST BANCORP
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF COMPREHENSIVE LOSS
(Unaudited)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(75,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(165,218 |
) |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized losses on available-for-sale debt securities on which an
other-than-temporary impairment has been recognized: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Noncredit-related impairment losses on debt securities not expected to be sold |
|
|
|
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(31,271 |
) |
Reclassification adjustment for other-than-temporary impairment on debt
securities included in net income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
All other unrealized holding gain arising during the period |
|
|
10,529 |
|
|
|
59,708 |
|
|
|
99,057 |
|
|
|
109,577 |
|
Reclassification adjustments for net gain
included in net income |
|
|
(48,783 |
) |
|
|
(30,242 |
) |
|
|
(93,719 |
) |
|
|
(58,385 |
) |
Reclassification adjustments for other-than-temporary impairment
on equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
353 |
|
|
|
388 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax benefit (expense) related to items of other comprehensive income |
|
|
5,238 |
|
|
|
(3,171 |
) |
|
|
(1,889 |
) |
|
|
(5,873 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other comprehensive (loss) income for the period, net of tax |
|
|
(33,016 |
) |
|
|
26,713 |
|
|
|
3,802 |
|
|
|
15,706 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total comprehensive loss |
|
$ |
(108,249 |
) |
|
$ |
(138,505 |
) |
|
$ |
(269,070 |
) |
|
$ |
(206,279 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The accompanying notes are an integral part of these statements.
9
FIRST BANCORP
PART I
NOTES TO CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(UNAUDITED)
1 BASIS OF PRESENTATION AND SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES
The Consolidated Financial Statements (unaudited) have been prepared in conformity with the
accounting policies stated in the Corporations Audited Consolidated Financial Statements included
in the Corporations Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009. Certain
information and note disclosures normally included in the financial statements prepared in
accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States of America (GAAP)
have been condensed or omitted from these statements pursuant to the rules and regulations of the
Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and, accordingly, these financial statements should be
read in conjunction with the Audited Consolidated Financial Statements of the Corporation for the
year ended December 31, 2009, included in the Corporations 2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K. All
adjustments (consisting only of normal recurring adjustments) that are, in the opinion of
management, necessary for a fair statement of the statement of financial position, results of
operations and cash flows for the interim periods have been reflected. All significant intercompany
accounts and transactions have been eliminated in consolidation.
The results of operations for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 are
not necessarily indicative of the results to be expected for the entire year.
Capital and Liquidity
The Consolidated Financial Statements have been prepared on a going concern basis, which
contemplates the realization of assets and the discharge of liabilities in the normal course of
business for the foreseeable future. Sustained weak economic conditions that have severely affected
Puerto Rico and the United States over the last several years have adversely impacted First
BanCorps results of operations and capital levels. The net loss in 2009, primarily related to
credit losses, the valuation allowance on deferred tax assets and an increase in the deposit
insurance premium, reduced the Corporations capital levels during 2009. The net loss for the
nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 was primarily driven by credit losses. The decrease in
regulatory capital ratios during the first nine-months of 2010 was not significant since the net
loss reported for the period was almost entirely offset by a decrease in risk-weighted assets,
consistent with the Corporations decision to deleverage its balance sheet to preserve its capital
position. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations Total, Tier 1 capital and Leverage ratios
were 13.26%, 11.96% and 8.34%, respectively, compared to 13.44%, 12.16% and 8.91%, respectively, as
of December 31, 2009.
As described in Note 18, Regulatory Matters, FirstBank is currently operating under a Consent
Order ( the Order) with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and First BanCorp has
entered into a Written Agreement (the Written Agreement and collectively with the Order the
Agreements) with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the FED or Federal
Reserve).
As previously reported, the Corporation submitted a Capital Plan to the FED and the FDIC in
July 2010. The primary objective of this Capital Plan is to improve the Corporations capital
structure in order to 1) enhance its ability to operate in the current economic environment, 2) be
in a position to continue executing business strategies to return to profitability and 3) achieve
certain minimum capital ratios set forth in the FDIC Order over time. The minimum capital ratios
are 8% for Leverage (Tier 1 Capital to Average Total Assets), 10% for Tier 1 Capital to
Risk-Weighted Assets and 12% for Total Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets. The Capital Plan sets forth
the following capital restructuring initiatives as well as various deleveraging strategies:
|
1. |
|
The exchange of shares of the Corporations preferred stock held by the U.S. Treasury
for common stock; |
|
|
2. |
|
The exchange of shares of the Corporations common stock for any and all of the
Corporations outstanding Series A through E Preferred Stock; and |
|
|
3. |
|
A $500 million capital raise through the issuance of new common shares for cash. |
During the third quarter of 2010, the Corporation completed transactions designed to
accomplish the first two initiatives. On July 20, 2010, the Corporation closed a transaction with
the U.S. Treasury for the exchange of the $400 million of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred
Stock, Series F (the Series F Preferred Stock) that the U.S. Treasury acquired pursuant to the
TARP Capital Purchase Program, and dividends accrued on such stock, for new shares of Series G
Preferred Stock. A key benefit of this transaction was obtaining the right, under the terms of the
new Series G Preferred Stock, to compel the conversion of this stock into shares of the
Corporations common stock, provided that the Corporation meets a number of conditions. On August
30, 2010, the Corporation completed its offer to issue shares of its common stock in exchange for
its outstanding Series A through E Preferred Stock (the Exchange Offer), which resulted in the
issuance of 227,015,210 new shares of common stock in exchange for 19,482,128 shares of preferred
stock with an aggregate liquidation amount of $487 million, or 89% of the outstanding Series A
through E preferred stock.
10
In addition, on August 24, 2010, the Corporation obtained its stockholders approval to
increase the number of authorized shares of common stock from 750 million to 2 billion and decrease
the par value of its common stock from $1.00 to $0.10 per share. These approvals and the issuance
of common stock in exchange for Series A through E Preferred Stock satisfy all but one of the
substantive conditions to the Corporations ability to compel the conversion of the 424,174 shares
of the new Series G Preferred Stock, issued to the U.S. Treasury. The other substantive condition
to the Corporations ability to compel the conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock is the
issuance of a minimum aggregate amount of $500 million of additional capital, subject to terms,
other than the price per share, reasonably acceptable to the U.S. Treasury in its sole discretion.
These first two initiatives were designed to improve the Corporations ability to successfully
raise additional capital through a sale of its common stock, which is the last component of the
Capital Plan. On September 16, 2010, the Corporation filed a registration statement for a proposed
underwritten public offering of $500 million ($575 million including an over allotment option) of
its common stock with the SEC. The completion of the Exchange Offer and the issuance of the Series
G Preferred Stock to the U.S. Treasury resulted in significant improvements in the Corporations
Tangible and Tier 1 common equity ratios which improved to 5.21% and 6.62%, respectively, as of
September 30, 2010 from 3.20% and 4.10%, respectively, as of December 31, 2009. (For information
about and a reconciliation of these non-GAAP measures, see Item 2 Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations (MD &A) Risk Management Capital
Capital Restructuring Initiatives.) These capital transactions completed during the third
quarter of 2010 are further discussed in Note 17.
The Corporation has deleveraged its balance sheet in order to preserve capital, principally by
selling investments and reducing the size of the loan portfolio. The decrease in securities and
loans resulting from deleveraging and balance sheet repositioning strategies allowed a reduction of
$3.6 billion in wholesale funding during 2010, including repurchase agreements, advances and
traditional brokered CDs (brokered CDs). Such reductions were partially offset by increases in retail deposits. Significant
decreases in risk-weighted assets have been achieved mainly through the non-renewal of commercial
loans with 100% risk weightings, such as temporary loan facilities to the Puerto Rico and Virgin
Islands governments, through the charge-offs of portions of loans deemed uncollectible and, to a
lesser extent, the sale of non-performing loans. In addition, a reduced volume of loan originations
contributed to this deleveraging strategy and partially offset the effect of net losses on capital
ratios.
Both the Corporation and the Bank actively manage liquidity and cash flow needs. The
Corporation does not have any unsecured debt, other than brokered CDs, maturing during the
remaining of 2010; additionally, it suspended common and preferred dividends to stockholders
effective August 2009. As of September 30, 2010, the holding company had $43.2 million of cash and
cash equivalents. Cash and cash equivalents at the Bank as of September 30, 2010 were approximately
$904.3 million. The Bank has $100 million and $426 million in repurchase agreements and FHLB
advances, respectively, maturing over the next year and $7.4 million in notes that mature prior to
September 30, 2011. In addition, it had $6.7 billion in brokered deposits as of September 30, 2010
of which $3.2 billion mature over the next year. Liquidity at the bank level is highly dependent
on bank deposits, which fund 75.56% of the Banks assets (or 35.43% excluding brokered CDs). At
September 30, 2010, the Bank held approximately $843 million of readily pledgeable or saleable
investment securities.
The Corporations credit as a long-term issuer is currently rated CCC+ by Standard & Poors
(S&P) and B- by Fitch Ratings Limited (Fitch); both with negative outlook. At the FirstBank
subsidiary level, long-term issuer rating is currently B3 by Moodys Investor Service (Moodys),
six notches below their definition of investment grade; CCC+ by S&P seven notches below their
definition of investment grade, and B- by Fitch, six notches below their definition of investment
grade. The outlook on the Banks credit ratings from the three rating agencies is negative. During
the second quarter of 2010, the Corporation and its subsidiary bank suffered credit rating
downgrades from Moodys (B1 to B3), S&P (B to CCC+), and Fitch (B to B-) rating services.
Furthermore, on June 2010, Moodys and Fitch placed the Corporation on Credit Watch Negative and
S&P placed a Negative Outlook. The Corporation does not have any outstanding debt or derivative
agreements that would be affected by the recent credit downgrades. Furthermore, given our
non-reliance on corporate debt or other instruments directly linked in terms of pricing or volume
to credit ratings, the liquidity of the Corporation so far has also not been affected in any
material way by the downgrades. The Corporations ability to access new non-deposit funding,
however, could be adversely affected by these credit ratings and any additional downgrades.
Based on current and expected liquidity needs and sources, management expects First BanCorp to
be able to meet its obligations for a reasonable period of time. The Corporation has $3.2 billion
of brokered CDs maturing within twelve months from September 30, 2010. While the Corporation has
increased its liquidity levels due to the current economic environment, it has continued to issue
brokered CDs pursuant to temporary approvals received from the FDIC to renew or roll over certain
amounts of brokered CDs through December 31, 2010. Management anticipates it will continue to
obtain waivers from the restrictions to issue brokered CDs under the Order to meet its obligations
and execute its business plans. If unanticipated market factors emerge, or if the Corporation is
unable to raise additional capital or complete identified capital preservation initiatives,
successfully execute its strategic operating plans, issue a sufficient amount of brokered deposits
or comply with the Order, its banking regulators could take further action, which could include
actions that may have a material adverse effect on the Corporations business, results of
operations and financial position.
11
Adoption of new accounting requirements and recently issued but not yet effective accounting
requirements
The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) has issued the following accounting
pronouncements and guidance relevant to the Corporations operations:
In June 2009, the FASB amended the existing guidance on the accounting for transfers of
financial assets, to improve the relevance, representational faithfulness, and comparability of the
information that a reporting entity provides in its financial statements about a transfer of
financial assets, the effects of a transfer on its financial position, financial performance, and
cash flows, and a transferors continuing involvement, if any, in transferred financial assets.
This guidance is effective as of the beginning of each reporting entitys first annual reporting
period that begins after November 15, 2009, for interim periods within that first annual reporting
period and for interim and annual reporting periods thereafter. Subsequently in December 2009, the
FASB amended the existing guidance issued in June 2009. Among the most significant changes and
additions to this guidance are changes to the conditions for sales of a financial asset based on
whether a transferor and its consolidated affiliates included in the financial statements have
surrendered control over the transferred financial asset or third party beneficial interest; and
the addition of the term participating interest, which represents a proportionate (pro rata)
ownership interest in an entire financial asset. The Corporation adopted the guidance with no
material impact on its financial statements.
In June 2009, the FASB amended the existing guidance on the consolidation of variable
interests to improve financial reporting by enterprises involved with variable interest entities
and address (i) the effects of the elimination of the qualifying special-purpose entity concept in
the accounting for transfer of financial assets guidance, and (ii) constituent concerns about the
application of certain key provisions of the guidance, including those in which the accounting and
disclosures do not always provide timely and useful information about an enterprises involvement
in a variable interest entity. This guidance is effective as of the beginning of each reporting
entitys first annual reporting period that begins after November 15, 2009, for interim periods
within that first annual reporting period, and for interim and annual reporting periods thereafter.
Subsequently in December 2009, the FASB amended the existing guidance issued in June 2009. Among
the most significant changes and additions to the guidance is the replacement of the quantitative
based risks and rewards calculation for determining which reporting entity, if any, has a
controlling financial interest in a variable interest entity with an approach focused on
identifying which reporting entity has the power to direct the activities of a variable interest
entity that most significantly impact the entitys economic performance and the obligation to
absorb losses of the entity or the right to receive benefits from the entity. The Corporation
adopted the guidance with no material impact on its financial statements.
In January 2010, the FASB updated the Accounting Standards Codification (Codification) to
provide guidance to improve disclosure requirements related to fair value measurements and require
reporting entities to make new disclosures about recurring or nonrecurring fair-value measurements
including significant transfers into and out of Level 1 and Level 2 fair-value measurements and
information on purchases, sales, issuances, and settlements on a gross basis in the reconciliation
of Level 3 fair-value measurements. Currently, entities are only required to disclose activity in
Level 3 measurements in the fair-value hierarchy on a net basis. The FASB also clarified existing
fair-value measurement disclosure guidance about the level of disaggregation, inputs, and valuation
techniques. Entities are required to separately disclose significant transfers into and out of
Level 1 and Level 2 measurements in the fair-value hierarchy and the reasons for the transfers.
Significance will be determined based on earnings and total assets or total liabilities or, when
changes in fair value are recognized in other comprehensive income, based on total equity. A
reporting entity must disclose and consistently follow its policy for determining when transfers
between levels are recognized. Acceptable methods for determining when to recognize transfers
include: (i) actual date of the event or change in circumstances causing the transfer; (ii)
beginning of the reporting period; and (iii) end of the reporting period. The guidance requires
disclosure of fair-value measurements by class instead of major category. A class is generally
a subset of assets and liabilities within a financial statement line item and is based on the
specific nature and risks of the assets and liabilities and their classification in the fair-value
hierarchy. When determining classes, reporting entities must also consider the level of
disaggregated information required by other applicable GAAP. For fair-value measurements using
significant observable inputs (Level 2) or significant unobservable inputs (Level 3), this guidance
requires reporting entities to disclose the valuation technique and the inputs used in determining
fair value for each class of assets and liabilities. If the valuation technique has changed in the
reporting period (e.g., from a market approach to an income approach) or if an additional valuation
technique is used, entities are required to disclose the change and the reason for making the
change. Except for the detailed Level 3 roll forward disclosures, the guidance is effective for
annual and interim reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2009 (first quarter of 2010 for
public companies with calendar year-ends). The new disclosures about purchases, sales, issuances,
and settlements in the roll forward activity for Level 3 fair value measurements are effective for
interim and annual reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2010 (first quarter of 2011 for
public companies with calendar year-ends). Early adoption is permitted. In the initial adoption
period, entities are not required to include disclosures for previous comparative periods; however,
they are required for periods ending after initial adoption. The Corporation adopted the guidance
in the first quarter of 2010 and the required disclosures are presented in Note 20 Fair Value.
In February 2010, the FASB updated the Codification to provide guidance to improve disclosure
requirements related to the recognition and disclosure of subsequent events. The amendment
establishes that an entity that either (a) is an SEC filer or (b) is a conduit bond obligor for
conduit debt securities that are traded in a public market (a domestic or foreign stock exchange or
an over-the-counter market, including local or regional markets) is required to evaluate subsequent
events through the date that the financial
12
statements are issued. If an entity meets neither of those criteria, then it should evaluate
subsequent events through the date the financial statements are available to be issued. An entity
that is an SEC filer is not required to disclose the date through which subsequent events have been
evaluated. Also, the scope of the reissuance disclosure requirements has been refined to include
revised financial statements only. Revised financial statements include financial statements
revised either as a result of the correction of an error or retrospective application of GAAP. The
guidance in this update was effective on the date of issuance in February. The Corporation has
adopted this guidance; refer to Note 25 Subsequent events.
In February 2010, the FASB updated the Codification to provide guidance on the deferral of
consolidation requirements for a reporting entitys interest in an entity (1) that has all the
attributes of an investment company or (2) for which it is industry practice to apply measurement
principles for financial reporting purposes that are consistent with those followed by investment
companies. The deferral does not apply in situations in which a reporting entity has the explicit
or implicit obligation to fund losses of an entity that could potentially be significant to the
entity. The deferral also does not apply to interests in securitization entities, asset-backed
financing entities, or entities formerly considered qualifying special purpose entities. In
addition, the deferral applies to a reporting entitys interest in an entity that is required to
comply or operate in accordance with requirements similar to those in Rule 2a-7 of the Investment
Company Act of 1940 for registered money market funds. An entity that qualifies for the deferral
will continue to be assessed under the overall guidance on the consolidation of variable interest
entities. The guidance also clarifies that for entities that do not qualify for the deferral,
related parties should be considered for determining whether a decision maker or service provider
fee represents a variable interest. In addition, the requirements for evaluating whether a decision
makers or service providers fee is a variable interest are modified to clarify the FASBs
intention that a quantitative calculation should not be the sole basis for this evaluation. The
guidance was effective for interim and annual reporting periods beginning after November 15, 2009.
The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact in the Corporations consolidated financial
statements.
In March 2010, the FASB updated the Codification to provide clarification on the scope
exception related to embedded credit derivatives related to the transfer of credit risk in the form
of subordination of one financial instrument to another. The transfer of credit risk that is only
in the form of subordination of one financial instrument to another (thereby redistributing credit
risk) is an embedded derivative feature that should not be subject to potential bifurcation and
separate accounting. The amendments address how to determine which embedded credit derivative
features, including those in collateralized debt obligations and synthetic collateralized debt
obligations, are considered to be embedded derivatives that should not be analyzed under this
guidance. The Corporation may elect the fair value option for any investment in a beneficial
interest in a securitized financial asset. The guidance is effective for the first fiscal quarter
beginning after June 15, 2010. The adoption of this guidance did not have an impact in the
Corporations consolidated financial statements.
In April 2010, the FASB updated the codification to provide guidance on the effects of a loan
modification when a loan is part of a pool that is accounted for as a single asset. Modifications
of loans that are accounted for within a pool do not result in the removal of those loans from the
pool even if the modification of those loans would otherwise be considered a troubled debt
restructuring. An entity will continue to be required to consider whether the pool of assets in
which the loan is included is impaired if expected cash flows for the pool change. The amendments
in this Update are effective for modifications of loans accounted for within pools occurring in the
first interim or annual period ending on or after July 15, 2010. The amendments are to be applied
prospectively and early application is permitted. The adoption of this guidance did not have an
impact in the Corporations consolidated financial statements.
In July 2010, the FASB updated the codification to expand the disclosure requirements
regarding credit quality of financing receivables and the allowance for credit losses. The
objectives of the enhanced disclosures are to provide information that will enable readers of
financial statements to understand the nature of credit risk in a companys financing receivables,
how that risk is analyzed in determining the related allowance for credit losses and changes to the
allowance during the reporting period. An entity should provide disclosures on a disaggregated
basis for portfolio segments and classes of financing receivable. The amendments in this Update are
effective for both interim and annual reporting period ending after December 15, 2010. The
Corporation is currently evaluating the impact of the adoption of this guidance on its financial
statements.
13
2 EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
The calculations of earnings per common share for the quarters and nine-month periods ended on
September 30, 2010 and 2009 are as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands, except per share information) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(75,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(165,218 |
) |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
Non-cumulative preferred stock dividends (Series A through E) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,356 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(23,494 |
) |
Cumulative non-convertible preferred stock dividends (Series F) |
|
|
(1,618 |
) |
|
|
(5,000 |
) |
|
|
(11,618 |
) |
|
|
(14,167 |
) |
Cumulative convertible preferred stock dividend (Series G) |
|
|
(4,183 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,183 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock discount accretion (Series F and G) |
|
|
(1,688 |
) |
|
|
(1,115 |
) |
|
|
(4,010 |
) |
|
|
(3,095 |
) |
Favorable impact from issuing common stock in exchange for
Series A through E preferred stock, net of issuance costs (1) (Refer to Note 17) |
|
|
385,387 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
385,387 |
|
|
|
|
|
Favorable impact from issuing Series G mandatorily
convertible preferred stock in exchange for
Series F preferred stock (2) (Refer to Note 17) |
|
|
55,122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
55,122 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common
stockholders basic |
|
$ |
357,787 |
|
|
$ |
(174,689 |
) |
|
$ |
147,826 |
|
|
$ |
(262,741 |
) |
Convertible preferred stock dividends and accretion |
|
|
5,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,626 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) available to common
stockholders diluted |
|
$ |
363,413 |
|
|
$ |
(174,689 |
) |
|
$ |
153,452 |
|
|
$ |
(262,741 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average common shares outstanding |
|
|
171,483 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
|
|
119,131 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
Average potential common shares (3) |
|
|
1,126,792 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
379,725 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average
common shares outstanding assuming dilution |
|
|
1,298,275 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
|
|
498,856 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Basic earnings (loss) per common share |
|
$ |
2.09 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
1.24 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Diluted earnings (loss) per common share |
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Excess of carrying amount of Series A through E preferred stock exchanged over the fair value
of new common shares issued. |
|
(2) |
|
Excess of carrying amount of Series F preferred stock exchanged and original warrant over the
fair value of new Series G preferred stock issued and amended warrant. |
|
(3) |
|
Assumes conversion of
the Series G convertible preferred stock at the time of issuance based on the most advantageous
conversion rate from the standpoint of the security holder |
Earnings (loss) per common share is computed by dividing net income (loss) available to
common stockholders by the weighted average common shares issued and outstanding. Net income (loss)
available to common stockholders represents net income (loss) adjusted for preferred stock
dividends including dividends declared, and cumulative dividends related to the current dividend
period that have not been declared as of the end of the period, and the accretion of discount on
preferred stock issuances. For 2010 the net income available to common stockholders also includes
the one-time effect of the issuance of common stock in exchange for shares of the Series A through
E Preferred Stock and the issuance of a new Series G Preferred Stock in exchange for the Series F
Preferred Stock. The Exchange Offer and the issuance of the Series G Preferred Stock to the U.S.
Treasury are discussed in Note 17 to the consolidated financial statements. Basic weighted average
common shares outstanding exclude unvested shares of restricted stock.
Potential common shares consist of common stock issuable under the assumed exercise of stock
options, unvested shares of restricted stock, and outstanding warrants using the treasury stock
method. This method assumes that the potential common shares are issued and the proceeds from the
exercise, in addition to the amount of compensation cost attributable to future services, are used
to purchase common stock at the exercise date. The difference between the number of potential
shares issued and the shares purchased is added as incremental shares to the actual number of
shares outstanding to compute diluted earnings per share. Stock options, unvested shares of
restricted stock, and outstanding warrants that result in lower potential shares issued than shares
purchased under the treasury stock method are not included in the computation of dilutive earnings
per share since their inclusion would have an antidilutive effect on earnings per share. For the
quarter and nine-month periods ended September 30, 2010 and 2009, there were 2,072,200 and
2,546,310, respectively, outstanding stock options, as well as warrants outstanding to purchase
5,842,259 shares of common stock that were excluded from the computation of diluted earnings per
common share because their inclusion would have an antidilutive effect. Approximately 21,477 and
32,216 unvested shares of restricted stock outstanding as of September 30, 2010 and 2009 were
excluded from the computation of earnings per share.
The Series G Preferred Stock is included in the calculation of earnings per share in 2010 as
all shares are assumed converted at the time of issuance of the Series G Preferred Stock, under the
if converted method. The amount of potential common shares was obtained based on the most
advantageous conversion rate from the standpoint of the security holder and assuming the
Corporation will not be able to compel conversion until the seven-year anniversary, at which date
the conversion price would be based on the
14
Corporations stock price in the open market and
conversion would be based on the full liquidation value of $1,000 per share, or a conversion rate of
3,347.84 shares of common stock for each share of Series G convertible preferred stock.
3 STOCK OPTION PLAN
Between 1997 and January 2007, the Corporation had a stock option plan (the 1997 stock option
plan) that authorized the granting of up to 8,696,112 options on shares of the Corporations
common stock to eligible employees. The options granted under the plan could not exceed 20% of the
number of common shares outstanding. Each option provides for the purchase of one share of common
stock at a price not less than the fair market value of the stock on the date the option was
granted. Stock options were fully vested upon grant. The maximum term to exercise the options is
ten years. The stock option plan provides for a proportionate adjustment in the exercise price and
the number of shares that can be purchased in the event of a stock dividend, stock split,
reclassification of stock, merger or reorganization and certain other issuances and distributions
such as stock appreciation rights.
Under the 1997 stock option plan, the Compensation and Benefits Committee (the Compensation
Committee) had the authority to grant stock appreciation rights at any time subsequent to the
grant of an option. Pursuant to stock appreciation rights, the optionee surrenders the right to
exercise an option granted under the plan in consideration for payment by the Corporation of an
amount equal to the excess of the fair market value of the shares of common stock subject to such
option surrendered over the total option price of such shares. Any option surrendered is cancelled
by the Corporation and the shares subject to the option are not eligible for further grants under
the option plan. On January 21, 2007, the 1997 stock option plan expired; all outstanding awards
granted under this plan continue in full force and effect, subject to their original terms. No
awards for shares could be granted under the 1997 stock option plan as of its expiration.
On April 29, 2008, the Corporations stockholders approved the First BanCorp 2008 Omnibus
Incentive Plan (the Omnibus Plan). The Omnibus Plan provides for equity-based compensation
incentives (the awards) through the grant of stock options, stock appreciation rights, restricted
stock, restricted stock units, performance shares, and other stock-based awards. This plan allows
the issuance of up to 3,800,000 shares of common stock, subject to adjustments for stock splits,
reorganization and other similar events. The Corporations Board of Directors, upon receiving the
relevant recommendation of the Compensation Committee, has the power and authority to determine
those eligible to receive awards and to establish the terms and conditions of any awards subject to
various limits and vesting restrictions that apply to individual and aggregate awards. Shares
delivered pursuant to an award may consist, in whole or in part, of authorized and unissued shares
of Common Stock or shares of Common Stock acquired by the Corporation. During the fourth quarter of
2008, the Corporation granted 36,243 shares of restricted stock with a fair value of $8.69 under
the Omnibus Plan to the Corporations independent directors, of which 4,027 were forfeited in the
second half of 2009 and 10,739 have vested.
For the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, the Corporation recognized
$23,333 and $69,999, respectively, of stock-based compensation expense related to the
aforementioned restricted stock awards. The total unrecognized compensation cost related to the
non-vested restricted shares was $143,890 as of September 30, 2010 and is expected to be recognized
over the next 1.2 years.
There were no stock options granted during 2010 and 2009, therefore, no compensation
associated with stock options was recorded in those years.
Stock-based compensation accounting guidance requires the Corporation to develop an estimate
of the number of share-based awards which will be forfeited due to employee or director turnover.
Quarterly changes in the estimated forfeiture rate may have a significant effect on share-based
compensation, as the effect of adjusting the rate for all expense amortization is recognized in the
period in which the forfeiture estimate is changed. If the actual forfeiture rate is higher than
the estimated forfeiture rate, then an adjustment is made to increase the estimated forfeiture
rate, which will result in a decrease to the expense recognized in the financial statements. If the
actual forfeiture rate is lower than the estimated forfeiture rate, then an adjustment is made to
decrease the estimated forfeiture rate, which will result in an increase to the expense recognized
in the financial statements. When unvested options or shares of restricted stock are forfeited, any
compensation expense previously recognized on the forfeited awards is reversed in the period of the
forfeiture.
15
The activity of stock options for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 is set forth
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Remaining |
|
|
Aggregate |
|
|
|
Number of |
|
|
Weighted-Average |
|
|
Contractual Term |
|
|
Intrinsic Value |
|
|
|
Options |
|
|
Exercise Price |
|
|
(Years) |
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Beginning of period |
|
|
2,481,310 |
|
|
$ |
13.46 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Options cancelled |
|
|
(409,110 |
) |
|
|
14.60 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
End of period outstanding and exercisable |
|
|
2,072,200 |
|
|
$ |
13.24 |
|
|
|
4.6 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
No stock options were exercised during the first nine months of 2010 or 2009.
4 INVESTMENT SECURITIES
Investment Securities Available for Sale
The amortized cost, non-credit loss component of other-than-temporary impairment (OTTI) on
securities recorded in other comprehensive income (OCI), gross unrealized gains and losses
recorded in OCI, approximate fair value, weighted-average yield and contractual maturities of
investment securities available for sale as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-Credit |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss Component |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss Component |
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
of OTTI |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
average |
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
of OTTI |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
average |
|
|
|
cost |
|
|
Recorded in OCI |
|
|
gains |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
yield% |
|
|
cost |
|
|
Recorded in OCI |
|
|
gains |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
yield% |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
U.S. Treasury securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
$ |
599,959 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
11,981 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
611,940 |
|
|
|
1.34 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Obligations of U.S. Government
sponsored agencies: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
707,333 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,383 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
711,716 |
|
|
|
1.40 |
|
|
|
1,139,577 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,562 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,145,139 |
|
|
|
2.12 |
|
Puerto Rico Government
obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due within one year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
12,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
28 |
|
|
|
11,989 |
|
|
|
1.82 |
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
126,682 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
588 |
|
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
127,256 |
|
|
|
5.33 |
|
|
|
113,232 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
302 |
|
|
|
47 |
|
|
|
113,487 |
|
|
|
5.40 |
|
After 5 to 10 years |
|
|
104,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
104,518 |
|
|
|
5.18 |
|
|
|
6,992 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
328 |
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
7,230 |
|
|
|
5.88 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
4,719 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13 |
|
|
|
4,706 |
|
|
|
6.21 |
|
|
|
3,529 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,620 |
|
|
|
5.42 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States and
Puerto Rico Government
obligations |
|
|
1,543,024 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17,139 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
|
1,560,136 |
|
|
|
1.97 |
|
|
|
1,275,346 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,284 |
|
|
|
165 |
|
|
|
1,281,465 |
|
|
|
2.44 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30 |
|
|
|
5.54 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
1,934 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,052 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
705,818 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,388 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
|
|
722,219 |
|
|
|
4.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,934 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
118 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,052 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
705,848 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,388 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
|
|
722,249 |
|
|
|
4.66 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
41 |
|
|
|
6.49 |
|
|
|
69 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72 |
|
|
|
6.56 |
|
After 5 to 10 years |
|
|
1,398 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
79 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,477 |
|
|
|
4.76 |
|
|
|
808 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
39 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
5.47 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
948,009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,902 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
981,087 |
|
|
|
4.27 |
|
|
|
407,565 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,808 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
417,393 |
|
|
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
949,445 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,984 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
982,605 |
|
|
|
4.27 |
|
|
|
408,442 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
10,850 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
418,312 |
|
|
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FNMA certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 5 to 10 years |
|
|
82,373 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
87,070 |
|
|
|
4.48 |
|
|
|
101,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,716 |
|
|
|
91 |
|
|
|
105,406 |
|
|
|
4.55 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
137,957 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,408 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
146,365 |
|
|
|
5.51 |
|
|
|
1,374,533 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
30,629 |
|
|
|
2,776 |
|
|
|
1,402,386 |
|
|
|
4.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
220,330 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,105 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
233,435 |
|
|
|
5.12 |
|
|
|
1,476,314 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
34,345 |
|
|
|
2,867 |
|
|
|
1,507,792 |
|
|
|
4.51 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations
issued or guaranteed by
FHLMC,
FNMA and GNMA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 10 years |
|
|
118,771 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,710 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
120,481 |
|
|
|
0.99 |
|
|
|
156,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
633 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
156,307 |
|
|
|
0.99 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other mortgage pass-through
trust certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 10 years |
|
|
105,184 |
|
|
|
27,785 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,400 |
|
|
|
2.26 |
|
|
|
117,198 |
|
|
|
32,846 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,354 |
|
|
|
2.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed
securities |
|
|
1,395,664 |
|
|
|
27,785 |
|
|
|
48,918 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
1,415,973 |
|
|
|
3.97 |
|
|
|
2,863,888 |
|
|
|
32,846 |
|
|
|
64,218 |
|
|
|
6,246 |
|
|
|
2,889,014 |
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities (without
contractual maturity) (1) |
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
81 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
available for sale |
|
$ |
2,938,765 |
|
|
$ |
27,785 |
|
|
$ |
66,057 |
|
|
$ |
857 |
|
|
$ |
2,976,180 |
|
|
|
2.92 |
|
|
$ |
4,139,661 |
|
|
$ |
32,846 |
|
|
$ |
70,583 |
|
|
$ |
6,616 |
|
|
$ |
4,170,782 |
|
|
|
3.76 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents common shares of other financial institutions in Puerto Rico. |
Maturities of mortgage-backed securities are based on contractual terms assuming no
prepayments. Expected maturities of investments might differ from contractual maturities because
they may be subject to prepayments and/or call options as was the case with approximately $1.2
billion of investment securities (mainly U.S. agency debt securities) called during 2010. The
weighted-average yield on investment securities available for sale is based on amortized cost and,
therefore, does not give effect to changes in fair value. The net unrealized gain or loss on
securities available for sale and the non-credit loss component of OTTI are presented as part of
OCI.
The following tables show the Corporations available-for-sale investments fair value and
gross unrealized losses, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual
securities have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, as
16
of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009. It also includes debt securities for which an OTTI was recognized and only the
amount related to a credit loss was recognized in earnings:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Government
obligations |
|
$ |
14,692 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
14,692 |
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
GNMA |
|
|
171,468 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
171,468 |
|
|
|
824 |
|
Other mortgage pass-through trust certificates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,177 |
|
|
|
27,785 |
|
|
|
77,177 |
|
|
|
27,785 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
6 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
186,231 |
|
|
$ |
857 |
|
|
$ |
77,177 |
|
|
$ |
27,785 |
|
|
$ |
263,408 |
|
|
$ |
28,642 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Government
obligations |
|
$ |
14,760 |
|
|
$ |
118 |
|
|
$ |
9,113 |
|
|
$ |
47 |
|
|
$ |
23,873 |
|
|
$ |
165 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC |
|
|
236,925 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
236,925 |
|
|
|
1,987 |
|
GNMA |
|
|
72,178 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
72,178 |
|
|
|
980 |
|
FNMA |
|
|
415,601 |
|
|
|
2,867 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
415,601 |
|
|
|
2,867 |
|
Collateralized mortgage obligations issued
or guaranteed by FHLMC, FNMA
and GNMA |
|
|
105,075 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
105,075 |
|
|
|
412 |
|
Other mortgage pass-through trust
certificates |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,105 |
|
|
|
32,846 |
|
|
|
84,105 |
|
|
|
32,846 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
90 |
|
|
|
205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
844,629 |
|
|
$ |
6,569 |
|
|
$ |
93,218 |
|
|
$ |
32,893 |
|
|
$ |
937,847 |
|
|
$ |
39,462 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
17
Investments Held to Maturity
The amortized cost, gross unrealized gains and losses, approximate fair value,
weighted-average yield and contractual maturities of investment securities held to maturity as of
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gross |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
average |
|
|
Amortized |
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
average |
|
|
|
cost |
|
|
gains |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
yield% |
|
|
cost |
|
|
gains |
|
|
losses |
|
|
value |
|
|
yield% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Treasury securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due within 1 year |
|
$ |
8,480 |
|
|
$ |
5 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,485 |
|
|
|
0.30 |
|
|
$ |
8,480 |
|
|
$ |
12 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
8,492 |
|
|
|
0.47 |
|
Puerto Rico Government obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 5 to 10 years |
|
|
19,106 |
|
|
|
975 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
20,081 |
|
|
|
5.86 |
|
|
|
18,584 |
|
|
|
564 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
19,055 |
|
|
|
5.86 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
4,731 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,843 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
4,995 |
|
|
|
77 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,072 |
|
|
|
5.50 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
United States and Puerto
Rico Government obligations |
|
|
32,317 |
|
|
|
1,092 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
33,409 |
|
|
|
4.35 |
|
|
|
32,059 |
|
|
|
653 |
|
|
|
93 |
|
|
|
32,619 |
|
|
|
4.38 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
3,100 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,152 |
|
|
|
3.80 |
|
|
|
5,015 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,093 |
|
|
|
3.79 |
|
FNMA certificates: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 1 to 5 years |
|
|
3,011 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,076 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
|
|
|
4,771 |
|
|
|
100 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,871 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
|
After 5 to 10 years |
|
|
426,506 |
|
|
|
22,146 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
448,652 |
|
|
|
4.47 |
|
|
|
533,593 |
|
|
|
19,548 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
553,141 |
|
|
|
4.47 |
|
After 10 years |
|
|
23,033 |
|
|
|
895 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
23,928 |
|
|
|
5.33 |
|
|
|
24,181 |
|
|
|
479 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24,660 |
|
|
|
5.30 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
455,650 |
|
|
|
23,158 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
478,808 |
|
|
|
4.50 |
|
|
|
567,560 |
|
|
|
20,205 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
587,765 |
|
|
|
4.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate bonds: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
After 10 years |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
648 |
|
|
|
1,352 |
|
|
|
5.80 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
5.80 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities
held-to-maturity |
|
$ |
489,967 |
|
|
$ |
24,250 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
$ |
513,569 |
|
|
|
4.50 |
|
|
$ |
601,619 |
|
|
$ |
20,858 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
621,584 |
|
|
|
4.49 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturities of mortgage-backed securities are based on contractual terms assuming no
prepayments. Expected maturities of investments might differ from contractual maturities because
they may be subject to prepayments and/or call options.
The following tables show the Corporations held-to-maturity investments fair value and gross
unrealized losses, aggregated by investment category and length of time that individual securities
have been in a continuous unrealized loss position, as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Corporate bonds |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
$ |
1,352 |
|
|
$ |
648 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
Less than 12 months |
|
|
12 months or more |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized |
|
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Losses |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Debt securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Government obligations |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
4,678 |
|
|
$ |
93 |
|
|
$ |
4,678 |
|
|
$ |
93 |
|
Corporate bonds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
1,200 |
|
|
|
800 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
5,878 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
$ |
5,878 |
|
|
$ |
893 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18
Assessment for OTTI
On a quarterly basis, the Corporation performs an assessment to determine whether there have
been any events or economic circumstances indicating that a security with an unrealized loss has
suffered OTTI. A debt security is considered impaired if the fair value is less than its amortized
cost basis at the reporting date. The accounting literature requires the Corporation to assess
whether the unrealized loss is other-than-temporary.
Prior to April 1, 2009, unrealized losses that were determined to be temporary were recorded,
net of tax, in other comprehensive income for available-for-sale securities, whereas unrealized
losses related to held-to-maturity securities determined to be temporary were not recognized.
Regardless of whether the security was classified as available for sale or held to maturity,
unrealized losses that were determined to be other-than-temporary were recorded through earnings.
An unrealized loss was considered other-than-temporary if (i) it was probable that the holder would
not collect all amounts due according to the contractual terms of the debt security, or (ii) the
fair value was below the amortized cost of the debt security for a prolonged period of time and the
Corporation did not have the positive intent and ability to hold the security until recovery or
maturity.
In April 2009, the FASB amended the OTTI model for debt securities. Under the amended
guidance, OTTI losses must be recognized in earnings if an investor has the intent to sell the debt
security or it is more likely than not that it will be required to sell the debt security before
recovery of its amortized cost basis. However, even if an investor does not expect to sell a debt
security, it must evaluate expected cash flows to be received and determine if a credit loss has
occurred.
Under the amended guidance, an unrealized loss is generally deemed to be other-than-temporary
and a credit loss is deemed to exist if the present value of the expected future cash flows is less
than the amortized cost basis of the debt security. As a result of the Corporations adoption of
this new guidance, the credit loss component of an OTTI, if any, would be recorded as a separate
line item in the accompanying consolidated statements of (loss) income, while the remaining portion
of the impairment loss would be recognized in OCI, provided the Corporation does not intend to sell
the underlying debt security and it is more likely than not that the Corporation will not have to
sell the debt security prior to recovery. For the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30,
2010, there were no credit loss impairment charges in earnings.
Debt securities issued by U.S. government agencies, government-sponsored entities and the U.S.
Treasury accounted for more than 90% of the total available-for-sale and held-to-maturity portfolio
as of September 30, 2010 and no credit losses are expected, given the explicit and implicit
guarantees provided by the U.S. federal government. The Corporations assessment was concentrated
mainly on private label MBS of approximately $105 million for which the Corporation evaluates
credit losses on a quarterly basis. The Corporation considered the following factors in determining
whether a credit loss exists and the period over which the debt security is expected to recover:
The length of time and the extent to which the fair value has been less than the amortized
cost basis.
Changes in the near term prospects of the underlying collateral of a security such as changes
in default rates, loss severity given default and significant changes in prepayment
assumptions;
The level of cash flows generated from the underlying collateral supporting the principal and
interest payments of the debt securities; and
Any adverse change to the credit conditions and liquidity of the issuer, taking into
consideration the latest information available about the overall financial condition of the
issuer, credit ratings, recent legislation and government actions affecting the issuers
industry and actions taken by the issuer to deal with the present economic climate.
No OTTI losses on available-for-sale debt securities were recorded in the first nine months of
2010. Cumulative unrealized other-than-temporary impairment losses recognized in OCI as of
September 30, 2010 amounted to $31.7 million.
19
For the third quarter and first nine months of 2009, the Corporation recorded OTTI losses
on available-for-sale debt securities as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Private label MBS |
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
(In thousands) |
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
Total other-than-temporary impairment losses |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(32,541 |
) |
Unrealized other-than-temporary impairment losses recognized in OCI (1) |
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
31,271 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment losses recognized in earnings (2) |
|
$ |
(209 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Represents the noncredit component impact of the OTTI on available-for-sale debt securities |
|
(2) |
|
Represents the credit component of the OTTI on available-for-sale debt securities |
The following table summarizes the rollforward of credit losses on debt securities held
by the Corporation for which a portion of OTTI is recognized in OCI:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Private label MBS |
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
(In thousands) |
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
Credit losses at the beginning of the period |
|
$ |
1,061 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Additions: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit losses related to securities for which an OTTI
was not previously recognized |
|
|
209 |
|
|
|
1,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance of credit losses on debt securities held for which a
portion of an OTTI was recognized in OCI |
|
$ |
1,270 |
|
|
$ |
1,270 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Private label mortgage-backed securities (MBS) are collateralized by fixed-rate
mortgages on single family residential properties in the United States. The interest rate on these private label MBS is variable, tied to 3-month LIBOR and limited to the weighted-average coupon of the underlying
collateral. The underlying mortgages are fixed-rate single family loans with original high FICO
scores (over 700) and moderate original loan-to-value ratios (under 80%), as well as moderate
delinquency levels.
Based on the expected cash flows derived from the model, and since the Corporation does not
have the intention to sell the securities and has sufficient capital and liquidity to hold these
securities until a recovery of the fair value occurs, no credit losses were reflected in earnings
for the period ended September 30, 2010. As a result of the valuation performed as of September 30,
2010, no additional other-than-temporary impairment was recorded for the period. Significant
assumptions in the valuation of the private label MBS as of September 30, 2010 were as follow:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted |
|
|
|
|
Average |
|
Range |
Discount rate |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
|
|
14.5 |
% |
Prepayment rate |
|
|
26 |
% |
|
|
21.62% 44.79 |
% |
Projected Cumulative Loss Rate |
|
|
4 |
% |
|
|
1.05% 16.80 |
% |
For the nine-month period ended on September 30, 2010, the Corporation recorded OTTI of
approximately $0.4 million on certain equity securities held in its available-for-sale investment
portfolio related to financial institutions in Puerto Rico. Management concluded that the declines
in value of the securities were other-than-temporary; as such, the cost basis of these securities
was written down to the market value as of the date of the analysis and is reflected in earnings as
a realized loss.
Total proceeds from the sale of securities available for sale during the first nine months of
2010 amounted to approximately $2.4 billion (2009 $1.0 billion). Given the Corporations balance
sheet structure and the shape and level of the yield curve, which in turn is reflected in the
valuation of the securities and the repurchase agreements, the Corporation took advantage of market
conditions
during the quarter and completed the sale of approximately $1.2 billion of U.S. agency MBS
that was matched with the early termination of approximately $1.0 billion of repurchase agreements.
The cost of the unwinding of the repurchase agreements of $47.4 million offset the gain of $47.1
million realized on the sale of investment securities.
20
5 OTHER EQUITY SECURITIES
Institutions that are members of the FHLB system are required to maintain a minimum investment
in FHLB stock. Such minimum is calculated as a percentage of aggregate outstanding mortgages, and
an additional investment is required that is calculated as a percentage of total FHLB advances,
letters of credit, and the collateralized portion of interest-rate swaps outstanding. The stock is
capital stock issued at $100 par value. Both stock and cash dividends may be received on FHLB
stock.
As of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the Corporation had investments in FHLB stock
with a book value of $63.0 million and $68.4 million, respectively. The net realizable value is a
reasonable proxy for the fair value of these instruments. Dividend income from FHLB stock for the
second quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 amounted to $0.6 million and $2.1
million, respectively, compared to $1.0 million and $2.2 million, respectively, for the same
periods in 2009.
The FHLB stocks owned by the Corporation are issued by the FHLB of New York and by the FHLB of
Atlanta. Both Banks are part of the Federal Home Loan Bank System, a national wholesale banking
network of 12 regional, stockholder-owned congressionally chartered banks. The Federal Home Loan
Banks are all privately capitalized and operated by their member stockholders. The system is
supervised by the Federal Housing Finance Agency, which ensures that the Home Loan Banks operate in
a financially safe and sound manner, remain adequately capitalized and able to raise funds in the
capital markets, and carry out their housing finance mission.
The Corporation has other equity securities that do not have a readily available fair value.
The carrying value of such securities as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 was $1.3
million and $1.6 million, respectively. An impairment charge of $0.25 million was recorded in the
first quarter of 2010 related to an investment in a failed financial institution in the United
States.
During the first quarter of 2010, the Corporation recognized a $10.7 million gain on the sale
of the remaining VISA Class C shares. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation no longer held any
VISA shares.
6 LOAN PORTFOLIO
The following is a detail of the loan portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Residential mortgage loans, mainly secured by first mortgages |
|
$ |
3,448,335 |
|
|
$ |
3,595,508 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans |
|
|
1,114,647 |
|
|
|
1,492,589 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
1,742,462 |
|
|
|
1,693,424 |
|
Commercial and Industrial loans (1) |
|
|
3,824,916 |
|
|
|
4,927,304 |
|
Loans to a local financial institution secured by
real estate mortgages |
|
|
295,855 |
|
|
|
321,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans |
|
|
6,977,880 |
|
|
|
8,434,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finance leases |
|
|
289,573 |
|
|
|
318,504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer loans |
|
|
1,464,238 |
|
|
|
1,579,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable |
|
|
12,180,026 |
|
|
|
13,928,451 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(608,526 |
) |
|
|
(528,120 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans receivable, net |
|
|
11,571,500 |
|
|
|
13,400,331 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans held for sale |
|
|
9,196 |
|
|
|
20,775 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
$ |
11,580,696 |
|
|
$ |
13,421,106 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
- |
As of September 30, 2010, includes $1.8 billion of commercial loans
that are secured by real estate but are not dependent upon the real estate
for repayment. |
The Corporations primary lending area is Puerto Rico. The Corporations Puerto Rico banking
subsidiary, FirstBank, also lends in the U.S. and British Virgin Islands markets and in the United
States (principally in the state of Florida). Of the total gross loan
21
portfolio of $12.2 billion as
of September 30, 2010, approximately 84% has credit risk concentration in Puerto Rico, 8% in the
United States and 8% in the Virgin Islands.
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had $273.1 million outstanding of credit facilities
granted to the Puerto Rico Government and/or its political subdivisions, down from $1.2 billion as
of December 31, 2009, and $57.2 million granted to the Virgin Islands government, down from $134.7
million as of December 31, 2009. A substantial portion of these credit facilities are obligations
that have a specific source of income or revenues identified for their repayment, such as property
taxes collected by the central Government and/or municipalities. Another portion of these
obligations consists of loans to public corporations that obtain revenues from rates charged for
services or products, such as electric power and water utilities. Public corporations have varying
degrees of independence from the central Government of Puerto Rico and many receive appropriations
or other payments from it. The Corporation also has loans to various municipalities in Puerto Rico
for which the good faith, credit and unlimited taxing power of the applicable municipality has been
pledged to their repayment.
The largest loan to one borrower as of September 30, 2010 in the amount of $295.9 million is
with one mortgage originator in Puerto Rico, Doral Financial Corporation. This commercial loan is
secured by individual real estate loans, mostly 1-4 residential mortgage loans.
7 ALLOWANCE FOR LOAN AND LEASE LOSSES
The changes in the allowance for loan and lease losses were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
604,304 |
|
|
$ |
407,746 |
|
|
$ |
528,120 |
|
|
$ |
281,526 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
120,482 |
|
|
|
148,090 |
|
|
|
438,240 |
|
|
|
442,671 |
|
Charge-offs |
|
|
(120,487 |
) |
|
|
(87,001 |
) |
|
|
(367,309 |
) |
|
|
(260,836 |
) |
Recoveries |
|
|
4,227 |
|
|
|
2,649 |
|
|
|
9,475 |
|
|
|
8,123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
$ |
471,484 |
|
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
$ |
471,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The allowance for impaired loans is part of the allowance for loan and lease losses. The
allowance for impaired loans covers those loans for which management has determined that it is
probable that the debtor will be unable to pay all the amounts due in accordance with the
contractual terms of the loan agreement, and does not necessarily represent loans for which the
Corporation will incur a loss. As of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, impaired loans and
their related allowance were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Impaired loans with valuation allowance, net of charge-offs |
|
$ |
1,394,335 |
|
|
$ |
1,060,088 |
|
Impaired loans without valuation allowance, net of charge-offs |
|
|
486,735 |
|
|
|
596,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total impaired loans |
|
$ |
1,881,070 |
|
|
$ |
1,656,264 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for impaired loans |
|
$ |
271,425 |
|
|
$ |
182,145 |
|
Interest income of approximately $13.5 million and $25.9 million was recognized on
impaired loans for the third quarter and first nine months of 2010, respectively, compared to $5.8
million and $20.0 million, respectively, for the same periods in 2009. The average recorded
investment in impaired loans for the first nine-months of 2010 and 2009 was $1.8 billion and $839.7
million, respectively.
22
The following tables show the activity for impaired loans and the related specific reserve during
the first nine months of 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Impaired Loans: |
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year |
|
$ |
1,656,264 |
|
Loans determined impaired during the period |
|
|
802,957 |
|
Net charge-offs (1) |
|
|
(299,871 |
) |
Loans sold, net of charge-offs of $42.6 million (2) |
|
|
(120,556 |
) |
Loans foreclosed, paid in full and partial payments, net of additional disbursements |
|
|
(157,724 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
1,881,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately $151.5 million, or 51%, is related to construction
loans. |
|
(2) |
|
Loans sold in Florida. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Specific Reserve: |
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year |
|
$ |
182,145 |
|
Provision for loan losses |
|
|
389,151 |
|
Net charge-offs |
|
|
(299,871 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
271,425 |
|
|
|
|
|
The Corporation provides homeownership preservation assistance to its customers through a
loss mitigation program in Puerto Rico and through programs sponsored by the Federal Government.
Due to the nature of the borrowers financial condition, restructurings or loan modifications
through these program as well as other restructurings of individual
commercial loans, commercial mortgage
loans, construction loans and residential mortgages in the U.S. mainland fit the definition of
Troubled Debt Restructuring (TDR). A restructuring of a debt constitutes a TDR if the creditor
for economic or legal reasons related to the debtors financial difficulties grants a concession to
the debtor that it would not otherwise consider. Modifications involve changes in one or more of
the loan terms that bring a defaulted loan current and provide sustainable affordability. Changes
may include the refinancing of any past-due amounts, including interest and escrow, the extension
of the maturity of the loan and modifications of the loan rate. As of September 30, 2010, the
Corporations TDR loans amounted to $372.6 million consisting of: $185.6 million of residential
mortgage loans, $41.7 million commercial and industrial loans, $90.3 million commercial mortgage
loans and $55.0 million of construction loans. Outstanding unfunded loan commitments on TDR loans
amounted to $2.3 million as of September 30, 2010.
Included in the $372.6 million of TDR loans are certain impaired condo-conversion loans
restructured into two separate agreements (loan splitting) in the fourth quarter of 2009. At that
time, each of these loans was restructured into two notes: one that represents the portion of the
loan that is expected to be fully collected along with contractual interest and the second note
that represents the portion of the original loan that was charged-off. The restructuring of these
loans was made after analyzing the borrowers and guarantors capacities to service the debt and
ability to perform under the modified terms. As part of the restructuring of the loans, the first
note of each loan has been placed on a monthly payment of principal and interest that amortizes the
debt over 25 years at a market rate of interest. An interest rate reduction was granted for the
second note. The carrying value of the notes deemed collectible amounted to $22.0 million as of
September 30, 2010 and the charge-offs recorded prior to 2010 associated with these loans were
$29.7 million. The loans that have been deemed collectible and returned to accrual status after a
performance period, continue to be individually evaluated for impairment purposes and a specific
reserve of $0.5 million was allocated to these loans as of September 30, 2010.
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation maintains a $8.5 million reserve for unfunded loan
commitments mainly related to outstanding construction loans commitments in Puerto Rico. The
reserve for unfunded loan commitments is an estimate of the losses inherent in off-balance sheet
loan commitments at the balance sheet date. It is calculated by multiplying an estimated loss
factor by an estimated probability of funding, and then by the period-end amounts for unfunded
commitments. The reserve for unfunded loan commitments is included as part of accounts payable and
other liabilities in the consolidated statement of financial condition.
8 DERIVATIVE INSTRUMENTS AND HEDGING ACTIVITIES
One of the market risks facing the Corporation is interest rate risk, which includes the risk
that changes in interest rates will result in changes in the value of the Corporations assets or
liabilities and the risk that net interest income from its loan and investment portfolios will be
adversely affected by changes in interest rates. The overall objective of the Corporations
interest rate risk management activities is to reduce the variability of earnings caused by changes
in interest rates.
The Corporation uses various financial instruments, including derivatives, to manage the
interest rate risk primarily for protection from rising interest rates in connection with private
label MBS.
The Corporation designates a derivative as a fair value hedge, cash flow hedge or an economic
undesignated hedge when it enters into the derivative contract. As of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, all derivatives held by the Corporation were
23
considered economic undesignated
hedges. These undesignated hedges are recorded at fair value with the resulting gain or loss
recognized in current earnings.
The following summarizes the principal derivative activities used by the Corporation in
managing interest rate risk:
Interest rate cap agreements Interest rate cap agreements provide the right to receive cash
if a reference interest rate rises above a contractual rate. The value increases as the reference
interest rate rises. The Corporation enters into interest rate cap agreements for protection from
rising interest rates. Specifically, the interest rate on certain of the Corporations commercial
loans to other financial institutions is generally a variable rate limited to the weighted-average
coupon of the pass-through certificate or referenced residential mortgage collateral, less a
contractual servicing fee. During the second quarter of 2010, the counterparty for interest rate
caps for certain private label mortgage pass-through securities was taken over by the FDIC,
immediately canceling all outstanding commitments, and as a result, interest rate caps with
notional amount of $113 million are no longer considered to be derivative financial instruments.
The total exposure to fair value of $3.0 million related to such contracts was reclassified to an
account receivable.
Interest
rate swaps Interest rate swap agreements generally involve the exchange of fixed-and
floating-rate interest payment obligations without the exchange of the underlying notional
principal amount. As of September 30, 2010, most of the interest rate swaps outstanding are used
for protection against rising interest rates. In the past, interest rate swaps volume was much
higher since they were used to convert fixed-rate brokered CDs (liabilities), mainly those with
long-term maturities, to a variable rate to mitigate the interest rate risk inherent in variable
rate loans. All interest rate swaps related to brokered CDs were called during 2009, in the face of
lower interest rate levels, and, as a consequence, the Corporation exercised its call option on the
swapped-to-floating brokered CDs. Similar to unrealized gains and losses arising from changes in
fair value, net interest settlements on interest rate swaps are recorded as an adjustment to
interest income or interest expense depending on whether an asset or liability is being
economically hedged.
Indexed options Indexed options are generally over-the-counter (OTC) contracts that the
Corporation enters into in order to receive the appreciation of a specified Stock Index (e.g., Dow
Jones Industrial Composite Stock Index) over a specified period in exchange for a premium paid at
the contracts inception. The option period is determined by the contractual maturity of the notes
payable tied to the performance of the Stock Index. The credit risk inherent in these options is
the risk that the exchange party may not fulfill its obligation. To satisfy the needs of its
customers, the Corporation may enter into non-hedging transactions. On these transactions,
generally, the Corporation participates as a buyer in one of the agreements and as a seller in the
other agreement under the same terms and conditions.
In addition, the Corporation enters into certain contracts with embedded derivatives that do
not require separate accounting as these are clearly and closely related to the economic
characteristics of the host contract. When the embedded derivative possesses economic
characteristics that are not clearly and closely related to the economic characteristics of the
host contract, it is bifurcated, carried at fair value, and designated as a trading or non-hedging
derivative instrument.
The following table summarizes the notional amounts of all derivative instruments as of September
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional Amounts |
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Economic undesignated hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements used to hedge loans |
|
$ |
41,635 |
|
|
$ |
79,567 |
|
Written interest rate cap agreements |
|
|
71,841 |
|
|
|
102,521 |
|
Purchased interest rate cap agreements |
|
|
71,841 |
|
|
|
228,384 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded written options on stock index deposits and notes payable |
|
|
53,515 |
|
|
|
53,515 |
|
Purchased options used to manage exposure to the stock
market on embedded stock index options |
|
|
53,515 |
|
|
|
53,515 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
292,347 |
|
|
$ |
517,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
24
The following table summarizes the fair value of derivative instruments and identifies
the location of such derivative instruments in the Statement of Financial Condition as of September
30, 2010 and December 31, 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Asset Derivatives |
|
|
Liability Derivatives |
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
Statement of |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
Statement of |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
Financial Condition |
|
Fair |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
Financial Condition |
|
Fair |
|
|
Fair |
|
|
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
|
Value |
|
|
Location |
|
Value |
|
|
Value |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Economic undesignated hedges: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements used to hedge loans |
|
Other assets |
|
$ |
427 |
|
|
$ |
319 |
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
$ |
6,171 |
|
|
$ |
5,068 |
|
Written interest rate cap agreements |
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
201 |
|
Purchased interest rate cap agreements |
|
Other assets |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
4,423 |
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded written options on stock index deposits |
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
|
|
|
|
14 |
|
Embedded written options on stock index notes payable |
|
Other assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable |
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
1,184 |
|
Purchased options used to manage exposure to the stock
market on embedded stock index options |
|
Other assets |
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,537 |
|
|
$ |
5,936 |
|
|
|
|
$ |
7,211 |
|
|
$ |
6,467 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the effect of derivative instruments on the Statement of
Loss for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 and 2009:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
Unrealized Gain or (Loss) |
|
|
|
Location of Unrealized Gain or (loss) |
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
Recognized in Income on |
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
Derivatives |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Interest rate contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements used to hedge: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brokered certificates of deposit |
|
Interest expense on deposits |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(5,236 |
) |
Notes payable |
|
Interest expense on notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3 |
|
Loans |
|
Interest income on loans |
|
|
(935 |
) |
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
984 |
|
Written and purchased interest rate cap agreements mortgage-backed securities |
|
Interest income on investment securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,028 |
) |
|
|
(1,137 |
) |
|
|
1,678 |
|
Written and purchased interest rate cap agreements loans |
|
Interest income on loans |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
(51 |
) |
|
|
(37 |
) |
|
|
93 |
|
Equity contracts: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Embedded written options on stock index deposits |
|
Interest expense on deposits |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(2 |
) |
|
|
(81 |
) |
Embedded written options on stock index notes payable |
|
Interest expense on notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
(180 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loss on derivatives |
|
|
|
$ |
(914 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,498 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,095 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,739 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative instruments, such as interest rate swaps, are subject to market risk. As is the
case with investment securities, the market value of derivative instruments is largely a function
of the financial markets expectations regarding the future direction of interest rates.
Accordingly, current market values are not necessarily indicative of the future impact of
derivative instruments on earnings. This will depend, for the most part, on the shape of the yield
curve, the level of interest rates, as well as the expectations for rates in the future. The
unrealized gains and losses in the fair value of derivatives that have economically hedged certain
callable brokered CDs and medium-term notes are partially offset by unrealized gains and losses on
the valuation of such economically hedged liabilities measured at fair value. The Corporation
includes the gain or loss on those economically hedged liabilities (brokered CDs and medium-term
notes) in the same line item as the offsetting loss or gain on the related derivatives as set forth
below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss |
|
|
|
|
(Loss) / Gain |
|
on liabilities measured at fair |
|
Net Unrealized |
|
Gain / (Loss) |
|
on liabilities measured at fair |
|
Net Unrealized |
(In thousands) |
|
on Derivatives |
|
value |
|
Loss |
|
on Derivatives |
|
value |
|
Gain / (Loss) |
Interest expense on deposits |
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense on notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
25 |
|
|
|
(550 |
) |
|
|
(525 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(1,576 |
) |
|
|
(1,590 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-Month Period ended September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain / (Loss) |
|
|
|
|
(Loss) / Gain |
|
on liabilities measured at fair |
|
Net Unrealized |
|
Loss |
|
on liabilities measured at fair |
|
Net Unrealized |
(In thousands) |
|
on Derivatives |
|
value |
|
(Loss) / Gain |
|
on Derivatives |
|
value |
|
Gain / (Loss) |
Interest expense on deposits |
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(2 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,317 |
) |
|
$ |
8,696 |
|
|
$ |
3,379 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense on notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
76 |
|
|
|
2,307 |
|
|
|
2,383 |
|
|
|
(177 |
) |
|
|
(3,000 |
) |
|
|
(3,177 |
) |
25
A summary of interest rate swaps as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
As of |
|
|
September 30, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Pay fixed/receive floating (generally used to economically hedge loans): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notional amount |
|
$ |
41,635 |
|
|
$ |
79,567 |
|
Weighted-average receive rate at period end |
|
|
2.14 |
% |
|
|
2.15 |
% |
Weighted-average pay rate at period end |
|
|
6.83 |
% |
|
|
6.52 |
% |
Floating rates range from 167 to 252 basis points over 3-month LIBOR |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation has not entered into any derivative instrument
containing credit-risk-related contingent features.
9 GOODWILL AND OTHER INTANGIBLES
Goodwill as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 amounted to $28.1 million, recognized
as part of Other assets. The Corporation conducted its annual evaluation of goodwill during the
fourth quarter of 2009. This evaluation is a two-step process. The Step 1 evaluation of goodwill
allocated to the Florida reporting unit, which is one level below the United States business
segment, indicated potential impairment of goodwill. The Step 1 fair value for the unit was below
the carrying amount of its equity book value as of the December 31, 2009 valuation date, requiring
the completion of Step 2. The Step 2 required a valuation of all assets and liabilities of the
Florida unit, including any recognized and unrecognized intangible assets, to determine the fair
value of net assets. To complete Step 2, the Corporation subtracted from the units Step 1 fair
value the determined fair value of the net assets to arrive at the implied fair value of goodwill.
The results of the Step 2 analysis indicated that the implied fair value of goodwill exceeded the
goodwill carrying value by $107.4 million, resulting in no goodwill impairment. There have been no
events related to the Florida reporting unit that could indicate potential goodwill impairment
since the date of the last evaluation; therefore, no goodwill impairment evaluation was performed
during the first nine months of 2010. Goodwill and other indefinite life intangibles are reviewed
at least annually for impairment. The Corporation understands that it is in its best interest to
move the annual evaluation date to an earlier date within the fourth quarter, therefore, the
Corporation will evaluate for goodwill impairment as of October 1, 2010. The change in date will
provide room for improvement to the testing structure and coordination and will enable the
evaluation to be performed in conjunction with the Corporations annual budgeting process.
As of September 30, 2010, the gross carrying amount and accumulated amortization of core
deposit intangibles was $41.8 million and $27.1 million, respectively, recognized as part of Other
assets in the Consolidated Statements of Financial Condition (December 31, 2009 $41.8 million
and $25.2 million, respectively). During the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30,
2010, the amortization expense of core deposit intangibles amounted to $0.6 million and $1.9
million, respectively, compared to $0.8 million and $2.7 million, respectively, for the comparable
periods in 2009. As a result of an impairment evaluation of core deposit intangibles, there was an
impairment charge of $4.0 million recognized during the first half of 2009 related to core deposits
in Florida attributable to decreases in the base of core deposits acquired and recorded as part of
other non-interest expenses in the Statement of Income (Loss).
10 NON-CONSOLIDATED VARIABLE INTEREST ENTITIES AND SERVICING ASSETS
The Corporation transfers residential mortgage loans in sale or securitization transactions in
which it has continuing involvement, which includes servicing responsibilities and guarantee
arrangements. All such transfers have been accounted for as sales as required by applicable
accounting guidance.
When evaluating transfers and other transactions with Variable Interest Entities (VIEs) for
consolidation under the recently adopted guidance, the Corporation first determines if the
counterparty is an entity for which a variable interest exists. If no scope exception is applicable
and a variable interest exists, the Corporation then evaluates if it is the primary beneficiary of
the VIE and whether the entity should be consolidated or not.
Below is a summary of transfers of financial assets to VIEs for which the Company has retained
some level of continuing involvement:
Ginnie Mae
The Corporation typically transfers first lien residential mortgage loans in conjunction with
Ginnie Mae securitization transactions whereby the loans are exchanged for cash or securities that
are readily redeemed for cash proceeds and servicing rights.
26
The securities issued through these
transactions are guaranteed by the issuer and, as such, under seller/servicer agreements the
Corporation is required to service the loans in accordance with the issuers servicing
guidelines and standards. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation serviced loans securitized
through GNMA with principal balance of $432.2 million.
Trust Preferred Securities
In 2004, FBP Statutory Trust I, a financing subsidiary of the Corporation, sold to
institutional investors $100 million of its variable rate trust preferred securities. The proceeds
of the issuance, together with the proceeds of the purchase by the Corporation of $3.1 million of
FBP Statutory Trust I variable rate common securities, were used by FBP Statutory Trust I to
purchase $103.1 million aggregate principal amount of the Corporations Junior Subordinated
Deferrable Debentures. Also in 2004, FBP Statutory Trust II, a statutory trust that is wholly-owned
by the Corporation, sold to institutional investors $125 million of its variable rate trust
preferred securities. The proceeds of the issuance, together with the proceeds of the purchase by
the Corporation of $3.9 million of FBP Statutory Trust II variable rate common securities, were
used by FBP Statutory Trust II to purchase $128.9 million aggregate principal amount of the
Corporations Junior Subordinated Deferrable Debentures. The trust preferred debentures are
presented in the Corporations Consolidated Statement of Financial Condition as Other Borrowings,
net of related issuance costs. The variable rate trust preferred securities are fully and
unconditionally guaranteed by the Corporation. The $100 million Junior Subordinated Deferrable
Debentures issued by the Corporation in April 2004 and the $125 million issued in September 2004
mature on September 17, 2034 and September 20, 2034, respectively; however, under certain
circumstances, the maturity of Junior Subordinated Debentures may be shortened (such shortening
would result in a mandatory redemption of the variable rate trust preferred securities). The trust
preferred securities, subject to certain limitations, qualify as Tier I regulatory capital under
current Federal Reserve rules and regulations. The Collins Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Wall Street
Reform and Consumer Protection Act eliminates certain trust preferred securities from Tier 1
Capital, but TARP preferred securities are exempted from this treatment. These regulatory
capital deductions for trust preferred securities are to be phased in incrementally over a period
of 3 years beginning on January 1, 2013.
Grantor Trusts
During 2004 and 2005, a third party to the Corporation, from now on identified as the seller,
established a series of statutory trusts to effect the securitization of mortgage loans and the
sale of trust certificates. The seller initially provided the servicing for a fee, which is senior
to the obligations to pay trust certificate holders. The seller then entered into a sales agreement
through which it sold and issued the trust certificates in favor of the Corporations banking
subsidiary. Currently the Bank is the 100% owner of the trust certificates; the servicing of the
underlying residential mortgages that generate the principal and interest cash flows, is performed
by the seller, which receives a fee compensation for services provided, the servicing fee. The
securities are variable rate securities tied to LIBOR index plus a spread. The principal payments
from the underlying loans are remitted to a paying agent (the seller) who then remits interest to
the Bank; interest income is shared to a certain extent with a third party financial institution
that has an interest only strip (IO) tied to the cash flows of the underlying loans, whereas it
is entitled to received the excess of the interest income less a servicing fee over the variable
rate income that the Bank earns on the securities. This IO is limited to the weighted average
coupon of the securities. No recourse agreement exists and the risk from losses on non accruing
loans and repossessed collateral is absorbed by the Bank as the 100% holder of the certificates.
As of September 30, 2010, the outstanding balance of Grantor Trusts amounted to $105.2 million with
a weighted average yield of 2.26%.
Servicing Assets
The Corporation is actively involved in the securitization of pools of FHA-insured and
VA-guaranteed mortgages for issuance of GNMA mortgage-backed securities. Also, certain conventional
conforming-loans are sold to FNMA or FHLMC with servicing retained. The Corporation recognizes as
separate assets the rights to service loans for others, whether those servicing assets are
originated or purchased.
27
The changes in servicing assets are shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Balance at beginning of period |
|
$ |
13,335 |
|
|
$ |
10,148 |
|
|
$ |
11,902 |
|
|
$ |
8,151 |
|
Capitalization of servicing assets |
|
|
2,181 |
|
|
|
1,748 |
|
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
|
4,929 |
|
Amortization |
|
|
(572 |
) |
|
|
(592 |
) |
|
|
(1,504 |
) |
|
|
(1,776 |
) |
Adjustment to servicing assets for loans repurchased (1) |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(736 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance before valuation allowance at end of period |
|
|
14,906 |
|
|
|
11,304 |
|
|
|
14,906 |
|
|
|
11,304 |
|
Valuation allowance for temporary impairment |
|
|
(1,018 |
) |
|
|
(1,252 |
) |
|
|
(1,018 |
) |
|
|
(1,252 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
13,888 |
|
|
$ |
10,052 |
|
|
$ |
13,888 |
|
|
$ |
10,052 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amount represents the adjustment to fair value related to the repurchase of $3.8 million and $71.2 million for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, respectively, in
principal balance of loans serviced for others. |
Impairment charges are recognized through a valuation allowance for each individual
stratum of servicing assets. The valuation allowance is adjusted to reflect the amount, if any, by
which the cost basis of the servicing asset for a given stratum of loans being serviced exceeds its
fair value. Any fair value in excess of the cost basis of the servicing asset for a given stratum
is not recognized. Other-than-temporary impairments, if any, are recognized as a direct write-down
of the servicing assets.
Changes in the impairment allowance were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Balance at
beginning of period |
|
$ |
282 |
|
|
$ |
1,796 |
|
|
$ |
745 |
|
|
$ |
751 |
|
Temporary impairment charges |
|
|
737 |
|
|
|
119 |
|
|
|
1,089 |
|
|
|
2,264 |
|
Recoveries |
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
(663 |
) |
|
|
(816 |
) |
|
|
(1,763 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
1,018 |
|
|
$ |
1,252 |
|
|
$ |
1,018 |
|
|
$ |
1,252 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The components of net servicing income are shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Servicing fees |
|
$ |
1,059 |
|
|
$ |
828 |
|
|
$ |
2,960 |
|
|
$ |
2,132 |
|
Late charges and prepayment penalties |
|
|
138 |
|
|
|
(42 |
) |
|
|
459 |
|
|
|
439 |
|
Adjustment for loans repurchased |
|
|
(38 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(736 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servicing income, gross |
|
|
1,159 |
|
|
|
786 |
|
|
|
2,683 |
|
|
|
2,571 |
|
Amortization and impairment of servicing assets |
|
|
(1,308 |
) |
|
|
(48 |
) |
|
|
(1,777 |
) |
|
|
(2,277 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Servicing (loss) income, net |
|
$ |
(149 |
) |
|
$ |
738 |
|
|
$ |
906 |
|
|
$ |
294 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
28
The Corporations servicing assets are subject to prepayment and interest rate risks. Key
economic assumptions used in determining the fair value at the time of sale ranged as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maximum |
|
Minimum |
Nine-month period ended September 30, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constant prepayment rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government guaranteed mortgage loans |
|
|
12.7 |
% |
|
|
11.3 |
% |
Conventional conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
18.0 |
% |
|
|
14.8 |
% |
Conventional non-conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
14.8 |
% |
|
|
11.5 |
% |
Discount rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government guaranteed mortgage loans |
|
|
11.7 |
% |
|
|
10.3 |
% |
Conventional conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
9.3 |
% |
|
|
9.2 |
% |
Conventional non-conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
13.1 |
% |
|
|
13.1 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-month period ended September 30, 2009: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constant prepayment rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government guaranteed mortgage loans |
|
|
24.8 |
% |
|
|
20.2 |
% |
Conventional conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
21.9 |
% |
|
|
19.0 |
% |
Conventional non-conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
20.1 |
% |
|
|
17.1 |
% |
Discount rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Government guaranteed mortgage loans |
|
|
13.4 |
% |
|
|
11.8 |
% |
Conventional conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
9.3 |
% |
|
|
9.2 |
% |
Conventional non-conforming mortgage loans |
|
|
13.2 |
% |
|
|
13.1 |
% |
At September 30, 2010, fair values of the Corporations servicing assets were based on a
valuation model that incorporates market driven assumptions, adjusted by the particular
characteristics of the Corporations servicing portfolio, regarding discount rates and mortgage
prepayment rates. The weighted-averages of the key economic assumptions used by the Corporation in
its valuation model and the sensitivity of the current fair value to immediate 10 percent and 20
percent adverse changes in those assumptions for mortgage loans at September 30, 2010, were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
Carrying amount of servicing assets |
|
$ |
13,888 |
|
Fair value |
|
$ |
14,751 |
|
Weighted-average expected life (in years) |
|
|
6.59 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Constant prepayment rate (weighted-average annual rate) |
|
|
15.61 |
% |
Decrease in fair value due to 10% adverse change |
|
$ |
791 |
|
Decrease in fair value due to 20% adverse change |
|
$ |
1,532 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Discount rate (weighted-average annual rate) |
|
|
10.43 |
% |
Decrease in fair value due to 10% adverse change |
|
$ |
525 |
|
Decrease in fair value due to 20% adverse change |
|
$ |
1,014 |
|
These sensitivities are hypothetical and should be used with caution. As the figures
indicate, changes in fair value based on a 10 percent variation in assumptions generally cannot be
extrapolated because the relationship of the change in assumption to the change in fair value may
not be linear. Also, in this table, the effect of a variation in a particular assumption on the
fair value of the servicing asset is calculated without changing any other assumption; in reality,
changes in one factor may result in changes in another (for example, increases in market interest
rates may result in lower prepayments), which may magnify or counteract the sensitivities.
29
11 DEPOSITS
The following table summarizes deposit balances:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Type of account and interest rate: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest bearing checking accounts |
|
$ |
703,836 |
|
|
$ |
697,022 |
|
Savings accounts |
|
|
2,029,369 |
|
|
|
1,761,646 |
|
Interest-bearing checking accounts |
|
|
1,063,193 |
|
|
|
998,097 |
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
|
2,058,678 |
|
|
|
1,650,866 |
|
Brokered certificates of deposit |
|
|
6,688,491 |
|
|
|
7,561,416 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
12,543,567 |
|
|
$ |
12,669,047 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brokered CDs mature as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
One to ninety days |
|
$ |
1,129,639 |
|
Over ninety days to one year |
|
|
2,083,672 |
|
One to three years |
|
|
3,289,085 |
|
Three to five years |
|
|
174,898 |
|
Over five years |
|
|
11,197 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
6,688,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
The following are the components of interest expense on deposits:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Interest expense on deposits |
|
$ |
55,842 |
|
|
$ |
66,876 |
|
|
$ |
174,786 |
|
|
$ |
232,876 |
|
Amortization of broker placement fees |
|
|
5,161 |
|
|
|
5,288 |
|
|
|
15,948 |
|
|
|
17,434 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense on deposits excluding net unrealized loss (gain) on
derivatives and brokered CDs measured at fair value |
|
|
61,003 |
|
|
|
72,164 |
|
|
|
190,734 |
|
|
|
250,310 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized loss (gain) on derivatives and brokered CDs measured at fair value |
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
(1 |
) |
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(3,379 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense on deposits |
|
$ |
61,004 |
|
|
$ |
72,163 |
|
|
$ |
190,736 |
|
|
$ |
246,931 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The interest expense on deposits includes the valuation to market of interest rate swaps
that economically hedged brokered CDs, the related interest exchanged, the amortization of broker
placement fees related to brokered CDs not measured at fair value and changes in fair value of
callable brokered CDs measured at fair value.
Total interest expense on deposits includes net cash settlements on interest rate swaps that
economically hedged brokered CDs and that, for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009,
amounted to net interest realized of $5.5 million. No amount was recognized for the first nine
months of 2010 since all interest rate swaps related to brokered CDs were called in the first half
of 2009.
12 LOANS PAYABLE
Loans payable consisted of short-term borrowings under the FED Discount Window Program. During
the second quarter of 2010, the Corporation repaid the remaining balance under the Discount Window.
As the capital markets recovered from the crisis witnessed in 2009, the FED gradually reversed its
stance back to lender of last resort. Advances from the Discount Window are once again discouraged,
and as such, the Corporation no longer uses FED Advances for regular funding needs.
30
13 SECURITIES SOLD UNDER AGREEMENTS TO REPURCHASE
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase (repurchase agreements) consist of the
following:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Repurchase agreements, interest ranging from 1.23% to 4.51% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2009 0.23% to 5.39%) |
|
$ |
1,400,000 |
|
|
$ |
3,076,631 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Repurchase agreements mature as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Over ninety days to one year |
|
$ |
100,000 |
|
One to three years |
|
|
500,000 |
|
Three to five years |
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
1,400,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, the securities underlying such agreements were
delivered to the dealers with whom the repurchase agreements were transacted.
Repurchase agreements as of September 30, 2010, grouped by counterparty, were as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Weighted-Average |
|
Counterparty |
|
Amount |
|
|
Maturity (In Months) |
|
Credit Suisse First Boston |
|
$ |
400,000 |
|
|
|
33 |
|
Citigroup Global Markets |
|
|
300,000 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
Barclays Capital |
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
23 |
|
Dean Witter / Morgan Stanley |
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
34 |
|
JP Morgan Chase |
|
|
200,000 |
|
|
|
42 |
|
UBS Financial Services, Inc. |
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
1,400,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As part of the Corporations balance sheet repositioning strategies, approximately $1.0
billion of repurchase agreements were early terminated during the third quarter of 2010. The cost
of the unwinding of the repurchase agreements of $47.4 million was offset by a gain of $47.1
million on the sale of approximately $1.2 billion of U.S. agency MBS. The repaid repurchase
agreements were scheduled to mature at various dates between January 2011 and October 2012 and had
a weighted-average cost of 4.30%.
14 ADVANCES FROM THE FEDERAL HOME LOAN BANK (FHLB)
Following is a summary of the advances from the FHLB:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Fixed-rate advances from FHLB, with a weighted-average
interest rate of 3.38% (2009 3.21%) |
|
$ |
835,440 |
|
|
$ |
978,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
31
Advances from FHLB mature as follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Over thirty days to ninety days |
|
$ |
182,000 |
|
Over ninety days to one year |
|
|
244,000 |
|
One to three years |
|
|
356,000 |
|
Three to five years |
|
|
53,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
835,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had additional capacity of approximately $185.9
million on this credit facility based on collateral pledged at the FHLB, including haircuts
reflecting the perceived risk associated with holding the collateral.
15 NOTES PAYABLE
Notes payable consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Callable step-rate notes, bearing step increasing interest
from 5.00% to 7.00% (5.50% as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009)
maturing on October 18, 2019, measured at fair value |
|
$ |
11,053 |
|
|
$ |
13,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) linked principal protected notes: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series A maturing on February 28, 2012 |
|
|
6,600 |
|
|
|
6,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Series B maturing on May 27, 2011 |
|
|
7,404 |
|
|
|
7,214 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
25,057 |
|
|
$ |
27,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
16 OTHER BORROWINGS
Other borrowings consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Junior subordinated debentures due in 2034,
interest-bearing at a floating-rate of 2.75%
over 3-month LIBOR (3.04% as of September 30, 2010
and 3.00% as of December 31, 2009) |
|
$ |
103,093 |
|
|
$ |
103,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Junior subordinated debentures due in 2034,
interest-bearing at a floating-rate of 2.50%
over 3-month LIBOR (2.79% as of September 30, 2010
and 2.75% as of December 31, 2009) |
|
|
128,866 |
|
|
|
128,866 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
231,959 |
|
|
$ |
231,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
32
17 STOCKHOLDERS EQUITY
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had 2,000,000,000 authorized shares of common stock
with a par value of $0.10 per share. As of September 30, 2010 there were 329,455,732 shares issued
and 319,557,932 shares outstanding compared to 102,440,522 shares issued and 92,542,722 shares
outstanding as of December 31, 2009. The increase in common shares is the result of the completion
of the Exchange Offer discussed below. In February 2009, the Corporations Board of Directors
declared a first quarter cash dividend of $0.07 per common share which was paid on March 31, 2009
to common stockholders of record on March 15, 2009 and in May 2009 declared a second quarter
dividend of $0.07 per common share which was paid on June 30, 2009 to common stockholders of record
on June 15, 2009. On July 30, 2009, the Corporation announced the suspension of common and
preferred dividends effective with the preferred dividend for the month of August 2009.
On August 24, 2010, the Corporations stockholders approved an additional increase in the
Corporations common stock to 2 billion, up from 750 million. During the prior quarter, the
Corporations stockholders had already increased the authorized shares of common stock from 250
million to 750 million. The Corporations stockholders also approved on August 24, 2010 a decrease
in the par value of the common stock from $1 per share to $0.10 per share. The decrease in the par
value of the Corporations common stock had no effect on the total dollar value of the
Corporations stockholders equity. For the quarter ended September 30, 2010, the Corporation
transferred $83.3 million from common stock to additional paid-in capital, which is the product of
the number of shares issued and outstanding and the difference between the old par value of $1 and
new par value of $0.10, of $0.90.
Exchange Offer
On August 30, 2010, the Corporation completed its offer to issue shares of its common stock in
exchange for its outstanding Series A through E Preferred Stock, which resulted in the issuance of
227,015,210 new shares of common stock in exchange for 19,482,128 shares of Preferred Stock with an
aggregate liquidation amount of $487 million or 89% of the outstanding Series A through E Preferred
Stock. In accordance with the terms of the Exchange Offer, the Corporation used a relevant price of
$1.18 per share of its common stock and an exchange ratio of 55% of the preferred stock liquidation
value to determine the number of shares of its common stock issued in exchange for the tendered
shares of Series A through E Preferred Stock. The fair value of the common stock was $0.40 per
share, which was the price as of the expiration date of the exchange offer. The carrying
(liquidation) value of the Series A through E Preferred Stock exchanged, or $487.1 million, was
reduced and common stock and additional paid-in capital increased in the amount of the fair value
of the common stock issued. The Corporation recorded the par amount of the shares issued as common
stock ($0.10 per common share) or $22.7 million. The excess of the common stock fair value over the
par amount, or $68.1 million, was recorded in additional paid-in capital. The excess of the carrying
amount of the shares of preferred stock over the fair value of the shares of common stock, or
$385.4 million, was recorded as a reduction to accumulated deficit and an increase in earnings per
common share computation.
The results of the exchange offer with respect to Series A through E Preferred Stock were as
follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liquidation |
|
|
Shares of preferred stock |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Shares of preferred |
|
|
Aggregate liquidation |
|
|
|
|
|
|
preference per |
|
|
outstanding prior to |
|
|
Shares of preferred |
|
|
stock outstanding |
|
|
preference amount after |
|
|
Shares of common stock |
|
Title of Securities |
|
share |
|
|
exchange |
|
|
stock exchanged |
|
|
after exchange |
|
|
exchange (In thousands) |
|
|
issued |
|
7.125% Noncumulative Perpetual Monthly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Preferred Stock, Series A |
|
|
$25 |
|
|
|
3,600,000 |
|
|
|
3,149,805 |
|
|
|
450,195 |
|
|
$ |
11,255 |
|
|
|
36,703,077 |
|
8.35% Noncumulative Perpetual Monthly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Preferred Stock, Series B |
|
|
$25 |
|
|
|
3,000,000 |
|
|
|
2,524,013 |
|
|
|
475,987 |
|
|
|
11,900 |
|
|
|
29,411,043 |
|
7.40% Noncumulative Perpetual Monthly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Preferred Stock, Series C |
|
|
$25 |
|
|
|
4,140,000 |
|
|
|
3,679,389 |
|
|
|
460,611 |
|
|
|
11,515 |
|
|
|
42,873,983 |
|
7.25% Noncumulative Perpetual Monthly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Preferred Stock, Series D |
|
|
$25 |
|
|
|
3,680,000 |
|
|
|
3,169,408 |
|
|
|
510,592 |
|
|
|
12,765 |
|
|
|
36,931,467 |
|
7.00% Noncumulative Perpetual Monthly |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income Preferred Stock, Series E |
|
|
$25 |
|
|
|
7,584,000 |
|
|
|
6,959,513 |
|
|
|
624,487 |
|
|
|
15,612 |
|
|
|
81,095,640 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
22,004,000 |
|
|
|
19,482,128 |
|
|
|
2,521,872 |
|
|
$ |
63,047 |
|
|
|
227,015,210 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dividends declared on the non-convertible non-cumulative preferred stock for the first
nine months of 2009 amounted to $20.1 million; consistent with the Corporations announcement in
July 2009, no dividends have been declared for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010. The
Corporation is currently in the process of voluntarily delisting the remaining Series A through E
preferred Stock from the New York Stock Exchange.
Exchange Agreement with the U.S. Treasury
On July 20, 2010, the Corporation closed a transaction with the U.S. Treasury for the exchange
of all 400,000 shares of the Corporations Series F Preferred Stock, beneficially owned and held by
the U.S. Treasury, for 424,174 shares of a new series of preferred stock, Series G Preferred Stock,
with a liquidation preference of $1,000 per share. The Series G Preferred Stock is mandatorily
convertible into approximately 380.2 million shares of the Corporations common stock, based upon
the initial conversion
price, by the Corporation upon the satisfaction of certain conditions and by the U.S. Treasury and
any subsequent holder at any time and,
33
unless earlier converted, is automatically convertible into
common stock on the seventh anniversary of issuance. As mentioned above, on August, 24, 2010, the
Corporation obtained its stockholders approval to increase the number of authorized shares of
common stock from 750 million to 2 billion and decrease the par value of its common stock from
$1.00 to $0.10 per share. These approvals and the issuance of common stock in exchange for Series A
through E Preferred Stock satisfy all but one of the substantive conditions to the Corporations
ability to compel the conversion of the 424,174 shares of the new series of Series G Preferred
Stock, issued to the U.S. Treasury. The other substantive condition to the Corporations ability to
compel the conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock is the issuance of a minimum aggregate amount
of $500 million of additional capital, subject to terms, other than the price per share, reasonably
acceptable to the U.S. Treasury in its sole discretion. On September 16, 2010, the Corporation
filed a registration statement for a proposed underwritten public offering of $500 million ($575
million including an over allotment option) of its common stock with the SEC. The Corporation
will effect a reverse stock split, if necessary, in the range of between one new share of
common stock for 10 old shares of common stock and one new share of common stock for 20 old shares
of common stock, which is the range that stockholders approved at the Special Meeting of
Stockholders on August 24, 2010.
The Corporation accounted for this transaction as an extinguishment of the previously issued
Series F Preferred Stock. As a result, the Corporation recorded $424.2 million of the new Series G
Preferred Stock, net of a $76.8 million discount and derecognized the carrying value of the Series
F Preferred Stock. The excess of the carrying amount of the Series F Preferred Stock over the fair
value of the Series G Preferred Stock, or $33.6 million was recorded as a reduction to accumulated
deficit.
The valuation of the
Series G Preferred Stock considered the following characteristics of the security, the base preferred stock component, which
consists of quarterly dividends plus the principal repayment, a long call option which gives the
U.S. Treasury the ability to convert the preferred stock to common stock at any time through July
20, 2017, and a short put option that provides the Corporation the ability to compel conversion,
provided certain conditions described above are met, at any time within the nine month period from
issue date through April 20, 2011.
The value of the base preferred stock component was determined using a discounted cash flow method.
The cash flows, which consist of the sum of the discounted quarterly dividends plus the principal
repayment, were discounted considering the Corporations credit rating. The short and long call
options were valued using a Cox-Rubinstein binomial option pricing model-based methodology. The
valuation methodology considered the likelihood of option conversions under different scenarios,
and the valuation interactions of the various components under each scenario.
Like the Series F Preferred Stock, the Series G Preferred Stock, qualifies as Tier 1
regulatory capital. Cumulative dividends on the Series G Preferred Stock accrue on the liquidation
preference amount on a quarterly basis at a rate of 5% per annum for the first five years, and
thereafter at a rate of 9% per annum, but will only be paid when, as and if declared by the
Corporations Board of Directors out of assets legally available therefore. The Series G Preferred
Stock ranks pari passu with the Corporations existing Series A through E, in terms of dividend
payments and distributions upon liquidation, dissolution and winding up of the Corporation. The
Exchange Agreement relating to this issuance contains limitations on the payment of dividends on
common stock, including limiting regular quarterly cash dividends to an amount not exceeding the
last quarterly cash dividend paid per share, or the amount publicly announced (if lower), of common
stock prior to October 14, 2008, which is $0.07 per share.
Additionally, the Corporation issued an amended 10-year warrant (the Warrant) to the U.S.
Treasury to purchase 5,842,259 shares of the Corporations common stock at an initial exercise
price of $0.7252 per share instead of the exercise price on the original warrant of $10.27 per
share. The Warrant has a 10-year term and is exercisable at any time. The exercise price and the
number of shares issuable upon exercise of the Warrant are subject to certain anti-dilution
adjustments. The Corporation evaluated the fair market value of the new warrant and recognized a
$1.2 million increase in value due to the difference between the fair market value of the new and
the old warrant as an increase to additional paid-in capital and an increase to the accumulated
deficit. The warrant value was calculated using the Cox-Rubinstein
binomial option pricing model-based methodology.
The possible future issuance of equity securities through the exercise of the Warrant could
affect the Corporations current stockholders in a number of ways, including by:
|
|
|
diluting the voting power of the current holders of common stock (the shares underlying the
warrant represent approximately 2% of the Corporations shares of common stock as of
September 30, 2010); |
|
|
|
|
diluting the earnings per share and book value per share of the outstanding shares of
common stock; and |
|
|
|
|
making the payment of dividends on common stock more expensive. |
As mentioned above, on July 30, 2009, the Corporation announced the suspension of dividends
for common and all its outstanding series of preferred stock. This suspension was effective with
the dividends for the month of August 2009, on the Corporations five outstanding series of
non-cumulative preferred stock and dividends for the Corporations then outstanding Series F
Preferred Stock and the Corporations common stock. Prior to any resumption of the payment of
dividends on or repurchases of any of the remaining outstanding noncumulative preferred stock or
common stock, the Corporation must comply with the terms of the Series G Preferred Stock. In
addition, prior to the repurchase of any stock for cash, the Corporation must obtain the consent of
the U.S. Treasury under certain circumstances.
Stock repurchase plan and treasury stock
The Corporation has a stock repurchase program under which from time to time it repurchases
shares of common stock in the open market and holds them as treasury stock. No shares of common
stock were repurchased during 2010 and 2009 by the Corporation. As of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009, of the total amount of common stock repurchased in prior years, 9,897,800 shares
were held as treasury stock and were available for general corporate purposes.
34
18 REGULATORY MATTERS
Effective June 2, 2010, FirstBank, by and through its Board of Directors, entered into the
Order with the FDIC and the Office of the Commissioner of Financial Institutions of Puerto Rico, a
copy of which is attached as Exhibit 10.1 of the Form 8-K filed by the Corporation on June 4, 2010.
This Order provides for various things, including (among other things) the following: (1) within 30
days of entering into the Order, the development by FirstBank of a capital plan to achieve over
time a leverage ratio of at least 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 10% and a total
risk-based capital ratio of at least 12%, (2) the preparation by FirstBank of strategic, liquidity
and earnings plans and related projections within certain timetables set forth in the Order and on
an ongoing basis, (3) the preparation by FirstBank of plans for reducing criticized assets and
delinquent loans within timeframes set forth in the Order, (4) the requirement for First Bank board
approval prior to the extension of credit to classified borrowers, (5) certain limitations with
respect to brokered deposits, including the need for pre-approval by the FDIC of the issuance of
brokered deposits (6) the establishment by FirstBank of a comprehensive policy and methodology for
determining the allowance for loan and lease losses and the review and revision of loan policies,
including the non-accrual policy, and (7) the operation by FirstBank under adequate and effective
programs of independent loan review and appraisal compliance and under an effective policy for
managing sensitivity to interest rate risk. The foregoing summary is not complete and is qualified
in all respects by reference to the actual language of the Order. Although all the regulatory
capital ratios exceeded the established well capitalized levels at September 30, 2010, because of
the Order with the FDIC, FirstBank cannot be treated as well capitalized institution under
regulatory guidance.
Effective June 3, 2010, First BanCorp entered into the Written Agreement with the FED, a copy
of which is attached as Exhibit 10.2 of the Form 8-K filed by the Corporation on June 4, 2010. The
Agreement provides, among other things, that the holding company must serve as a source of strength
to FirstBank, and that, except upon consent of the FED, (1) the holding company may not pay dividends
to stockholders or receive dividends from FirstBank, (2) the holding company and its nonbank
subsidiaries may not make payments on trust preferred securities or subordinated debt, and (3) the
holding company cannot incur, increase or guarantee debt or repurchase any capital securities. The
Agreement also requires that the holding company submit a capital plan which reflects sufficient
capital at First BanCorp on a consolidated basis, which must be acceptable to the FED, and follow certain guidelines with respect to
the appointment or change in responsibilities of senior officers. The foregoing summary is not
complete and is qualified in all respects by reference to the actual language of the Written
Agreement.
The Corporation submitted its capital plan setting forth how it plans to improve capital
positions to comply with the above mentioned Agreements over time. The primary objective of this
Capital Plan is to improve the Corporations capital structure in order to (1) enhance its ability
to operate in the current economic environment, (2) be in a position to continue executing business
strategies to return to profitability and (3) achieve certain minimum capital ratios over time.
Specifically, the capital plan details how the Bank will attempt to achieve a total capital to
risk-weighted assets ratio of at least 12%, a Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets ratio of at
least 10% and a leverage ratio of at least 8%. The Capital Plan sets forth the following capital
restructuring initiatives as well as various deleveraging strategies: (1) the exchange of shares of
the Corporations preferred stock held by the U.S. Treasury for common stock; (2) the exchange of
shares of the Corporations common stock for any and all of the Corporations outstanding Series A
through E Preferred Stock; and (3) a $500 million capital raise through the issuance of new common
shares for cash. As discussed in Note 1, the Corporation has completed the transactions designed to
accomplish the first two initiatives, including the exchange of 89% of the outstanding Series A
through E Preferred Stock
and the conversion of the preferred stock held by the U.S. Treasury into a new series of preferred stock that are mandatorily convertible into shares of common stock.
In addition to the capital plan, the Corporation has submitted to its regulators a liquidity
and brokered deposit plan, including a contingency funding plan, a non-performing asset reduction
plan, a budget and profit plan, a strategic plan and a plan for the reduction of classified and
special mention assets. Further, the Corporation have reviewed and enhanced the Corporations loan
review program, various credit policies, the Corporations treasury and investments policy, the
Corporations asset classification and allowance for loan and lease losses and non-accrual
policies, the Corporations charge-off policy and the Corporations appraisal program. The
Agreements also require the submission to the regulators of quarterly progress reports.
The Order imposes no other restrictions on the FirstBanks products or services offered to
customers, nor do they impose any type of penalties or fines upon FirstBank or the Corporation.
Concurrent with the Order, the FDIC has granted FirstBank temporary waivers to enable it to
continue accessing the brokered deposit market through December 31, 2010. FirstBank will request
approvals for future periods.
35
19 INCOME TAXES
Income tax expense includes Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands income taxes as well as applicable
U.S. federal and state taxes. The Corporation is subject to Puerto Rico income tax on its income
from all sources. As a Puerto Rico corporation, First BanCorp is treated as a foreign corporation
for U.S. income tax purposes and is generally subject to United States income tax only on its
income from sources within the United States or income effectively connected with the conduct of a
trade or business within the United States. Any such tax paid is creditable, within certain
conditions and limitations, against the Corporations Puerto Rico tax liability. The Corporation is
also subject to U.S.Virgin Islands taxes on its income from sources within that jurisdiction. Any
such tax paid is also creditable against the Corporations Puerto Rico tax liability, subject to
certain conditions and limitations.
Under the Puerto Rico Internal Revenue Code of 1994, as amended (the PR Code), the
Corporation and its subsidiaries are treated as separate taxable entities and are not entitled to
file consolidated tax returns and, thus, the Corporation is not able to utilize losses from one
subsidiary to offset gains in another subsidiary. Accordingly, in order to obtain a tax benefit
from a net operating loss, a particular subsidiary must be able to demonstrate sufficient taxable
income within the applicable carry forward period (7 years under the PR Code). The PR Code provides
a dividend received deduction of 100% on dividends received from controlled subsidiaries subject
to taxation in Puerto Rico and 85% on dividends received from other taxable domestic corporations.
Dividend payments from a U.S. subsidiary to the Corporation are subject to a 10% withholding tax
based on the provisions of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code. Under the PR Code, First BanCorp is
subject to a maximum statutory tax rate of 39%. In 2009, the Puerto Rico Government approved Act
No. 7 (the Act), to stimulate Puerto Ricos economy and to reduce the Puerto Rico Governments
fiscal deficit. The Act imposes a series of temporary and permanent measures, including the
imposition of a 5% surtax over the total income tax determined, which is applicable to
corporations, among others, whose combined income exceeds $100,000, effectively resulting in an
increase in the maximum statutory tax rate from 39% to 40.95% and an increase in the capital gain
statutory tax rate from 15% to 15.75%. This temporary measure is effective for tax years that
commenced after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2012. The PR Code also includes an
alternative minimum tax of 22% that applies if the Corporations regular income tax liability is
less than the alternative minimum tax requirements.
The Corporation has maintained an effective tax rate lower than the maximum statutory rate
mainly by investing in government obligations and mortgage-backed securities exempt from U.S. and
Puerto Rico income taxes and by doing business through an International Banking Entities (IBE) of
the Bank and through the Banks subsidiary, FirstBank Overseas Corporation, in which the interest
income and gain on sales is exempt from Puerto Rico and U.S. income taxation. Under the Act, all
IBEs are subject to the special 5% tax on their net income not otherwise subject to tax pursuant to
the PR Code. This temporary measure is also effective for tax years that commenced after December
31, 2008 and before January 1, 2012. The IBE and FirstBank Overseas Corporation were created under
the International Banking Entity Act of Puerto Rico, which provides for total Puerto Rico tax
exemption on net income derived by IBEs operating in Puerto Rico. IBEs that operate as a unit of a
bank pay income taxes at normal rates to the extent that the IBEs net income exceeds 20% of the
banks total net taxable income.
For the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, the Corporation recognized an
income tax benefit of $1.0 million and an income tax expense of $9.7 million, respectively,
compared to income tax expense of $113.5 million and $1.2 million recorded for the same periods
in 2009. The variance in income tax expense mainly resulted from the impact in the third quarter of
2009 of a non-cash charge of approximately $152.2 million to increase the valuation allowance for
the Corporations deferred tax asset. The income tax benefit recorded for the third quarter of
2010 was mainly related to the operations of FirstBank Overseas, which had a pre-tax loss of $30.5
million during the third quarter, driven by its share of the loss on the early extinguishment of
repurchase agreements. This entity was profitable for the nine-month period ended September 30,
2010. Meanwhile, the income tax expense for the first nine months of 2010 is related to the
operations of profitable subsidiaries.
As of September 30, 2010, the deferred tax asset, net of a valuation allowance of $290.5
million, amounted to $101.2 million compared to $109.2 million as of December 31, 2009. The
decrease was associated with a $3.5 million increase in the valuation allowance related to deferred
tax assets created prior to 2010 and the creation of deferred tax liabilities in connection with
unrealized gains on available for sale securities; the unrealized gains on available-for-sale
securities were recorded as part of other comprehensive income.
Accounting for income taxes requires that companies assess whether a valuation allowance
should be recorded against their deferred tax assets based on the consideration of all available
evidence, using a more likely than not realization standard. Valuation allowances are
established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than
not to be realized. In making such assessment, significant weight is to be given to evidence that
can be objectively verified, including both positive and negative evidence. The accounting for
income taxes guidance requires the consideration of all sources of taxable income available to
realize the deferred tax asset, including the future reversal of existing temporary differences,
future taxable income exclusive of the reversal of temporary differences and carryforwards, taxable
income in carryback years and tax planning strategies. In estimating taxes, management assesses
the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of transactions taking into account
statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance, and recognizes tax benefits only when deemed probable.
36
In assessing the weight of positive and negative evidence, a significant negative factor that
resulted in increases of the valuation allowance was that the Corporations banking subsidiary
FirstBank Puerto Rico continues in a three-year historical cumulative loss position as of the end
of the third quarter of 2010, mainly as a result of charges to the provision for loan and lease
losses, especially in the construction loan portfolio in both, Puerto Rico and Florida markets, as
a result of the economic downturn. As of September 30, 2010, management concluded that $101.2
million of the deferred tax assets will be realized. In assessing the likelihood of realizing the
deferred tax assets, management has considered all four sources of taxable income mentioned above
and, even though the Corporation expects to be profitable in the near future and be able to realize
the deferred tax asset, given current uncertain economic conditions, the Corporation has only
relied on tax-planning strategies as the main source of taxable income to realize the deferred tax
asset amount. Among the most significant tax-planning strategies identified are: (i) sale of
appreciated assets, (ii) consolidation of profitable and unprofitable companies (in Puerto Rico
each company files a separate tax return; no consolidated tax returns are permitted), and (iii)
deferral of deductions without affecting their utilization. In line with these strategies,
effective July 1, 2010 the operations conducted by First Leasing and Grupo Empresas de Servicios
Financieros (PR Finance) as separate subsidiaries were merged with and into FirstBank. Management
will continue monitoring the likelihood of realizing the deferred tax assets in future periods. If
future events differ from managements September 30, 2010 assessment, an additional valuation
allowance may need to be established, which may have a material adverse effect on the Corporations
results of operations. Similarly, to the extent the realization of a portion, or all, of the tax
asset becomes more likely than not based on changes in circumstances (such as, improved earnings,
changes in tax laws or other relevant changes), a reversal of that portion of the deferred tax
asset valuation allowance will then be recorded.
The increase in the valuation allowance does not have any impact on the Corporations
liquidity, nor does such an allowance preclude the Corporation from using tax losses, tax credits
or other deferred tax assets in the future.
FASB guidance prescribes a comprehensive model for the financial statement recognition,
measurement, presentation and disclosure of income tax uncertainties with respect to positions
taken or expected to be taken on income tax returns. Under the authoritative accounting guidance,
income tax benefits are recognized and measured based upon a two-step model: 1) a tax position must
be more likely than not to be sustained based solely on its technical merits in order to be
recognized, and 2) the benefit is measured as the largest dollar amount of that position that is
more likely than not to be sustained upon settlement. The difference between the benefit recognized
in accordance with this model and the tax benefit claimed on a tax return is referred to as unrecognized tax benefits (UTB).
During the second quarter of 2009, the Corporation reversed UTBs of $10.8 million and related
accrued interest of $3.5 million due to the lapse of the statute of limitations for the 2004
taxable year. Also, in July 2009, the Corporation entered into an agreement with the Puerto Rico
Department of the Treasury to conclude an income tax audit and to eliminate all possible income and
withholding tax deficiencies related to taxable years 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008. As a result of
such agreement, the Corporation reversed during the third quarter of 2009 the remaining UTBs and
related interest by approximately $2.9 million, net of the payment made to the Puerto Rico
Department of the Treasury in connection with the conclusion of the tax audit. There were no UTBs
outstanding as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
The Corporation classified all interest and penalties, if any, related to tax uncertainties as
income tax expense. For the first nine months of 2009, the total amount of accrued interest
reversed by the Corporation through income tax expense was $6.8 million. The amount of UTBs may
increase or decrease for various reasons, including changes in the amounts for current tax year
positions, the expiration of open income tax returns due to the expiration of statutes of
limitations, changes in managements judgment about the level of uncertainty, the status of
examinations, litigation and legislative activity and the addition or elimination of uncertain tax
positions.
20 FAIR VALUE
Fair Value Option
Medium-Term Notes
The Corporation elected the fair value option for certain medium term notes that were hedged
with interest rate swaps that were previously designated for fair value hedge accounting. As of
September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, these medium-term notes had a fair value of $11.1 million
and $13.4 million, respectively, and principal balance of $15.4 million recorded in notes payable.
Interest paid/accrued on these instruments is recorded as part of interest expense and the accrued
interest is part of the fair value of the notes. Electing the fair value option allows the
Corporation to eliminate the burden of complying with the requirements for hedge accounting (e.g.,
documentation and effectiveness assessment) without introducing earnings volatility.
Medium-term notes for which the Corporation elected the fair value option were priced using
observable market data in the institutional markets.
37
Callable brokered CDs
In the past, the Corporation also measured at fair value callable brokered CDs. All of the
brokered CDs measured at fair value were called during 2009.
Fair Value Measurement
The FASB authoritative guidance for fair value measurement defines fair value as the exchange
price that would be received for an asset or paid to transfer a liability (an exit price) in the
principal or most advantageous market for the asset or liability in an orderly transaction between
market participants on the measurement date. This guidance also establishes a fair value hierarchy
which requires an entity to maximize the use of observable inputs and minimize the use of
unobservable inputs when measuring fair value. Three levels of inputs may be used to measure fair
value:
Level 1- Valuations of Level 1 assets and liabilities are obtained from readily available
pricing sources for market transactions involving identical assets or liabilities. Level 1
assets and liabilities include equity securities that are traded in an active exchange
market, as well as certain U.S. Treasury and other U.S. government and agency securities and
corporate debt securities that are traded by dealers or brokers in active markets.
Level 2- Valuations of Level 2 assets and liabilities are based on observable inputs other
than Level 1 prices, such as quoted prices for similar assets or liabilities, or other inputs
that are observable or can be corroborated by observable market data for substantially the
full term of the assets or liabilities. Level 2 assets and liabilities include (i)
mortgage-backed securities for which the fair value is estimated based on the value of
identical or comparable assets, (ii) debt securities with quoted prices that are traded less
frequently than exchange-traded instruments and (iii) derivative contracts and financial
liabilities (e.g., medium-term notes elected to be measured at fair value) whose value is
determined using a pricing model with inputs that are observable in the market or can be
derived principally from or corroborated by observable market data.
Level 3- Valuations of Level 3 assets and liabilities are based on unobservable inputs that
are supported by little or no market activity and that are significant to the fair value of
the assets or liabilities. Level 3 assets and liabilities include financial instruments whose
value is determined using pricing models for which the determination of fair value requires
significant management judgment or estimation.
For the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, there have been no transfers
into or out of Level 1 and Level 2 measurements of the fair value hierarchy.
Estimated Fair Value of Financial Instruments
The information about the estimated fair value of financial instruments required by GAAP is
presented hereunder. The aggregate fair value amounts presented do not necessarily represent
managements estimate of the underlying value of the Corporation.
The estimated fair value is subjective in nature and involves uncertainties and matters of
significant judgment and, therefore, cannot be determined with precision. Changes in the underlying
assumptions used in calculating fair value could significantly affect the results. In addition, the
fair value estimates are based on outstanding balances without attempting to estimate the value of
anticipated future business.
38
The following table presents the estimated fair value and carrying value of financial
instruments as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Carrying |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Carrying |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amount in |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Statement of |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Financial |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
Financial |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
|
|
Condition |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
Condition |
|
|
Estimated |
|
|
|
9/30/2010 |
|
|
9/30/2010 |
|
|
12/31/2009 |
|
|
12/31/2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks and money
market investments |
|
$ |
904,626 |
|
|
$ |
904,626 |
|
|
$ |
704,084 |
|
|
$ |
704,084 |
|
Investment securities available
for sale |
|
|
2,976,180 |
|
|
|
2,976,180 |
|
|
|
4,170,782 |
|
|
|
4,170,782 |
|
Investment securities held to maturity |
|
|
489,967 |
|
|
|
513,569 |
|
|
|
601,619 |
|
|
|
621,584 |
|
Other equity securities |
|
|
64,310 |
|
|
|
64,310 |
|
|
|
69,930 |
|
|
|
69,930 |
|
Loans receivable, including loans
held for sale |
|
|
12,189,222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,949,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
Less: allowance for loan and
lease losses |
|
|
(608,526 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(528,120 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans, net of allowance |
|
|
11,580,696 |
|
|
|
11,104,113 |
|
|
|
13,421,106 |
|
|
|
12,811,010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivatives, included in assets |
|
|
1,537 |
|
|
|
1,537 |
|
|
|
5,936 |
|
|
|
5,936 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Deposits |
|
|
12,543,567 |
|
|
|
12,720,872 |
|
|
|
12,669,047 |
|
|
|
12,801,811 |
|
Loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
900,000 |
|
|
|
900,000 |
|
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
1,400,000 |
|
|
|
1,537,030 |
|
|
|
3,076,631 |
|
|
|
3,242,110 |
|
Advances from FHLB |
|
|
835,440 |
|
|
|
872,852 |
|
|
|
978,440 |
|
|
|
1,025,605 |
|
Notes Payable |
|
|
25,057 |
|
|
|
23,567 |
|
|
|
27,117 |
|
|
|
25,716 |
|
Other borrowings |
|
|
231,959 |
|
|
|
63,587 |
|
|
|
231,959 |
|
|
|
80,267 |
|
Derivatives, included in liabilities |
|
|
7,211 |
|
|
|
7,211 |
|
|
|
6,467 |
|
|
|
6,467 |
|
Assets and liabilities measured at fair value on a recurring basis, including financial
liabilities for which the Corporation has elected the fair value option, are summarized below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
Fair Value Measurements Using |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets / Liabilities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Assets / Liabilities |
(In thousands) |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
at Fair Value |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
at Fair Value |
Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities available for sale : |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity securities |
|
$ |
71 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
71 |
|
|
$ |
303 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
303 |
|
U.S. Treasury Securities |
|
|
611,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
611,940 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-callable U.S. agency debt |
|
|
305,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
305,204 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Callable U.S. agency debt and MBS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,745,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,745,085 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,949,799 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,949,799 |
|
Puerto Rico Government Obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
233,850 |
|
|
|
2,630 |
|
|
|
236,480 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,326 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
136,326 |
|
Private label MBS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
77,400 |
|
|
|
77,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
84,354 |
|
|
|
84,354 |
|
Derivatives, included in assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
319 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
319 |
|
Purchased interest rate cap agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
224 |
|
|
|
4,199 |
|
|
|
4,423 |
|
Purchased options used to manage exposure to the
stock market on embeded stock indexed options |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,109 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,194 |
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Medium-term notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,053 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,361 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
13,361 |
|
Derivatives, included in liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swap agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
6,171 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,068 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,068 |
|
Written interest rate cap agreements |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
201 |
|
Embedded written options on stock index
deposits and notes payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,039 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,198 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,198 |
|
39
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value for the Quarter Ended September 30, 2010, for |
|
|
Changes in Fair Value for the Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
items Measured at Fair Value Pursuant to Election of the Fair Value |
|
|
September 30, 2010, for items Measured at Fair Value Pursuant |
|
|
|
Option |
|
|
to Election of the Fair Value Option |
|
|
|
Unrealized Losses and Interest Expense |
|
|
Unrealized Gains and Interest Expense |
|
(In thousands) |
|
included in Current-Period Earnings (1) |
|
|
included in Current-Period Earnings (1) |
|
Medium-term notes |
|
$ |
(762 |
) |
|
$ |
1,670 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(762 |
) |
|
$ |
1,670 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Changes in fair value for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 include
interest expense on medium-term notes of $0.2 million and $0.6 million, respectively. Interest
expense on medium-term notes that have been elected to be carried at fair value are recorded in
interest expense in the Consolidated Statement of (Loss) Income based on their contractual coupons. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value for the Quarter Ended |
|
|
Changes in Fair Value for the Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, 2009, for items Measured at Fair Value Pursuant |
|
|
September 30, 2009, for items Measured at Fair Value Pursuant |
|
|
|
to Election of the Fair Value Option |
|
|
to Election of the Fair Value Option |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Fair Value |
|
|
|
Unrealized Losses and |
|
|
Unrealized Losses and |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
Unrealized Gains and |
|
|
Unrealized Losses and |
|
|
Unrealized Losses |
|
|
|
Interest Expense included |
|
|
Interest Expense included |
|
|
and Interest Expense |
|
|
Interest Expense included |
|
|
Interest Expense included |
|
|
and Interest Expense |
|
|
|
in Interest Expense |
|
|
in Interest Expense |
|
|
included in |
|
|
in Interest Expense |
|
|
in Interest Expense |
|
|
included in |
|
(In thousands) |
|
on Deposits (1) |
|
|
on Notes Payable (1) |
|
|
Current-Period Earnings (1) |
|
|
on Deposits (1) |
|
|
on Notes Payable (1) |
|
|
Current-Period Earnings (1) |
|
Callable brokered CDs |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(2,068 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(2,068 |
) |
Medium-term notes |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,788 |
) |
|
|
(1,788 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,637 |
) |
|
|
(3,637 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
(1,788 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,788 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,068 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,637 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,705 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Changes in fair value for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009 include interest
expense on callable brokered CDs of $10.8 million and interest expense on medium-term notes of $0.2
million and $0.6 million for the quarter and first nine months of 2009, respectively. Interest
expense on callable brokered CDs and medium term notes that have been elected to be carried at fair
value are recorded in interest expense in the Consolidated Statement of Income based on their
contractual coupons. |
The table below presents a reconciliation for all assets and liabilities measured at fair
value on a recurring basis using significant unobservable inputs (Level 3) for the quarter and
nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
Total Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
(Quarter Ended September 30, 2010) |
|
|
(Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, 2010) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Available For |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Instruments Only |
|
Derivatives (1) |
|
|
Sale (2) |
|
|
Derivatives (1) |
|
|
Securities Available For Sale (2) |
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
83,442 |
|
|
$ |
4,199 |
|
|
$ |
84,354 |
|
|
Total gains or (losses) (realized / unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,152 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Included in other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,090 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
5,060 |
|
Purchases |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,584 |
|
Principal repayments and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,502 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(11,968 |
) |
Other (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(3,047 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
80,030 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
80,030 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts related to the valuation of interest rate cap agreements. The counterparty to these
interest rate cap agreements failed on April 30, 2010 and was acquired by another financial
institution through an FDIC assisted transaction. The Corporation currently has a claim with the
FDIC. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts mostly related to certain private label mortgage-backed securities. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
Total Fair Value Measurements |
|
|
|
(Quarter Ended September 30, 2009) |
|
|
(Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, 2009) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Available For |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Level 3 Instruments Only |
|
Derivatives (1) |
|
|
Sale (2) |
|
|
Derivatives (1) |
|
|
Securities Available For Sale (2) |
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning balance |
|
$ |
3,514 |
|
|
$ |
96,568 |
|
|
$ |
760 |
|
|
$ |
113,983 |
|
|
Total gains or (losses) (realized / unrealized): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Included in earnings |
|
|
(1,047 |
) |
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
1,707 |
|
|
|
(1,270 |
) |
Included in other comprehensive income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,580 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
336 |
|
Principal repayments and amortization |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(5,853 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(20,963 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending balance |
|
$ |
2,467 |
|
|
$ |
92,086 |
|
|
$ |
2,467 |
|
|
$ |
92,086 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Amounts related to the valuation of interest rate cap agreements. |
|
(2) |
|
Amounts mostly related to certain private label mortgage-backed securities. |
40
The table below summarizes changes in unrealized gains and losses recorded in earnings
for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2009 for Level 3 assets and liabilities
that are still held at the end of such periods.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Changes in Unrealized |
|
|
Changes in Unrealized |
|
|
|
Losses |
|
|
Gains (Losses) |
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
Level 3 Instruments Only |
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Available For |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Securities Available For |
|
(In thousands) |
|
Derivatives |
|
|
Sale |
|
|
Derivatives |
|
|
Sale |
|
Changes in unrealized gains (losses) relating to assets still held at
reporting date (1) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income on loans |
|
$ |
(19 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
29 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
Interest income on investment securities |
|
|
(1,028 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
Net impairment losses on investment securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
(1,047 |
) |
|
$ |
(209 |
) |
|
$ |
1,707 |
|
|
$ |
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Unrealized gains of $1.6 million and $0.3 million on Level 3 available-for-sale securities was
recognized as part of comprehensive income for the quarter and nine-month period ended September
30, 2009. |
Additionally, fair value is used on a non-recurring basis to evaluate certain assets in
accordance with GAAP. Adjustments to fair value usually result from the application of
lower-of-cost-or-market accounting (e.g., loans held for sale carried at the lower of cost or fair
value and repossessed assets) or write-downs of individual assets (e.g., goodwill, loans).
As of September 30, 2010, impairment or valuation adjustments were recorded for assets
recognized at fair value on a non-recurring basis as shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses recorded for |
|
Losses recorded for |
|
|
Carrying value as of September 30, 2010 |
|
the Quarter Ended |
|
the Nine-month period |
(In thousands) |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
ended September 30, 2010 |
Loans receivable (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1,512,091 |
|
|
$ |
87,092 |
|
|
$ |
387,536 |
|
Other Real Estate Owned (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
82,706 |
|
|
|
5,880 |
|
|
|
13,144 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mainly impaired commercial and construction loans. The impairment was generally measured based
on the fair value of the collateral. The fair values are derived from appraisals that take into
consideration prices in observed transactions involving similar assets in similar locations but
adjusted for specific characteristics and assumptions of the collateral (e.g. absorption rates),
which are not market observable. |
|
(2) |
|
The fair value is derived from appraisals that take into consideration prices in observed
transactions involving similar assets in similar locations but adjusted for specific
characteristics and assumptions of the properties (e.g. absorption rates), which are not
market observable. Losses are related to market valuation adjustments after the transfer of the
loans to the Other Real Estate Owned (OREO) portfolio. |
As of September 30, 2009, impairment or valuation adjustments were recorded for assets
recognized at fair value on a non-recurring basis as shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Losses recorded for |
|
Losses recorded for |
|
|
Carrying value as of September 30, 2009 |
|
the Quarter Ended |
|
the Nine-month period |
(In thousands) |
|
Level 1 |
|
Level 2 |
|
Level 3 |
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
ended September 30, 2009 |
Loans receivable (1) |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
994,441 |
|
|
$ |
72,077 |
|
|
$ |
202,645 |
|
Other Real Estate Owned (2) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
67,493 |
|
|
|
3,099 |
|
|
|
8,260 |
|
Core deposit intangible (3) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
7,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,988 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mainly impaired commercial and construction loans. The impairment was generally measured based
on the fair value of the collateral. The fair values are derived from appraisals that take into
consideration prices in observed transactions involving similar assets in similar locations but
adjusted for specific characteristics and assumptions of the collateral (e.g. absorption rates),
which are not market observable. |
|
(2) |
|
The fair value is derived from appraisals that take into consideration prices in observed
transactions involving similar assets in similar locations but adjusted for specific
characteristics and assumptions of the properties (e.g. absorption rates), which are not
market observable. Losses are related to market valuation adjustments after the transfer
of the loans to the OREO portfolio. |
|
(3) |
|
Amount represents core deposit intangible of FirstBank Florida. The impairment
was generally measured based on internal information about decreases in the base of
core deposits acquired upon the acquisition of FirstBank Florida. |
The following is a description of the valuation methodologies used for instruments for
which an estimated fair value is presented as well as for instruments for which the Corporation has
elected the fair value option. The estimated fair value was calculated using certain facts and
assumptions, which vary depending on the specific financial instrument.
41
Cash and due from banks and money market investments
The carrying amounts of cash and due from banks and money market investments are reasonable
estimates of their fair value. Money market investments include held-to-maturity U.S. Government
obligations, which have a contractual maturity of three months or less. The fair value of these
securities is based on quoted market prices in active markets that incorporate the risk of
nonperformance.
Investment securities available for sale and held to maturity
The fair value of investment securities is the market value based on quoted market prices (as
is the case with equity securities, U.S. Treasury notes and non-callable U.S. Agency debt
securities), when available, or market prices for identical or comparable assets (as is the case
with MBS and callable U.S. agency debt) that are based on observable market parameters including
benchmark yields, reported trades, quotes from brokers or dealers, issuer spreads, bids, offers and
reference data including market research operations. Observable prices in the market already
consider the risk of nonperformance. If listed prices or quotes are not available, fair value is
based upon models that use unobservable inputs due to the limited market activity of the
instrument, as is the case with certain private label mortgage-backed securities held by the
Corporation.
Private label MBS are collateralized by fixed-rate mortgages on single-family residential
properties in the United States; the interest rate on the securities is variable, tied to 3-month
LIBOR and limited to the weighted-average coupon of the underlying collateral. The market valuation
represents the estimated net cash flows over the projected life of the pool of underlying assets
applying a discount rate that reflects market observed floating spreads over LIBOR, with a widening
spread bias on a nonrated security. The market valuation is derived from a model that utilizes
relevant assumptions such as prepayment rate, default rate, and loss severity on a loan level
basis. The Corporation modeled the cash flow from the fixed-rate mortgage collateral using a static
cash flow analysis according to collateral attributes of the underlying mortgage pool (i.e. loan
term, current balance, note rate, rate adjustment type, rate adjustment frequency, rate caps,
others) in combination with prepayment forecasts obtained from a commercially available prepayment
model (ADCO). The variable cash flow of the security is modeled using the 3-month LIBOR forward
curve. Loss assumptions were driven by the combination of default and loss severity estimates,
taking into account loan credit characteristics (loan-to-value, state, origination date, property
type, occupancy loan purpose, documentation type, debt-to-income ratio, other) to provide an
estimate of default and loss severity. Refer to Note 4 Investment securities for additional
information about assumptions used in the valuation of private label MBS.
Other equity securities
Equity or other securities that do not have a readily available fair value are stated at the
net realizable value, which management believes is a reasonable proxy for their fair value. This
category is principally composed of FHLB stock that is owned by the Corporation to comply with FHLB
regulatory requirements. Their realizable value equals their cost as these shares can be freely
redeemed at par.
Loans receivable, including loans held for sale
The fair value of all loans was estimated using discounted cash flow analyses, based on
interest rates currently being offered for loans with similar terms and credit quality and with
adjustments that the Corporations management believes a market participant would consider in
determining fair value. Loans were classified by type such as commercial, residential mortgage,
credit cards and automobile. These asset categories were further segmented into fixed- and
adjustable-rate categories. The fair values of performing fixed-rate and adjustable-rate loans were
calculated by discounting expected cash flows through the estimated maturity date. Loans with no
stated maturity, like credit lines, were valued at book value. Prepayment assumptions were
considered for non-residential loans. For residential mortgage loans, prepayment estimates were
based on prepayment experiences of generic U.S. mortgage-backed securities pools with similar
characteristics (e.g. coupon and original term) and adjusted based on the Corporations historical
data. Discount rates were based on the Treasury and LIBOR/Swap Yield Curves at the date of the
analysis, and included appropriate adjustments for expected credit losses and liquidity. For
impaired collateral dependent loans, the impairment was primarily measured based on the fair value
of the collateral, which is derived from appraisals that take into consideration prices in
observable transactions involving similar assets in similar locations.
Deposits
The estimated fair value of demand deposits and savings accounts, which are deposits with no
defined maturities, equals the amount payable on demand at the reporting date. For deposits with
stated maturities, but that reprice at least quarterly, the fair value is also estimated to be the
recorded amounts at the reporting date. The fair values of retail fixed-rate time deposits, with
stated maturities, are based on the present value of the future cash flows expected to be paid on
the deposits. The cash flows were based on contractual maturities; no early repayments are assumed.
Discount rates were based on the LIBOR yield curve.
42
The estimated fair value of total deposits excludes the fair value of core deposit
intangibles, which represent the value of the customer relationship measured by the value of demand
deposits and savings deposits that bear a low or zero rate of interest and do not fluctuate in
response to changes in interest rates.
The fair value of brokered CDs, which are included within deposits, is determined using
discounted cash flow analyses over the full term of the CDs. The valuation uses a Hull-White
Interest Rate Tree approach, an industry-standard approach for valuing instruments with interest
rate call options. The fair value of the CDs is computed using the outstanding principal amount.
The discount rates used are based on US dollar LIBOR and swap rates. At-the-money implied swaption
volatility term structure (volatility by time to maturity) is used to calibrate the model to
current market prices. The fair value does not incorporate the risk of nonperformance, since
brokered CDs are generally participated out by brokers in shares of less than $100,000 and insured
by the FDIC.
Loans payable
Loans payable consisted of short-term borrowings under the FED Discount Window Program. Due to
the short-term nature of these borrowings, their outstanding balances are estimated to be the fair
value.
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase
Some repurchase agreements reprice at least quarterly, and their outstanding balances are
estimated to be their fair value. Where longer commitments are involved, fair value is estimated
using exit price indications of the cost of unwinding the transactions as of the end of the
reporting period. Securities sold under agreements to repurchase are fully collateralized by
investment securities.
Advances from FHLB
The fair value of advances from FHLB with fixed maturities is determined using discounted cash
flow analyses over the full term of the borrowings, using indications of the fair value of similar
transactions. The cash flows assume no early repayment of the borrowings. Discount rates are based
on the LIBOR yield curve. For advances from FHLB that reprice quarterly, their outstanding balances
are estimated to be their fair value. Advances from FHLB are fully collateralized by mortgage loans
and, to a lesser extent, investment securities.
Derivative instruments
The fair value of most of the derivative instruments is based on observable market parameters
and takes into consideration the credit risk component of paying counterparties when appropriate,
except when collateral is pledged. That is, on interest rate swaps, the credit risk of both
counterparties is included in the valuation; and on options and caps, only the sellers credit risk
is considered. The Hull-White Interest Rate Tree approach is used to value the option components
of derivative instruments, and discounting of the cash flows is performed using US dollar
LIBOR-based discount rates or yield curves that account for the industry sector and the credit
rating of the counterparty and/or the Corporation. Derivatives include interest rate swaps used for
protection against rising interest rates and, prior to June 30, 2009, included interest rate swaps
to economically hedge brokered CDs and medium-term notes. For these interest rate swaps, a credit
component was not considered in the valuation since the Corporation has fully collateralized with
investment securities any mark to market loss with the counterparty and, if there were market
gains, the counterparty had to deliver collateral to the Corporation.
Certain derivatives with limited market activity, as is the case with derivative instruments
named as reference caps, were valued using models that consider unobservable market parameters
(Level 3). Reference caps were used mainly to hedge interest rate risk inherent in private label
mortgage-backed securities, thus were tied to the notional amount of the underlying fixed-rate
mortgage loans originated in the United States. The counterparty to these derivative instruments
failed on April 30, 2010. The Corporation currently has a claim with the FDIC and the exposure to
fair value of $3.0 million was recorded as an account receivable. In the past, significant inputs
used for the fair value determination consisted of specific characteristics such as information
used in the prepayment model which follow the amortizing schedule of the underlying loans, which
was an unobservable input. The valuation model used the Black formula, which is a benchmark
standard in the financial industry. The Black formula is similar to the Black-Scholes formula for
valuing stock options except that the spot price of the underlying is replaced by the forward
price. The Black formula uses as inputs the strike price of the cap, forward LIBOR rates,
volatility estimates and discount rates to estimate the option value. LIBOR rates and swap rates
are obtained from Bloomberg L.P. (Bloomberg) every day and are used to build a zero coupon curve
based on the Bloomberg LIBOR/Swap curve. The discount factor is then calculated from the zero
coupon curve. The cap is the sum of all caplets. For each caplet, the rate is reset at the
beginning of each reporting period and payments are made at the end of each period. The cash flow
of each caplet is then discounted from each payment date.
Although most of the derivative instruments are fully collateralized, a credit spread is
considered for those that are not secured in full. The cumulative mark-to-market effect of credit
risk in the valuation of derivative instruments resulted in an unrealized gain of approximately
$1.3 million as of September 30, 2010, which includes an unrealized gain of $0.8 million for the
first nine months of 2010.
43
Term notes payable
The fair value of term notes is determined using a discounted cash flow analysis over the full
term of the borrowings. This valuation also uses the Hull-White Interest Rate Tree approach to
value the option components of the term notes. The model assumes that the embedded options are
exercised economically. The fair value of medium-term notes is computed using the notional amount
outstanding. The discount rates used in the valuations are based on US dollar LIBOR and swap rates.
At-the-money implied swaption volatility term structure (volatility by time to maturity) is used to
calibrate the model to current market prices and value the cancellation option in the term notes.
For the medium-term notes, the credit risk is measured using the difference in yield curves between
swap rates and a yield curve that considers the industry and credit rating of the Corporation as
issuer of the note at a tenor comparable to the time to maturity of the note and option. The net
gain from fair value changes attributable to the Corporations own credit to the medium-term notes
for which the Corporation has elected the fair value option recorded for the first nine months of
2010 amounted to $1.9 million, compared to an unrealized loss of $2.9 million for the first nine
months of 2009. The cumulative mark-to-market unrealized gain on the medium-term notes since
measured at fair value attributable to credit risk amounted to $4.5 million as of September 30,
2010.
Other borrowings
Other borrowings consist of junior subordinated debentures. Projected cash flows from the
debentures were discounted using the LIBOR yield curve plus a credit spread. This credit spread was
estimated using the difference in yield curves between Swap rates and a yield curve that considers
the industry and credit rating of the Corporation as issuer of the note at a tenor comparable to
the time to maturity of the debentures.
21 SUPPLEMENTAL CASH FLOW INFORMATION
Supplemental cash flow information follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
|
(In thousands) |
Cash paid for: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest on borrowings |
|
$ |
285,567 |
|
|
$ |
393,463 |
|
Income tax |
|
|
435 |
|
|
|
503 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-cash investing and financing activities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Additions to other real estate owned |
|
|
77,712 |
|
|
|
76,677 |
|
Additions to auto repossesion |
|
|
55,826 |
|
|
|
61,107 |
|
Capitalization of servicing assets |
|
|
5,244 |
|
|
|
4,929 |
|
Loan securitizations |
|
|
164,904 |
|
|
|
262,129 |
|
Non-cash acquisition of mortgage loans that previously served
as collateral of a commercial loan to a local financial institution |
|
|
|
|
|
|
205,395 |
|
Change in par value of common stock |
|
|
83,287 |
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred Stock exchanged for new common stock issued: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock exchanged (Series A through E) |
|
|
476,193 |
|
|
|
|
|
New common stock issued |
|
|
90,806 |
|
|
|
|
|
Series F Preferred Stock exchanged for Series G Preferred Stock: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Preferred stock exchanged (Series F) |
|
|
378,408 |
|
|
|
|
|
New Series G Preferred Stock issued |
|
|
347,386 |
|
|
|
|
|
Fair value adjustment on amended common stock warrant |
|
|
1,179 |
|
|
|
|
|
22 SEGMENT INFORMATION
Based upon the Corporations organizational structure and the information provided to the
Chief Executive Officer of the Corporation and, to a lesser extent, the Board of Directors, the
operating segments are driven primarily by the Corporations lines of business for its operations
in Puerto Rico, the Corporations principal market, and by geographic areas for its operations
outside of Puerto Rico. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had six reportable segments:
Commercial and Corporate Banking; Mortgage Banking; Consumer (Retail) Banking; Treasury and
Investments; United States operations and Virgin Islands operations. Management determined the
reportable segments based on the internal reporting used to evaluate performance and to assess
where to allocate resources. Other factors such as the Corporations organizational chart, nature
of the products, distribution channels and the economic characteristics of the products were also
considered in the determination of the reportable segments.
44
Starting in the fourth quarter of 2009, the Corporation realigned its reporting segments to
better reflect how it views and manages its business. Two additional operating segments were
created to evaluate the operations conducted by the Corporation, outside of Puerto Rico. Operations
conducted in the United States and in the Virgin Islands are now individually evaluated as separate
operating segments. This realignment in the segment reporting essentially reflects the effect of
restructuring initiatives, including the merger of FirstBank Florida operations with and into
FirstBank, and allows the Corporation to better present the results from its growth focus.
Prior to the third quarter of 2009, the operating segments were driven primarily by the
Corporations legal entities. FirstBank operations conducted in the Virgin Islands and through its
loan production office in Miami, Florida were reflected in the Corporations then four reportable
segments (Commercial and Corporate Banking; Mortgage Banking; Consumer (Retail) Banking; Treasury
and Investments) while the operations conducted by FirstBank Florida were reported as part of a
category named Other. In the third quarter of 2009, as a result of the aforementioned merger, the
operations of FirstBank Florida were reported as part of the four reportable segments. Starting in
the first quarter of 2010, activities related to auto floor plan financings previously included as
part of Consumer (Retail) Banking are now included as part of the Commercial and Corporate Banking
segment. The changes in the fourth quarter of 2009 and first quarter of 2010 reflected a further
realignment of the organizational structure as a result of management changes. Prior period amounts
have been reclassified to conform to current period presentation. These changes did not have an
impact on the previously reported consolidated results of the Corporation.
The Commercial and Corporate Banking segment consists of the Corporations lending and other
services for large customers represented by specialized and middle-market clients and the public
sector. The Commercial and Corporate Banking segment offers commercial loans, including commercial
real estate and construction loans, and floor plan financings as well as other products such as
cash management and business management services. The Mortgage Banking segments operations consist
of the origination, sale and servicing of a variety of residential mortgage loans. The Mortgage
Banking segment also acquires and sells mortgages in the secondary markets. In addition, the
Mortgage Banking segment includes mortgage loans purchased from other local banks and mortgage
bankers. The Consumer (Retail) Banking segment consists of the Corporations consumer lending and
deposit taking activities conducted mainly through its branch network and loan centers. The
Treasury and Investments segment is responsible for the Corporations investment portfolio and
treasury functions executed to manage and enhance liquidity. This segment lends funds to the
Commercial and Corporate Banking, Mortgage Banking and Consumer (Retail) Banking segments to
finance their lending activities and borrows from those segments. The Consumer (Retail) Banking
segment also lends funds to other segments. The interest rates charged or credited by Treasury and
Investments and the Consumer (Retail) Banking segments are allocated based on market rates. The
difference between the allocated interest income or expense and the Corporations actual net
interest income from centralized management of funding costs is reported in the Treasury and
Investments segment. The United States operations segment consists of all banking activities
conducted by FirstBank in the United States mainland, including commercial and retail banking
services. The Virgin Islands operations segment consists of all banking activities conducted by the
Corporation in the U.S. and British Virgin Islands, including commercial and retail banking
services and insurance activities.
The accounting policies of the segments are the same as those referred to in Note 1 to the
Corporations financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2009 contained in the
Corporations Annual Report or Form 10-K.
The Corporation evaluates the performance of the segments based on net interest income, the
estimated provision for loan and lease losses, non-interest income and direct non-interest
expenses. The segments are also evaluated based on the average volume of their interest-earning
assets less the allowance for loan and lease losses.
45
The following table presents information about the reportable segments (in thousands):
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
Treasury and |
|
|
United States |
|
|
Virgin Islands |
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Banking |
|
|
(Retail) Banking |
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
Investments |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Total |
|
For the quarter ended September 30, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
38,653 |
|
|
$ |
46,131 |
|
|
$ |
58,034 |
|
|
$ |
32,419 |
|
|
$ |
12,416 |
|
|
|
16,375 |
|
|
$ |
204,028 |
|
Net (charge) credit for transfer of funds |
|
|
(21,677 |
) |
|
|
1,161 |
|
|
|
(6,126 |
) |
|
|
26,642 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(12,552 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(64,769 |
) |
|
|
(11,348 |
) |
|
|
(1,657 |
) |
|
|
(90,326 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (loss) |
|
|
16,976 |
|
|
|
34,740 |
|
|
|
51,908 |
|
|
|
(5,708 |
) |
|
|
1,068 |
|
|
|
14,718 |
|
|
|
113,702 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(15,067 |
) |
|
|
(13,632 |
) |
|
|
(83,851 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4,137 |
) |
|
|
(3,795 |
) |
|
|
(120,482 |
) |
Non-interest income |
|
|
6,348 |
|
|
|
6,902 |
|
|
|
2,579 |
|
|
|
932 |
|
|
|
235 |
|
|
|
2,270 |
|
|
|
19,266 |
|
Direct non-interest expenses |
|
|
(11,532 |
) |
|
|
(22,395 |
) |
|
|
(12,860 |
) |
|
|
(1,403 |
) |
|
|
(10,401 |
) |
|
|
(10,233 |
) |
|
|
(68,824 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment (loss) income |
|
$ |
(3,275 |
) |
|
$ |
5,615 |
|
|
$ |
(42,224 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,179 |
) |
|
$ |
(13,235 |
) |
|
$ |
2,960 |
|
|
$ |
(56,338 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average earnings assets |
|
$ |
2,601,342 |
|
|
$ |
1,573,994 |
|
|
$ |
5,775,249 |
|
|
$ |
4,654,372 |
|
|
$ |
986,730 |
|
|
$ |
930,474 |
|
|
$ |
16,522,161 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
Treasury and |
|
|
United States |
|
|
Virgin Islands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banking |
|
|
(Retail) Banking |
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
Investments |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Total |
|
For the quarter ended September 30, 2009: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
39,798 |
|
|
$ |
49,304 |
|
|
$ |
58,859 |
|
|
$ |
61,313 |
|
|
$ |
15,663 |
|
|
|
17,085 |
|
|
$ |
242,022 |
|
Net (charge) credit for transfer of funds |
|
|
(26,425 |
) |
|
|
(1,765 |
) |
|
|
(9,336 |
) |
|
|
37,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(14,714 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(73,836 |
) |
|
|
(22,463 |
) |
|
|
(1,876 |
) |
|
|
(112,889 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (loss) |
|
|
13,373 |
|
|
|
32,825 |
|
|
|
49,523 |
|
|
|
25,003 |
|
|
|
(6,800 |
) |
|
|
15,209 |
|
|
|
129,133 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(3,354 |
) |
|
|
(18,138 |
) |
|
|
(85,863 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(32,346 |
) |
|
|
(8,389 |
) |
|
|
(148,090 |
) |
Non-interest income |
|
|
3,212 |
|
|
|
8,383 |
|
|
|
1,483 |
|
|
|
34,042 |
|
|
|
112 |
|
|
|
2,757 |
|
|
|
49,989 |
|
Direct non-interest expenses |
|
|
(8,105 |
) |
|
|
(23,717 |
) |
|
|
(9,882 |
) |
|
|
(1,654 |
) |
|
|
(7,077 |
) |
|
|
(11,190 |
) |
|
|
(61,625 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment income (loss) |
|
$ |
5,126 |
|
|
$ |
(647 |
) |
|
$ |
(44,739 |
) |
|
$ |
57,391 |
|
|
$ |
(46,111 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,613 |
) |
|
$ |
(30,593 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average earnings assets |
|
$ |
2,726,367 |
|
|
$ |
1,757,626 |
|
|
$ |
6,115,810 |
|
|
$ |
6,177,819 |
|
|
$ |
1,430,889 |
|
|
$ |
977,723 |
|
|
$ |
19,186,234 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
Treasury and |
|
|
United States |
|
|
Virgin Islands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banking |
|
|
(Retail) Banking |
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
Investments |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Total |
|
For the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
118,313 |
|
|
$ |
140,820 |
|
|
$ |
174,567 |
|
|
$ |
114,401 |
|
|
$ |
39,654 |
|
|
$ |
52,125 |
|
|
$ |
639,880 |
|
Net (charge) credit for transfer of funds |
|
|
(71,189 |
) |
|
|
5,982 |
|
|
|
(19,436 |
) |
|
|
84,643 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(39,669 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(211,632 |
) |
|
|
(34,176 |
) |
|
|
(4,776 |
) |
|
|
(290,253 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income (loss) |
|
|
47,124 |
|
|
|
107,133 |
|
|
|
155,131 |
|
|
|
(12,588 |
) |
|
|
5,478 |
|
|
|
47,349 |
|
|
|
349,627 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(60,505 |
) |
|
|
(37,048 |
) |
|
|
(214,950 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(108,950 |
) |
|
|
(16,787 |
) |
|
|
(438,240 |
) |
Non-interest income |
|
|
10,765 |
|
|
|
21,670 |
|
|
|
7,184 |
|
|
|
55,805 |
|
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
8,143 |
|
|
|
104,117 |
|
Direct non-interest expenses |
|
|
(29,820 |
) |
|
|
(71,546 |
) |
|
|
(50,022 |
) |
|
|
(4,428 |
) |
|
|
(32,410 |
) |
|
|
(31,742 |
) |
|
|
(219,968 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment (loss) income |
|
$ |
(32,436 |
) |
|
$ |
20,209 |
|
|
$ |
(102,657 |
) |
|
$ |
38,789 |
|
|
$ |
(135,332 |
) |
|
$ |
6,963 |
|
|
$ |
(204,464 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average earnings assets |
|
$ |
2,674,753 |
|
|
$ |
1,621,958 |
|
|
$ |
6,073,657 |
|
|
$ |
5,180,125 |
|
|
$ |
1,131,391 |
|
|
$ |
1,000,797 |
|
|
$ |
17,682,681 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage |
|
|
Consumer |
|
|
Commercial and |
|
|
Treasury and |
|
|
United States |
|
|
Virgin Islands |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banking |
|
|
(Retail) Banking |
|
|
Corporate |
|
|
Investments |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Operations |
|
|
Total |
|
For the nine-month period ended September 30, 2009: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income |
|
$ |
116,566 |
|
|
$ |
150,786 |
|
|
$ |
183,930 |
|
|
$ |
197,561 |
|
|
$ |
51,912 |
|
|
|
52,370 |
|
|
$ |
753,125 |
|
Net (charge) credit for transfer of funds |
|
|
(82,420 |
) |
|
|
(3,648 |
) |
|
|
(53,774 |
) |
|
|
139,842 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(46,432 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(262,224 |
) |
|
|
(55,136 |
) |
|
|
(7,588 |
) |
|
|
(371,380 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
34,146 |
|
|
|
100,706 |
|
|
|
130,156 |
|
|
|
75,179 |
|
|
|
(3,224 |
) |
|
|
44,782 |
|
|
|
381,745 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
(24,283 |
) |
|
|
(32,782 |
) |
|
|
(229,794 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(133,126 |
) |
|
|
(22,686 |
) |
|
|
(442,671 |
) |
Non-interest income |
|
|
6,369 |
|
|
|
24,162 |
|
|
|
3,975 |
|
|
|
59,929 |
|
|
|
1,330 |
|
|
|
7,692 |
|
|
|
103,457 |
|
Direct non-interest expenses |
|
|
(23,835 |
) |
|
|
(71,490 |
) |
|
|
(31,779 |
) |
|
|
(5,366 |
) |
|
|
(29,092 |
) |
|
|
(34,821 |
) |
|
|
(196,383 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Segment (loss) income |
|
$ |
(7,603 |
) |
|
$ |
20,596 |
|
|
$ |
(127,442 |
) |
|
$ |
129,742 |
|
|
$ |
(164,112 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,033 |
) |
|
$ |
(153,852 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average earnings assets |
|
$ |
2,635,929 |
|
|
$ |
1,793,601 |
|
|
$ |
6,220,832 |
|
|
$ |
5,919,854 |
|
|
$ |
1,475,681 |
|
|
$ |
985,711 |
|
|
|
19,031,608 |
|
46
The following table presents a reconciliation of the reportable segment financial
information to the consolidated totals:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Net loss: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loss for segments and other |
|
$ |
(56,338 |
) |
|
$ |
(30,593 |
) |
|
$ |
(204,464 |
) |
|
$ |
(153,852 |
) |
Other operating expenses |
|
|
(19,858 |
) |
|
|
(21,152 |
) |
|
|
(58,687 |
) |
|
|
(66,910 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(76,196 |
) |
|
|
(51,745 |
) |
|
|
(263,151 |
) |
|
|
(220,762 |
) |
Income tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
(113,473 |
) |
|
|
(9,721 |
) |
|
|
(1,223 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated net loss |
|
$ |
(75,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(165,218 |
) |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total average earning assets for segments |
|
$ |
16,522,161 |
|
|
$ |
19,186,234 |
|
|
$ |
17,682,681 |
|
|
$ |
19,031,608 |
|
Average non-earning assets |
|
|
728,079 |
|
|
|
1,016,657 |
|
|
|
746,064 |
|
|
|
826,410 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total consolidated average assets |
|
$ |
17,250,240 |
|
|
$ |
20,202,891 |
|
|
$ |
18,428,745 |
|
|
$ |
19,858,018 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
47
23 COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES
The Corporation enters into financial instruments with off-balance sheet risk in the normal
course of business to meet the financing needs of its customers. These financial instruments may
include commitments to extend credit and commitments to sell mortgage loans at fair value. As of
September 30, 2010, commitments to extend credit amounted to approximately $841.0 million and
standby letters of credit amounted to approximately $81.1 million. Included in commitments to
extend credit is a $50.0 million participation in a loan extended for the construction of a resort
facility in Puerto Rico. The Corporation does not expect to disburse this commitment until 2012.
Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as there is no violation
of any conditions established in the contract. Commitments generally have fixed expiration dates or
other termination clauses. For most of the commercial lines of credit, the Corporation has the
option to reevaluate the agreement prior to additional disbursements. In the case of credit cards
and personal lines of credit, the Corporation can cancel the unused credit facility at any time and
without cause. Generally, the Corporations mortgage banking activities do not enter into interest
rate lock agreements with prospective borrowers.
Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. (Lehman) was the counterparty to the Corporation on
certain interest rate swap agreements. During the third quarter of 2008, Lehman failed to pay the
scheduled net cash settlement due to the Corporation, which constituted an event of default under
those interest rate swap agreements. The Corporation terminated all interest rate swaps with Lehman
and replaced them with other counterparties under similar terms and conditions. In connection with
the unpaid net cash settlement due as of September 30, 2010 under the swap agreements, the
Corporation has an unsecured counterparty exposure with Lehman, which filed for bankruptcy on
October 3, 2008, of approximately $1.4 million. This exposure was reserved in the third quarter of
2008. The Corporation had pledged collateral of $63.6 million with Lehman to guarantee its
performance under the swap agreements in the event payment thereunder was required. The book value
of pledged securities with Lehman as of September 30, 2010 amounted to approximately $64.5 million.
The Corporation believes that the securities pledged as collateral should not be part of the
Lehman bankruptcy estate given the fact that the posted collateral constituted a performance
guarantee under the swap agreements and was not part of a financing agreement, and that ownership
of the securities was never transferred to Lehman. Upon termination of the interest rate swap
agreements, Lehmans obligation was to return the collateral to the Corporation. During the fourth
quarter of 2009, the Corporation discovered that Lehman Brothers, Inc., acting as agent of Lehman,
had deposited the securities in a custodial account at JP Morgan Chase, and that, shortly before
the filing of the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings, it had provided instructions to have most of the
securities transferred to Barclays Capital (Barclays) in New York. After Barclays refusal to
turn over the securities, during December 2009, the Corporation filed a lawsuit against Barclays in
federal court in New York demanding the return of the securities.
During February 2010, Barclays filed a motion with the court requesting that the Corporations
claim be dismissed on the grounds that the allegations of the complaint are not sufficient to
justify the granting of the remedies therein sought. Shortly thereafter, the Corporation filed its
opposition motion. A hearing on the motions was held in court on April 28, 2010. The court, on that
date, after hearing the arguments by both sides, concluded that the Corporations equitable-based
causes of action, upon which the return of the investment securities is being demanded, contain
allegations that sufficiently plead facts warranting the denial of Barclays motion to dismiss the
Corporations claim. Accordingly, the judge ordered the case to proceed to trial. Subsequent to the
decision handed down by the court, the district court judge transferred the case to the Lehman
bankruptcy court for trial. While the Corporation believes it has valid reasons to support its
claim for the return of the securities, the Corporation may not succeed in its litigation against
Barclays to recover all or a substantial portion of the securities.
Additionally, the Corporation continues to pursue its claim filed in January 2009 in the
proceedings under the Securities Protection Act with regard to Lehman Brothers Incorporated in
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York. An estimated loss was not accrued as the
Corporation is unable to determine the timing of the claim resolution or whether it will succeed in
recovering all or a substantial portion of the collateral or its equivalent value. If additional
relevant negative facts become available in future periods, a need to recognize a partial or full
reserve of this claim may arise. Considering that the investment securities have not yet been
recovered by the Corporation, despite its efforts in this regard, the Corporation decided to
classify such investments as non-performing during the second quarter of 2009.
As of September 30, 2010, First BanCorp and its subsidiaries were defendants in various legal
proceedings arising in the ordinary course of business. Management believes that the final
disposition of these matters will not have a material adverse effect on the Corporations financial
position or results of operations.
48
24 FIRST BANCORP (Holding Company Only) Financial Information
The following condensed financial information presents the financial position of the Holding
Company only as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 and the results of its operations for
the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Assets |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Cash and due from banks |
|
$ |
43,216 |
|
|
$ |
55,423 |
|
Money market investments |
|
|
300 |
|
|
|
300 |
|
Investment securities available for sale, at market: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity investments |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
Other investment securities |
|
|
1,300 |
|
|
|
1,550 |
|
Investment in FirstBank Puerto Rico, at equity |
|
|
1,493,513 |
|
|
|
1,754,217 |
|
Investment in FirstBank Insurance Agency, at equity |
|
|
6,402 |
|
|
|
6,709 |
|
Investment in PR Finance, at equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,036 |
|
Investment in FBP Statutory Trust I |
|
|
3,093 |
|
|
|
3,093 |
|
Investment in FBP Statutory Trust II |
|
|
3,866 |
|
|
|
3,866 |
|
Other assets |
|
|
5,076 |
|
|
|
3,194 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets |
|
$ |
1,556,837 |
|
|
$ |
1,831,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities & Stockholders Equity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other borrowings |
|
$ |
231,959 |
|
|
$ |
231,959 |
|
Accounts payable and other liabilities |
|
|
2,899 |
|
|
|
669 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total liabilities |
|
|
234,858 |
|
|
|
232,628 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Stockholders equity |
|
|
1,321,979 |
|
|
|
1,599,063 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total Liabilities & Stockholders Equity |
|
$ |
1,556,837 |
|
|
$ |
1,831,691 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Income: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income on other investments |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
1 |
|
Dividends from FirstBank Puerto Rico |
|
|
|
|
|
|
847 |
|
|
|
1,522 |
|
|
|
45,786 |
|
Dividends from other subsidiaries |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,400 |
|
|
|
|
|
Other income |
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
56 |
|
|
|
157 |
|
|
|
197 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
57 |
|
|
|
903 |
|
|
|
3,080 |
|
|
|
45,984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Expense: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable and other borrowings |
|
|
1,850 |
|
|
|
1,870 |
|
|
|
5,219 |
|
|
|
6,599 |
|
Other operating expenses |
|
|
862 |
|
|
|
516 |
|
|
|
2,372 |
|
|
|
1,678 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,712 |
|
|
|
2,386 |
|
|
|
7,591 |
|
|
|
8,277 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain (loss) on investments and impairments |
|
|
|
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Loss) income before income taxes and equity
in undistributed losses of subsidiaries |
|
|
(2,655 |
) |
|
|
(1,235 |
) |
|
|
(5,114 |
) |
|
|
37,567 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Income tax provision |
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8 |
) |
|
|
(3 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Equity in undistributed losses of subsidiaries |
|
|
(72,570 |
) |
|
|
(163,983 |
) |
|
|
(267,750 |
) |
|
|
(259,549 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net loss |
|
$ |
(75,233 |
) |
|
$ |
(165,218 |
) |
|
$ |
(272,872 |
) |
|
$ |
(221,985 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
49
25 SUBSEQUENT EVENTS
The Company has performed an evaluation of all other events occurring subsequent to September
30, 2010, management has determined that there are no additional events occurring in this period
that required disclosure in or adjustment to the accompanying financial statements.
50
ITEM 2. MANAGEMENTS DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS OF FINANCIAL CONDITION AND RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
(MD&A)
SELECTED FINANCIAL DATA
(In thousands, except for per share and financial ratios)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended |
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
|
September 30, |
|
September 30, |
|
September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Condensed Income Statements: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest income |
|
$ |
204,028 |
|
|
$ |
242,022 |
|
|
$ |
639,880 |
|
|
$ |
753,125 |
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
90,326 |
|
|
|
112,889 |
|
|
|
290,253 |
|
|
|
371,380 |
|
Net interest income |
|
|
113,702 |
|
|
|
129,133 |
|
|
|
349,627 |
|
|
|
381,745 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
120,482 |
|
|
|
148,090 |
|
|
|
438,240 |
|
|
|
442,671 |
|
Non-interest income |
|
|
19,266 |
|
|
|
49,989 |
|
|
|
104,117 |
|
|
|
103,457 |
|
Non-interest expenses |
|
|
88,682 |
|
|
|
82,777 |
|
|
|
278,655 |
|
|
|
263,293 |
|
Loss before income taxes |
|
|
(76,196 |
) |
|
|
(51,745 |
) |
|
|
(263,151 |
) |
|
|
(220,762 |
) |
Income tax benefit (expense) |
|
|
963 |
|
|
|
(113,473 |
) |
|
|
(9,721 |
) |
|
|
(1,223 |
) |
Net loss |
|
|
(75,233 |
) |
|
|
(165,218 |
) |
|
|
(272,872 |
) |
|
|
(221,985 |
) |
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders, basic |
|
|
357,787 |
|
|
|
(174,689 |
) |
|
|
147,826 |
|
|
|
(262,741 |
) |
Net income (loss) available to common stockholders, diluted |
|
|
363,413 |
|
|
|
(174,689 |
) |
|
|
153,452 |
|
|
|
(262,741 |
) |
Per Common Share Results: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net income (loss) per share basic |
|
$ |
2.09 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
1.24 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
Net income (loss) per share diluted |
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
(1.89 |
) |
|
$ |
0.31 |
|
|
$ |
(2.84 |
) |
Cash dividends declared |
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
0.14 |
|
Average shares outstanding |
|
|
171,483 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
|
|
119,131 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
Average shares outstanding diluted |
|
|
1,298,275 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
|
|
498,856 |
|
|
|
92,511 |
|
Book value per common share |
|
$ |
2.85 |
|
|
$ |
8.34 |
|
|
$ |
2.85 |
|
|
$ |
8.34 |
|
Tangible book value per common share (1) |
|
$ |
2.71 |
|
|
$ |
7.85 |
|
|
$ |
2.71 |
|
|
$ |
7.85 |
|
Selected Financial Ratios (In Percent): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Profitability: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Return on Average Assets |
|
|
(1.73 |
) |
|
|
(3.27 |
) |
|
|
(1.98 |
) |
|
|
(1.49 |
) |
Interest Rate Spread (2) |
|
|
2.55 |
|
|
|
2.66 |
|
|
|
2.46 |
|
|
|
2.57 |
|
Net Interest Margin (2) |
|
|
2.83 |
|
|
|
2.95 |
|
|
|
2.74 |
|
|
|
2.91 |
|
Return on Average Total Equity |
|
|
(21.28 |
) |
|
|
(35.47 |
) |
|
|
(24.40 |
) |
|
|
(15.53 |
) |
Return on Average Common Equity |
|
|
(50.80 |
) |
|
|
(74.62 |
) |
|
|
(62.75 |
) |
|
|
(34.94 |
) |
Average Total Equity to Average Total Assets |
|
|
8.13 |
|
|
|
9.22 |
|
|
|
8.11 |
|
|
|
9.60 |
|
Tangible common equity ratio (1) |
|
|
5.21 |
|
|
|
3.62 |
|
|
|
5.21 |
|
|
|
3.62 |
|
Dividend payout ratio |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(4.93 |
) |
Efficiency ratio (3) |
|
|
66.69 |
|
|
|
46.21 |
|
|
|
61.41 |
|
|
|
54.26 |
|
Asset Quality: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to loans receivable |
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
3.43 |
|
|
|
5.00 |
|
|
|
3.43 |
|
Net charge-offs (annualized) to average loans |
|
|
3.74 |
|
|
|
2.53 |
|
|
|
3.67 |
|
|
|
2.52 |
|
Provision for loan and lease losses to net charge-offs |
|
|
103.63 |
|
|
|
175.56 |
|
|
|
122.47 |
|
|
|
175.17 |
|
Non-performing assets to total assets |
|
|
10.01 |
|
|
|
8.39 |
|
|
|
10.01 |
|
|
|
8.39 |
|
Non-performing loans to total loans receivable |
|
|
12.36 |
|
|
|
11.21 |
|
|
|
12.36 |
|
|
|
11.21 |
|
Allowance to total non-performing loans |
|
|
40.41 |
|
|
|
30.64 |
|
|
|
40.41 |
|
|
|
30.64 |
|
Allowance to total non-performing loans
excluding residential real estate loans |
|
|
56.43 |
|
|
|
42.90 |
|
|
|
56.43 |
|
|
|
42.90 |
|
Other Information: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common Stock Price: End of period |
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
3.05 |
|
|
$ |
0.28 |
|
|
$ |
3.05 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
As of |
|
|
September 30, |
|
December 31, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
Balance Sheet Data: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and loans held for sale |
|
$ |
12,189,222 |
|
|
$ |
13,949,226 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
608,526 |
|
|
|
528,120 |
|
Money market and investment securities |
|
|
3,745,951 |
|
|
|
4,866,617 |
|
Intangible assets |
|
|
42,771 |
|
|
|
44,698 |
|
Deferred tax asset, net |
|
|
101,248 |
|
|
|
109,197 |
|
Total assets |
|
|
16,678,879 |
|
|
|
19,628,448 |
|
Deposits |
|
|
12,543,567 |
|
|
|
12,669,047 |
|
Borrowings |
|
|
2,492,456 |
|
|
|
5,214,147 |
|
Total preferred equity |
|
|
411,876 |
|
|
|
928,508 |
|
Total common equity |
|
|
879,808 |
|
|
|
644,062 |
|
Accumulated other comprehensive income, net of tax |
|
|
30,295 |
|
|
|
26,493 |
|
Total equity |
|
|
1,321,979 |
|
|
|
1,599,063 |
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Non-GAAP measure. Refer to Capital discussion below for additional information
about the components and reconciliation of these measures. |
|
(2) |
|
On a tax-equivalent basis and excluding the changes in fair value of derivative and
financial instruments and financial liabilities measured at fair value (see Net Interest
Income discussion below for a reconciliation of this non-gaap measure). |
|
(3) |
|
Non-interest expenses to the sum of net interest income and non-interest income. The
denominator includes non recurring income and changes in the fair value of derivative
instruments and financial liabilities measured at fair value. |
51
The following Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of
Operations relates to the accompanying consolidated unaudited financial statements of First BanCorp
and should be read in conjunction with the interim unaudited financial statements and the notes
thereto. First BanCorp, incorporated under the laws of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, is
sometimes referred in this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q as the Corporation, we, our.
DESCRIPTION OF BUSINESS
First BanCorp is a diversified financial holding company headquartered in San Juan, Puerto
Rico offering a full range of financial products to consumers and commercial customers through
various subsidiaries. First BanCorp is the holding company of FirstBank Puerto Rico (FirstBank or
the Bank) and FirstBank Insurance Agency. Through its wholly-owned subsidiaries, the Corporation
operates offices in Puerto Rico, the United States and British Virgin Islands and the State of
Florida (USA) specializing in commercial banking, residential mortgage loan originations, finance
leases, personal loans, small loans, auto loans, insurance agency and broker-dealer activities.
As described in Item 1, Note 18, Regulatory Matters, FirstBank is currently operating under a
Consent Order ( the Order) with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and First
BanCorp has entered into a Written Agreement (the Written Agreement and collectively with the
Order the Agreements) with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the FED or
Federal Reserve).
As discussed in Item 1, Note 1 to the Consolidated Financial Statements, the Corporation has
assessed its ability to continue as a going concern and has concluded that, based on current and
expected liquidity needs and sources, management expects the Corporation to be able to meet its
obligations for a reasonable period of time. The Corporation has $3.2 billion of traditional
brokered certificates of deposit (brokered CDs) maturing within twelve months from September 30,
2010. The Corporation has continued to issue brokered CDs pursuant to temporary approvals received
from the FDIC to renew or roll over certain amounts of brokered CDs through December 31, 2010.
Management anticipates it will continue to obtain waivers from the restrictions to issue brokered
CDs under the Order to meet its obligations and execute its business plans. If unanticipated
market factors emerge, or if the Corporation is unable to raise additional capital or complete the
identified alternative capital preservation initiatives, successfully execute its plans, or comply
with the Order, its banking regulators could take further action, which could include actions that
may have a material adverse effect on the Corporations business, results of operations and
financial position. Also see Liquidity and Capital Adequacy.
OVERVIEW OF RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
First BanCorps results of operations generally depend primarily upon its net interest income,
which is the difference between the interest income earned on its interest-earning assets,
including investment securities and loans, and the interest expense incurred on its
interest-bearing liabilities, including deposits and borrowings. Net interest income is affected by
various factors, including: the interest rate scenario; the volumes, mix and composition of
interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities; and the re-pricing characteristics of
these assets and liabilities. The Corporations results of operations also depend on the provision
for loan and lease losses, which significantly affected the results for the quarter ended September
30, 2010, non-interest expenses (such as personnel, occupancy, insurance premiums and other costs),
non-interest income (mainly service charges and fees on loans and deposits and insurance income),
gains (losses) on sales of investments, gains (losses) on mortgage banking activities, and income
taxes.
Net loss for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 amounted to $75.2 million, compared to a net
loss of $165.2 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2009. The Corporations financial
results for the third quarter of 2010, as compared to the third quarter of 2009, were principally
impacted by (i) the impact in 2009 of a non-cash charge of $152.2 million to increase the deferred
tax asset valuation allowance, and (ii) a reduction of $27.6 million in the provision for loan and
lease losses related to lower charges to specific reserves, a slower migration of loans to
non-performing status and the overall decline in the size of the loan portfolio. These factors
were partially offset by (i) a decrease of $30.7 million in non-interest income driven by a
reduction of $33.7 million in gains on sale of investments due to a lower volume of sales, aside
from a nominal loss of $0.3 million resulting from a transaction on which the Corporation sold
mortgage-backed securities realizing a gain of $47.1 million that was offset by the cost of $47.4
million for the early extinguishment of a matching set of repurchase agreements, (ii) a decrease of
$15.4 million in net interest income mainly resulting from the Corporations deleveraging
strategies to preserve its capital position and from higher than historical levels of liquidity
maintained in the balance sheet due to the current economic environment, and (iii) an increase of
$5.9 million in non-interest expenses driven by increases in the FDIC deposit insurance premium and
higher losses on real estate owned (REO) operations due to write-downs to the value of repossessed
properties and higher costs associated with a larger inventory.
The key drivers of the Corporations financial results for the quarter ended September 30,
2010 include the following:
|
|
|
Net interest income for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 was $113.7 million,
compared to $129.1 million for the same period in 2009. The decrease is mainly associated
with the deleveraging of the Corporations balance sheet to preserve its capital position,
including sales of approximately $2.2 billion of investment securities over the last 12
months, mainly U.S. agency mortgage-backed securities (MBS), and loan repayments. Net
interest income was also affected by compressions in net interest |
52
|
|
|
margin, which on an adjusted tax-equivalent basis decreased to 2.83% for the third quarter of
2010 from 2.95% for the same period in 2009, mainly due to lower yields on investments and
the adverse impact of maintaining higher than historical liquidity levels. Approximately
$1.2 billion in investment securities were called over the last twelve months and were
replaced with lower yielding U.S. agency investment securities. These factors were partially
offset by the favorable impact of lower deposit pricing and the roll-off and repayments of
higher cost funds, such as maturing brokered CDs and repurchase agreements, and improved
spreads in commercial loans. Refer to the Net Interest Income discussion below for
additional information. |
|
|
|
|
For the third quarter of 2010, the Corporations provision for loan and lease losses
amounted to $120.5 million, compared to $148.1 million for the same period in 2009. Refer
to the discussion under Risk Management below for an analysis of the allowance for loan
and lease losses and non-performing assets and related ratios. The decrease in the
provision for 2010 was primarily due to lower charges to specific reserves, a slower
migration of loans to non-performing status and the overall reduction of the loan
portfolio. Much of the decrease in the provision is related to the construction loan
portfolio in Florida and the commercial and industrial (C&I) portfolio in Puerto Rico. |
|
|
|
|
The Corporations net charge-offs for the third quarter of 2010 were $116.3 million or
3.74% of average loans on an annualized basis, compared to $84.4 million or 2.53% of
average loans on an annualized basis for the same period in 2009, an increase mainly
related to impaired loans for which the Corporation had previously established adequate
specific reserves, including charge-offs of $27.1 million for non-performing construction
and commercial mortgage loans sold during the third quarter in Florida. Refer to the
Provision for Loan and Lease Losses and Risk Management Non-performing assets and
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses sections below for additional information. |
|
|
|
|
For the quarter ended September 30, 2010, the Corporations non-interest income amounted
to $19.3 million, compared to $50.0 million for the quarter ended September 30, 2009. The
decrease was mainly due to lower gains on sale of investments securities, as the
Corporation realized gains of approximately $1.7 million on the sale of approximately $61.9
million of MBS, versus the $34.0 million aggregate gain recorded on the sale of
approximately $613 million of U.S. agency MBS, $98 million of U.S Treasury Notes and VISA
Class A shares in the third quarter of 2009. Also, a nominal loss of approximately $0.3
million was recorded in the third quarter, resulting from a transaction in which the
Corporation sold approximately $1.2 billion in MBS, combined with the unwinding of a
matching set of repurchase agreements as part of a balance sheet repositioning strategy.
Partially offsetting these factors were increased gains from mortgage banking activities
resulting from a higher volume of loans sold in the secondary market. Refer to the Non
Interest Income discussion below for additional information. |
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses for the third quarter of 2010 amounted to $88.7 million, compared
to $82.8 million for the same period in 2009. The increase is mainly related to a $7.8
million increase in the FDIC insurance premium expense, as premium rates increased and the
level of deposits grew compared to 2009, and an increase of $3.2 million in losses on REO
operations, driven by write-downs and costs associated with a larger inventory. This was
partially offset by a decrease of $4.6 million in employees compensation reflecting
further reductions in bonuses and other employee benefits and the headcount reduction.
Refer to the Non Interest Expenses discussion below for additional information. |
|
|
|
|
For the third quarter of 2010, the Corporation recorded an income tax benefit of $1.0
million, compared to an income tax expense of $113.5 million for the same period in 2009.
The 2009 results included a non-cash charge of approximately $152.2 million to increase the
valuation allowance for the Corporations deferred tax asset. The income tax benefit for
the third quarter of 2010 was mainly related to the operations of FirstBank Overseas, a
profitable subsidiary for the first nine months of 2010, due to its share in the loss on
the early extinguishment of repurchase agreements. Refer to the Income Taxes discussion
below for additional information. |
|
|
|
|
Total assets as of September 30, 2010 amounted to $16.7 billion, a decrease of $2.9
billion compared to total assets as of December 31, 2009. The decrease in total assets was
primarily a result of a net decrease of $1.8 billion in the loan portfolio largely
attributable to repayments of credit facilities extended to the Puerto Rico government
and/or political subdivisions coupled with charge-offs, the sale of non-performing loans
and a higher allowance for loan and lease losses. Also, there was a decrease of $1.3
billion in investment securities driven by sales of MBS. The decrease in assets is
consistent with the Corporations deleveraging and balance sheet repositioning strategies
to, among other things, preserve its capital position and enhance net interest margins in
the future. Refer to the Financial Condition and Operating Data discussion below for
additional information. |
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010, total liabilities amounted to $15.4 billion, a decrease of
approximately $2.7 billion, as compared to $18.0 billion as of December 31, 2009. The
decrease in total liabilities is mainly attributable to a $1.7 billion decrease in
repurchase agreements driven by the early extinguishment of approximately $1 billion of
long-term repurchase agreements as part of the Corporations balance sheet repositioning
strategies and the nonrenewal of maturing repurchase agreements. Also, there was a
decrease of $900 million and $143 million in advances from the FED and the Federal Home
Loan Bank (FHLB), respectively, and a decrease of $872.9 million in brokered CDs.
Partially offsetting the aforementioned decreases |
53
|
|
|
was an increase of $747.4 million in total non-brokered deposits. Refer to the Risk
Management Liquidity and Capital Adequacy discussion below for additional information
about the Corporations funding sources. |
|
|
|
|
The Corporations stockholders equity amounted to $1.3 billion as of September 30,
2010, a decrease of $277.1 million compared to the balance as of December 31, 2009, driven
by the net loss of $272.9 million for the first nine months of 2010 and $8 million of issue
costs related to the issuance of new common stock in exchange for $487 million of Series A
through E preferred stock (the Exchange Offer), partially offset by an increase of $3.8
million in accumulated other comprehensive income. Although all the regulatory capital
ratios exceeded the established well capitalized levels at September 30, 2010, due to the
Order, FirstBank cannot be treated as a well capitalized institution under regulatory
guidance. |
|
|
|
|
During the third quarter of 2010, the Corporation increased its common equity by issuing
common stock in exchange for $487 million, or 89%, of the outstanding Series A through E
preferred stock at conversion date and issued a new Series G mandatorily convertible
preferred stock (the Series G Preferred Stock) in exchange for the $400 million Series F
preferred stock held by the United States Department of Treasury (U.S. Treasury). As a
result of these initiatives the Corporations tangible common equity and Tier 1 common equity
ratios as of September 30, 2010 increased to 5.21% and 6.62%, respectively, from 3.20% and
4.10%, respectively, at December 31, 2009. Refer to the Risk Management Capital section
below for additional information, including further information about these non-GAAP
financial measures and the Corporations capital plan execution. |
|
|
|
|
Total loan production, including purchases, refinancings and draws from existing
commitments, for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 was $896 million, compared to $1.4
billion for the comparable period in 2009. The decrease in loan production during 2010, as
compared to the third quarter of 2009, was reflected in all major loan categories but in
particular in credit facilities extended to the Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands government.
The Corporation continues with its targeted lending activities and, excluding credit
facilities extended to the Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands governments, loan originations
for the third quarter of 2010 were $481 million compared to $695 million for the third
quarter of 2009, a reduction mainly related to the C&I, the residential mortgage and the
construction loan portfolio. |
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans as of September 30, 2010 were $1.51 billion, compared to
$1.56 billion as of December 31, 2009. The decrease of $57.9 million, or 4%, in
non-performing loans from December 31, 2009
mainly in connection with charge-offs and sales of approximately $163
million of impaired loans in Florida.
Non-performing construction loans decreased by $76.2 million mainly due to charge-offs and sales of $115.7 million of non-performing construction loans during 2010.
Non-performing commercial mortgage loans decreased by $23.2 million, or 12%, since December
2009 mainly due to charge-offs and two relationships amounting to $12.5 million in the
aggregate that became current and for which the Corporation expects to collect principal
and interest in full pursuant to the terms of the loans. Non-performing residential
mortgage loans decreased by $14.1 million mainly due to loans restored to accrual status
based on compliance with modified terms as part of the Corporations loss mitigation and
loans modifications transactions. Non-performing C&I loans increased by $52.0 million, or
22%, from the end of 2009 driven by the inflow of three relationships in Puerto Rico in
individual amounts exceeding $10 million with an aggregate carrying value of $62 million,
of which $38.9 million (net of a charge-off of $7.7 million) is related to the
Corporations participation in a syndicated loan downgraded by the lead bank regulator in
its latest annual review. The levels of non-accrual consumer loans, including finance
leases, remained stable showing a $3.6 million increase during the first nine months of
2010. Refer to the Risk Management Non-performing loans and Non-performing Assets
section below for additional information. |
CRITICAL ACCOUNTING POLICIES AND PRACTICES
The accounting principles of the Corporation and the methods of applying these principles
conform with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (GAAP). The
Corporations critical accounting policies relate to the 1) allowance for loan and lease losses;
2) other-than-temporary impairments; 3) income taxes; 4) classification and related values of
investment securities; 5) valuation of financial instruments; and 6) income recognition on loans.
These critical accounting policies involve judgments, estimates and assumptions made by management
that affect the amounts recorded for assets and liabilities and for contingent liabilities as of
the date of the financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expenses during the
reporting periods. Actual results could differ from estimates, if different assumptions or
conditions prevail. Certain determinations inherently require greater reliance on the use of
estimates, assumptions, and judgments and, as such, have a greater possibility of producing results
that could be materially different than those originally reported.
The Corporations critical accounting policies are described in Managements Discussion and
Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations included in First BanCorps 2009 Annual
Report on Form 10-K. There have not been any material changes in the Corporations critical
accounting policies since December 31, 2009.
54
RESULTS OF OPERATIONS
Net Interest Income
Net interest income is the excess of interest earned by First BanCorp on its interest-earning
assets over the interest incurred on its interest-bearing liabilities. First BanCorps net interest
income is subject to interest rate risk due to the re-pricing and maturity mismatch of the
Corporations assets and liabilities. Net interest income for the quarter and nine-month period
ended September 30, 2010 was $113.7 million and $349.6 million, respectively, compared to
$129.1 million and $381.7 million for the comparable periods in 2009. On a tax-equivalent basis and
excluding the changes in the fair value of derivative instruments and unrealized gains and losses
on liabilities measured at fair value, net interest income for the quarter and nine-month period
ended September 30, 2010 was $121.9 million and $373.3 million, respectively, compared to
$145.1 million and $420.1 million for the comparable periods of 2009.
The following tables include a detailed analysis of net interest income. Part I presents
average volumes and rates on an adjusted tax-equivalent basis and Part II presents, also on an
adjusted tax-equivalent basis, the extent to which changes in interest rates and changes in volume
of interest-related assets and liabilities have affected the Corporations net interest income. For
each category of interest-earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities, information is provided
on changes attributable to (i) changes in volume (changes in volume multiplied by prior period
rates), and (ii) changes in rate (changes in rate multiplied by prior period volumes). Rate-volume
variances (changes in rate multiplied by changes in volume) have been allocated to the changes in
volume and rate based upon their respective percentage of the combined totals.
The net interest income is computed on a tax-equivalent basis and excluding: (1) the change
in the fair value of derivative instruments and (2) unrealized gains or losses on liabilities
measured at fair value (for definition and reconciliation of this non-GAAP measure, refer to
discussions below).
55
Part I
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Volume |
|
|
Interest income (1) / expense |
|
|
Average Rate (1) |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Quarter ended September 30, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Interest-earning assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market & other short-term investments |
|
$ |
794,318 |
|
|
$ |
161,491 |
|
|
$ |
511 |
|
|
$ |
185 |
|
|
|
0.26 |
% |
|
|
0.45 |
% |
Government obligations (2) |
|
|
1,361,925 |
|
|
|
1,382,167 |
|
|
|
8,023 |
|
|
|
9,709 |
|
|
|
2.34 |
% |
|
|
2.79 |
% |
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
2,416,485 |
|
|
|
4,595,678 |
|
|
|
27,491 |
|
|
|
63,588 |
|
|
|
4.51 |
% |
|
|
5.49 |
% |
Corporate bonds |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
29 |
|
|
|
5.75 |
% |
|
|
5.75 |
% |
FHLB stock |
|
|
63,950 |
|
|
|
76,843 |
|
|
|
640 |
|
|
|
1,038 |
|
|
|
3.97 |
% |
|
|
5.36 |
% |
Equity securities |
|
|
1,377 |
|
|
|
1,977 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18 |
|
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
3.61 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments (3) |
|
|
4,640,055 |
|
|
|
6,220,156 |
|
|
|
36,694 |
|
|
|
74,567 |
|
|
|
3.14 |
% |
|
|
4.76 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
3,454,820 |
|
|
|
3,602,562 |
|
|
|
51,839 |
|
|
|
53,617 |
|
|
|
5.95 |
% |
|
|
5.90 |
% |
Construction loans |
|
|
1,240,522 |
|
|
|
1,604,565 |
|
|
|
8,096 |
|
|
|
12,402 |
|
|
|
2.59 |
% |
|
|
3.07 |
% |
C&I and commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
5,968,781 |
|
|
|
6,137,781 |
|
|
|
65,852 |
|
|
|
62,379 |
|
|
|
4.38 |
% |
|
|
4.03 |
% |
Finance leases |
|
|
293,956 |
|
|
|
335,636 |
|
|
|
5,937 |
|
|
|
6,775 |
|
|
|
8.01 |
% |
|
|
8.01 |
% |
Consumer loans |
|
|
1,484,976 |
|
|
|
1,640,556 |
|
|
|
43,326 |
|
|
|
46,692 |
|
|
|
11.58 |
% |
|
|
11.29 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans (4) (5) |
|
|
12,443,055 |
|
|
|
13,321,100 |
|
|
|
175,050 |
|
|
|
181,865 |
|
|
|
5.58 |
% |
|
|
5.42 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-earning assets |
|
$ |
17,083,110 |
|
|
$ |
19,541,256 |
|
|
$ |
211,744 |
|
|
$ |
256,432 |
|
|
|
4.92 |
% |
|
|
5.21 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brokered CDs |
|
$ |
6,929,356 |
|
|
$ |
7,292,913 |
|
|
$ |
39,086 |
|
|
$ |
51,305 |
|
|
|
2.24 |
% |
|
|
2.79 |
% |
Other interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
5,008,676 |
|
|
|
3,995,123 |
|
|
|
21,917 |
|
|
|
20,860 |
|
|
|
1.74 |
% |
|
|
2.07 |
% |
Loans payable |
|
|
|
|
|
|
652,391 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
463 |
|
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.28 |
% |
Other borrowed funds |
|
|
2,214,076 |
|
|
|
4,171,348 |
|
|
|
21,618 |
|
|
|
30,545 |
|
|
|
3.87 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
FHLB advances |
|
|
850,060 |
|
|
|
1,196,657 |
|
|
|
7,179 |
|
|
|
8,127 |
|
|
|
3.35 |
% |
|
|
2.69 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities (6) |
|
$ |
15,002,168 |
|
|
$ |
17,308,432 |
|
|
$ |
89,800 |
|
|
$ |
111,300 |
|
|
|
2.37 |
% |
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
121,944 |
|
|
$ |
145,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
2.66 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.83 |
% |
|
|
2.95 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Volume |
|
|
Interest income (1) / expense |
|
|
Average Rate (1) |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Interest-earning assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market & other short-term investments |
|
$ |
849,183 |
|
|
$ |
126,234 |
|
|
$ |
1,571 |
|
|
$ |
393 |
|
|
|
0.25 |
% |
|
|
0.42 |
% |
Government obligations (2) |
|
|
1,356,257 |
|
|
|
1,355,492 |
|
|
|
25,000 |
|
|
|
45,214 |
|
|
|
2.46 |
% |
|
|
4.46 |
% |
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
2,938,302 |
|
|
|
4,392,359 |
|
|
|
103,491 |
|
|
|
187,021 |
|
|
|
4.71 |
% |
|
|
5.69 |
% |
Corporate bonds |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
5,703 |
|
|
|
87 |
|
|
|
264 |
|
|
|
5.82 |
% |
|
|
6.19 |
% |
FHLB stock |
|
|
67,046 |
|
|
|
78,178 |
|
|
|
2,058 |
|
|
|
2,186 |
|
|
|
4.10 |
% |
|
|
3.74 |
% |
Equity securities |
|
|
1,516 |
|
|
|
2,103 |
|
|
|
15 |
|
|
|
54 |
|
|
|
1.32 |
% |
|
|
3.43 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments (3) |
|
|
5,214,304 |
|
|
|
5,960,069 |
|
|
|
132,222 |
|
|
|
235,132 |
|
|
|
3.39 |
% |
|
|
5.27 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
3,518,566 |
|
|
|
3,508,471 |
|
|
|
158,244 |
|
|
|
159,383 |
|
|
|
6.01 |
% |
|
|
6.07 |
% |
Construction loans |
|
|
1,388,771 |
|
|
|
1,592,372 |
|
|
|
25,981 |
|
|
|
39,646 |
|
|
|
2.50 |
% |
|
|
3.33 |
% |
C&I and commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
6,270,952 |
|
|
|
6,223,979 |
|
|
|
198,642 |
|
|
|
193,325 |
|
|
|
4.24 |
% |
|
|
4.15 |
% |
Finance leases |
|
|
304,350 |
|
|
|
347,791 |
|
|
|
18,503 |
|
|
|
21,468 |
|
|
|
8.13 |
% |
|
|
8.25 |
% |
Consumer loans |
|
|
1,525,920 |
|
|
|
1,681,015 |
|
|
|
132,369 |
|
|
|
142,722 |
|
|
|
11.60 |
% |
|
|
11.35 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans (4) (5) |
|
|
13,008,559 |
|
|
|
13,353,628 |
|
|
|
533,739 |
|
|
|
556,544 |
|
|
|
5.49 |
% |
|
|
5.57 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-earning assets |
|
$ |
18,222,863 |
|
|
$ |
19,313,697 |
|
|
$ |
665,961 |
|
|
$ |
791,676 |
|
|
|
4.89 |
% |
|
|
5.48 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest-bearing liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brokered CDs |
|
$ |
7,195,479 |
|
|
$ |
7,267,812 |
|
|
$ |
124,967 |
|
|
$ |
180,815 |
|
|
|
2.32 |
% |
|
|
3.33 |
% |
Other interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
4,854,273 |
|
|
|
4,056,396 |
|
|
|
65,767 |
|
|
|
69,495 |
|
|
|
1.81 |
% |
|
|
2.29 |
% |
Loans payable |
|
|
400,549 |
|
|
|
574,117 |
|
|
|
3,442 |
|
|
|
1,423 |
|
|
|
1.15 |
% |
|
|
0.33 |
% |
Other borrowed funds |
|
|
2,697,408 |
|
|
|
3,799,118 |
|
|
|
75,998 |
|
|
|
95,113 |
|
|
|
3.77 |
% |
|
|
3.35 |
% |
FHLB advances |
|
|
926,444 |
|
|
|
1,395,752 |
|
|
|
22,460 |
|
|
|
24,736 |
|
|
|
3.24 |
% |
|
|
2.37 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest-bearing liabilities (6) |
|
$ |
16,074,153 |
|
|
$ |
17,093,195 |
|
|
$ |
292,634 |
|
|
$ |
371,582 |
|
|
|
2.43 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
373,327 |
|
|
$ |
420,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate spread |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.46 |
% |
|
|
2.57 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2.74 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
56
|
|
|
(1) |
|
On an adjusted tax-equivalent basis. The adjusted tax-equivalent yield was estimated by
dividing the interest rate spread on exempt assets by 1 less Puerto Rico statutory tax rate as
adjusted for changes to enacted tax rates (40.95% for the Corporations subsidiaries other
than IBEs and 35.95% for the Corporations IBEs) and adding to it the cost of interest-bearing
liabilities. The tax-equivalent adjustment recognizes the income tax savings when comparing
taxable and tax-exempt assets. Management believes that it is a standard practice in the
banking industry to present net interest income, interest rate spread and net interest margin
on a fully tax-equivalent basis. Therefore, management believes these measures provide useful
information to investors by allowing them to make peer comparisons. Changes in the fair value
of derivatives and unrealized gains or losses on liabilities measured at fair value are
excluded from interest income and interest expense because the changes in valuation do not
affect interest paid or received. |
|
(2) |
|
Government obligations include debt issued by government sponsored agencies. |
|
(3) |
|
Unrealized gains and losses in available-for-sale securities are excluded from the average
volumes. |
|
(4) |
|
Average loan balances include the average of non-performing loans. |
|
(5) |
|
Interest income on loans includes $2.5 million and $2.8 million for the third quarter of 2010
and 2009, respectively, and $8.1 million and $8.3 million for the nine-month period ended
September 30, 2010 and 2009, respectively, of income from prepayment penalties and late fees
related to the Corporations loan portfolio. |
|
(6) |
|
Unrealized gains and losses on liabilities measured at fair value are excluded from the
average volumes. |
Part II
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended September 30, |
|
|
Nine-month period ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 compared to 2009 |
|
|
2010 compared to 2009 |
|
|
|
Increase (decrease) |
|
|
Increase (decrease) |
|
|
|
Due to: |
|
|
Due to: |
|
|
|
Volume |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Volume |
|
|
Rate |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income on interest-earning assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Money market & other short-term investments |
|
$ |
558 |
|
|
$ |
(232 |
) |
|
$ |
326 |
|
|
$ |
1,809 |
|
|
$ |
(631 |
) |
|
$ |
1,178 |
|
Government obligations |
|
|
(140 |
) |
|
|
(1,546 |
) |
|
|
(1,686 |
) |
|
|
49 |
|
|
|
(20,263 |
) |
|
|
(20,214 |
) |
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
(26,250 |
) |
|
|
(9,847 |
) |
|
|
(36,097 |
) |
|
|
(54,927 |
) |
|
|
(28,603 |
) |
|
|
(83,530 |
) |
Corporate bonds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(162 |
) |
|
|
(15 |
) |
|
|
(177 |
) |
FHLB stock |
|
|
(156 |
) |
|
|
(242 |
) |
|
|
(398 |
) |
|
|
(239 |
) |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
(128 |
) |
Equity securities |
|
|
(4 |
) |
|
|
(14 |
) |
|
|
(18 |
) |
|
|
(12 |
) |
|
|
(27 |
) |
|
|
(39 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investments |
|
|
(25,992 |
) |
|
|
(11,881 |
) |
|
|
(37,873 |
) |
|
|
(53,482 |
) |
|
|
(49,428 |
) |
|
|
(102,910 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
(2,217 |
) |
|
|
439 |
|
|
|
(1,778 |
) |
|
|
410 |
|
|
|
(1,549 |
) |
|
|
(1,139 |
) |
Construction loans |
|
|
(2,548 |
) |
|
|
(1,758 |
) |
|
|
(4,306 |
) |
|
|
(4,638 |
) |
|
|
(9,027 |
) |
|
|
(13,665 |
) |
C&I and commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
(1,778 |
) |
|
|
5,251 |
|
|
|
3,473 |
|
|
|
1,430 |
|
|
|
3,887 |
|
|
|
5,317 |
|
Finance leases |
|
|
(838 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(838 |
) |
|
|
(2,652 |
) |
|
|
(313 |
) |
|
|
(2,965 |
) |
Consumer loans |
|
|
(4,464 |
) |
|
|
1,098 |
|
|
|
(3,366 |
) |
|
|
(13,341 |
) |
|
|
2,988 |
|
|
|
(10,353 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
|
(11,845 |
) |
|
|
5,030 |
|
|
|
(6,815 |
) |
|
|
(18,791 |
) |
|
|
(4,014 |
) |
|
|
(22,805 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest income |
|
|
(37,837 |
) |
|
|
(6,851 |
) |
|
|
(44,688 |
) |
|
|
(72,273 |
) |
|
|
(53,442 |
) |
|
|
(125,715 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Brokered CDs |
|
|
(2,459 |
) |
|
|
(9,760 |
) |
|
|
(12,219 |
) |
|
|
(1,778 |
) |
|
|
(54,070 |
) |
|
|
(55,848 |
) |
Other interest-bearing deposits |
|
|
4,819 |
|
|
|
(3,762 |
) |
|
|
1,057 |
|
|
|
12,268 |
|
|
|
(15,996 |
) |
|
|
(3,728 |
) |
Loan payable |
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(463 |
) |
|
|
(968 |
) |
|
|
2,987 |
|
|
|
2,019 |
|
Other borrowed funds |
|
|
(16,608 |
) |
|
|
7,681 |
|
|
|
(8,927 |
) |
|
|
(29,337 |
) |
|
|
10,222 |
|
|
|
(19,115 |
) |
FHLB advances |
|
|
(2,628 |
) |
|
|
1,680 |
|
|
|
(948 |
) |
|
|
(9,869 |
) |
|
|
7,593 |
|
|
|
(2,276 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total interest expense |
|
|
(17,339 |
) |
|
|
(4,161 |
) |
|
|
(21,500 |
) |
|
|
(29,684 |
) |
|
|
(49,264 |
) |
|
|
(78,948 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Change in net interest income |
|
$ |
(20,498 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,690 |
) |
|
$ |
(23,188 |
) |
|
$ |
(42,589 |
) |
|
$ |
(4,178 |
) |
|
$ |
(46,767 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Portions of the Corporations interest-earning assets, mostly investments in obligations
of some U.S. Government agencies and sponsored entities, generate interest which is exempt from
income tax, principally in Puerto Rico. Also, interest and gains on sales of investments held by
the Corporations international banking entities are tax-exempt under the Puerto Rico tax law,
except for a temporary 5% tax rate imposed by the Puerto Rico Government on IBEs net income
effective for years that commenced after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2012 (refer to the
Income Taxes discussion below for additional information). To facilitate the comparison of all
interest data related to these assets, the interest income has been converted to an adjusted
taxable equivalent basis. The tax equivalent yield was estimated by dividing the interest rate
spread on exempt assets by 1 less the Puerto Rico statutory tax rate as adjusted for changes to
enacted tax rates (40.95% for the Corporations subsidiaries other than IBEs and 35.95% for the
Corporations IBEs) and adding to it the average cost of interest-bearing liabilities. The
computation considers the interest expense disallowance required by Puerto Rico tax law. Refer to
the Income Taxes discussion below for additional information of the Puerto Rico tax law.
The presentation of net interest income excluding the effects of the changes in the fair value
of the derivative instruments and unrealized gains or losses on liabilities measured at fair value
(valuations) provides additional information about the Corporations
57
net interest income and facilitates comparability and analysis. The changes in the fair value
of the derivative instruments and unrealized gains or losses on liabilities measured at fair value
have no effect on interest due or interest earned on interest-bearing liabilities or
interest-earning assets, respectively, or on interest payments exchanged with derivatives
counterparties.
The following table reconciles net interest income in accordance with GAAP to net interest
income excluding valuations, and to net interest income on an adjusted tax-equivalent basis and
net interest rate spread and net interest margin on a GAAP basis to these items excluding
valuations and on an adjusted tax-equivalent basis:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
Net Interest Income (in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Income GAAP |
|
$ |
204,028 |
|
|
$ |
242,022 |
|
|
$ |
639,880 |
|
|
$ |
753,125 |
|
Unrealized loss (gain) on
derivative instruments |
|
|
938 |
|
|
|
1,485 |
|
|
|
2,169 |
|
|
|
(2,755 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income excluding valuations |
|
|
204,966 |
|
|
|
243,507 |
|
|
|
642,049 |
|
|
|
750,370 |
|
Tax-equivalent adjustment |
|
|
6,778 |
|
|
|
12,925 |
|
|
|
23,912 |
|
|
|
41,306 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income on a tax-equivalent basis excluding valuations |
|
|
211,744 |
|
|
|
256,432 |
|
|
|
665,961 |
|
|
|
791,676 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest Expense GAAP |
|
|
90,326 |
|
|
|
112,889 |
|
|
|
290,253 |
|
|
|
371,380 |
|
Unrealized (loss) gain on
derivative instruments and liabilities measured at fair value |
|
|
(526 |
) |
|
|
(1,589 |
) |
|
|
2,381 |
|
|
|
202 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest expense excluding valuations |
|
|
89,800 |
|
|
|
111,300 |
|
|
|
292,634 |
|
|
|
371,582 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income GAAP |
|
$ |
113,702 |
|
|
$ |
129,133 |
|
|
$ |
349,627 |
|
|
$ |
381,745 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income excluding valuations |
|
$ |
115,166 |
|
|
$ |
132,207 |
|
|
$ |
349,415 |
|
|
$ |
378,788 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income on a tax-equivalent basis excluding valuations |
|
$ |
121,944 |
|
|
$ |
145,132 |
|
|
$ |
373,327 |
|
|
$ |
420,094 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Balances (in thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans and leases |
|
$ |
12,443,055 |
|
|
$ |
13,321,100 |
|
|
$ |
13,008,559 |
|
|
$ |
13,353,628 |
|
Total securities and other short-term investments |
|
|
4,640,055 |
|
|
|
6,220,156 |
|
|
|
5,214,304 |
|
|
|
5,960,069 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Interest-Earning Assets |
|
$ |
17,083,110 |
|
|
$ |
19,541,256 |
|
|
$ |
18,222,863 |
|
|
$ |
19,313,697 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Interest-Bearing Liabilities |
|
$ |
15,002,168 |
|
|
$ |
17,308,432 |
|
|
$ |
16,074,153 |
|
|
$ |
17,093,195 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average Yield/Rate |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average yield on interest-earning assets GAAP |
|
|
4.74 |
% |
|
|
4.91 |
% |
|
|
4.69 |
% |
|
|
5.21 |
% |
Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities GAAP |
|
|
2.39 |
% |
|
|
2.59 |
% |
|
|
2.41 |
% |
|
|
2.90 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread GAAP |
|
|
2.35 |
% |
|
|
2.32 |
% |
|
|
2.28 |
% |
|
|
2.31 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin GAAP |
|
|
2.64 |
% |
|
|
2.62 |
% |
|
|
2.57 |
% |
|
|
2.64 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average yield on interest-earning assets excluding valuations |
|
|
4.76 |
% |
|
|
4.94 |
% |
|
|
4.71 |
% |
|
|
5.19 |
% |
Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities excluding valuations |
|
|
2.37 |
% |
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
2.43 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread excluding valuations |
|
|
2.39 |
% |
|
|
2.39 |
% |
|
|
2.28 |
% |
|
|
2.28 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin excluding valuations |
|
|
2.67 |
% |
|
|
2.68 |
% |
|
|
2.56 |
% |
|
|
2.62 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average yield on interest-earning assets on a tax-equivalent basis and excluding valuations |
|
|
4.92 |
% |
|
|
5.21 |
% |
|
|
4.89 |
% |
|
|
5.48 |
% |
Average rate on interest-bearing liabilities excluding valuations |
|
|
2.37 |
% |
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
2.43 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest spread on a tax-equivalent basis and excluding valuations |
|
|
2.55 |
% |
|
|
2.66 |
% |
|
|
2.46 |
% |
|
|
2.57 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest margin on a tax-equivalent basis and excluding valuations |
|
|
2.83 |
% |
|
|
2.95 |
% |
|
|
2.74 |
% |
|
|
2.91 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table summarizes the components of the changes in fair values of interest
rate swaps and interest rate caps, which are included in interest income:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-month Period Ended |
|
(In thousands) |
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
Unrealized (loss) gain on derivatives (economic undesignated hedges): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate caps |
|
$ |
(3 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,079 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,174 |
) |
|
$ |
1,771 |
|
Interest rate swaps on loans |
|
|
(935 |
) |
|
|
(406 |
) |
|
|
(995 |
) |
|
|
984 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized (loss) gain on derivatives (economic undesignated hedges) |
|
$ |
(938 |
) |
|
$ |
(1,485 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,169 |
) |
|
$ |
2,755 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
58
The following table summarizes the components of the net unrealized gain and loss on
derivatives (economic undesignated hedges) and net unrealized gain and loss on liabilities
measured at fair value which are included in interest expense:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter ended September 30, |
|
|
Nine-month period ended September 30, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Unrealized loss (gain) on derivatives (economic undesignated hedges): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest rate swaps and options on brokered CDs and stock index deposits |
|
$ |
1 |
|
|
$ |
(1 |
) |
|
$ |
2 |
|
|
$ |
5,317 |
|
Interest rate swaps and options on medium-term measured at fair value and stock index notes |
|
|
(25 |
) |
|
|
14 |
|
|
|
(76 |
) |
|
|
177 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized (gain) loss on derivatives (economic undesignated hedges) |
|
$ |
(24 |
) |
|
$ |
13 |
|
|
$ |
(74 |
) |
|
$ |
5,494 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized (gain) loss on liabilities measured at fair value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Unrealized gain on brokered CDs |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(8,696 |
) |
Unrealized loss (gain) on medium-term notes |
|
|
550 |
|
|
|
1,576 |
|
|
|
(2,307 |
) |
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized loss (gain)on liabilities measured at fair value |
|
$ |
550 |
|
|
$ |
1,576 |
|
|
$ |
(2,307 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,696 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net unrealized loss (gain) on derivatives (economic undesignated hedges)
and liabilities measured at fair value |
|
$ |
526 |
|
|
$ |
1,589 |
|
|
$ |
(2,381 |
) |
|
$ |
(202 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Interest income on interest-earning assets primarily represents interest earned on loans
receivable and investment securities.
Interest expense on interest-bearing liabilities primarily represents interest paid on
brokered CDs, branch-based deposits, repurchase agreements, advances from the FHLB and FED and
notes payable.
Unrealized gains or losses on derivatives represent changes in the fair value of derivatives,
primarily interest rate caps and swaps used for protection against rising interest rates and for
2009 mainly related to interest rate swaps that economically hedge brokered CDs and medium-term
notes. All interest rate swaps related to brokered CDs were called during the course of 2009 due
to the low level of interest rates and, as a consequence, the Corporation exercised its call option
on the swapped-to-floating brokered CDs that were recorded at fair value.
Unrealized gains or losses on liabilities measured at fair value represent the change in the
fair value of such liabilities (medium-term notes and brokered CDs), other than the accrual of
interests.
Derivative instruments, such as interest rate swaps, are subject to market risk. While the
Corporation does have certain trading derivatives to facilitate customer transactions, the
Corporation does not utilize derivative instruments for speculative purposes. As of September 30,
2010, most of the interest rate swaps outstanding are used for protection against rising interest
rates. In the past, the volume of interest rate swaps was much higher, as they were used to
convert the fixed-rate of a large portfolio of brokered CDs, mainly those with long-term
maturities, to a variable rate and to mitigate the interest rate risk related to variable rate
loans. Refer to Note 8 of the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements for
further details concerning the notional amounts of derivative instruments and additional
information. As is the case with investment securities, the market value of derivative instruments
is largely a function of the financial markets expectations regarding the future direction of
interest rates. Accordingly, current market values are not necessarily indicative of the future
impact of derivative instruments on net interest income. This will depend, for the most part, on
the shape of the yield curve, the level of interest rates, as well as the expectations for rates
in the future.
Net interest income decreased 12% to $113.7 million for the third quarter of 2010 from $129.1
million in the third quarter of 2009 and by 8% to $349.6 million for the first nine months of 2010
from $381.7 million for the first nine months of 2009. The decrease in net interest income was
mainly related to the deleveraging of the Corporations balance sheet to preserve its capital
position, the adverse impact on net interest margin of maintaining a higher liquidity position and
continued pressures from the high level of non-performing loans. Partially offsetting the decrease
in average interest-earning assets were reduced funding costs and improved spreads in commercial
loans.
The average volume of interest-earning assets for the third quarter and first nine months of
2010 decreased by $2.5 billion and $1.1 billion, respectively, as compared to comparable periods in
2009. The reduction in average earning assets primarily reflected a decrease of $1.6 billion and
of $745.8 million for the third quarter and first nine months of 2010, respectively, in average
investment securities and other short term investments, and a decrease of $878.0 million and of
$345.1 million for the third quarter and first nine months of 2010, respectively, in average loans
receivable. The decrease is consistent with the Corporations deleveraging and balance sheet
repositioning strategy for capital preservation purposes, and was achieved mainly by selling
investment securities and reducing the loan portfolio via paydowns and charge-offs. The decrease
in average securities was driven by the sale of approximately $2.2 billion of investment securities
over the last 12 months, mainly U.S. agency MBS, including the sale during the third quarter of
2010 of $1.2 billion of U.S. agency MBS that was matched with the early extinguishment of a
matching set of repurchase agreements.
59
Given the Corporations balance sheet structure and the shape and level of the yield curve,
which in turn is reflected in the valuation of the securities and the repurchase agreements, the
Corporation took advantage of market conditions during the third quarter of 2010 and completed the
sale of approximately $1.2 billion of mortgage-backed securities that was matched with the early
termination of approximately $1.0 billion of repurchase agreements. The cost of the unwinding of
the repurchase agreements of $47.4 million offset the gain of $47.1 million realized on the sale of
investment securities. The repaid repurchase agreements were scheduled to mature at various dates
between January 2011 and October 2012 and had a weighted average cost of 4.30%, which was higher
than the average yield of 3.93% on the securities that were sold. This balance sheet
re-structuring transaction, through which $1 billion of higher cost liabilities was disposed
without material earnings impact in the immediate term, will provide for enhancement of net
interest margin in the future, while also improving the Corporations leverage ratio.
The average volume of all major loan categories, in particular the average volume of
construction and commercial loans, decreased for the third quarter of 2010 compared to the same
period in 2009. The average volume of construction loans decreased by $364.0 million, mainly due
to the charge-off activity and the sale of non-performing credits, including the full and partial
effects of the approximately $158.1 million of non-performing construction loans sold over the last
12 months. The decrease also showed the effect of some very early improvements in residential
construction projects in Puerto Rico. On September 2, 2010, the Government of Puerto Rico enacted
legislation that provides, among other things, incentives to buyers of residences on the Island.
Such measures could result in improvements in the construction lending sector. Refer to the Risk
Management Credit Quality Non-performing Loans and Non-performing Assets section below for
additional information. The decrease in average commercial loans of $169.0 million for the third
quarter of 2010, as compared to the third quarter of 2009, was primarily related to both
charge-offs and paydowns, including repayments of facilities granted to the Puerto Rico and Virgin
Islands governments. The average volume of residential mortgage loans decreased by $147.7 million
for the third quarter of 2010, compared to the same period in 2009, driven by sales of loans in the
secondary market, including $109.4 million of sales completed during the third quarter, and by
charge-offs and paydowns. The average volume of consumer loans (including finance leases)
decreased by $197.3 million for the third quarter of 2010, compared to the same period a year ago,
resulting from paydowns and charge-offs that exceeded new loan originations.
While the average balance of the construction and consumer loan portfolios for the first
nine months of 2010 decreased by $203.6 million and $198.5 million, respectively, for the reasons
stated above, a slight increase of $47 million and $10.1 million was observed for the commercial
and residential mortgage loans portfolios. The Corporation increased its credit facilities
extended to the Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands Government in the latter part of 2009 and early
2010, thus, on a year to date basis the average volume of commercial loans for 2010 was higher than
in 2009. The increase in the average volume of residential mortgage loans for the first nine
months of 2010, compared to the same period in 2009, was mainly related to the purchase in the
latter part of June 2009 of approximately $205 million of residential mortgage loans that
previously served as collateral for a commercial loan extended to R&G Financial Corporation.
As mentioned above, the deleveraging and balance sheet repositioning strategies resulted in a
net reduction in securities and loans that have allowed a reduction in average wholesale funding of
$3.3 billion and $1.8 billion for the quarter and first nine months of 2010, respectively,
including repurchase agreements, advances and brokered CDs. The average balance of brokered CDs
decreased to $6.9 billion and $7.2 billion for the third quarter and first nine months of 2010,
respectively, from $7.3 billion for both the quarter and first nine month periods of 2009. The
average balance of interest-bearing deposits, excluding brokered CDs, increased by 25%, or $1.0
billion, during the third quarter of 2010, as compared to the same period of 2009, and by 20%, or
$797.9 million for the first nine months of 2010 compared to the same period a year ago.
Net interest margin on an adjusted tax-equivalent basis and excluding valuations decreased to
2.83% for the third quarter of 2010 from 2.95% for the same period in 2009, and to 2.74% for the
first nine months of 2010 from 2.91% for the first nine months of 2009 adversely affected by the
maintenance of excess liquidity in the balance sheet due to the current economic environment.
Liquidity volumes were significantly higher than normal levels as reflected in average balances in
money market and overnight funding of $794.3 million and $849.2 million for the third quarter and
first nine months of 2010, respectively, compared to $161.5 million and $126.2 million for the
comparable periods in 2009. Also, affecting the margin were the lower yields on investments
affected by the MBS sales and the approximately $1.2 billion in investment securities called over
the last twelve months that were replaced with lower yielding U.S. agency investment securities.
The high volume of non-performing loans continued to pressure net interest margins as interest
payments of approximately $1.3 million and $5.1 million during the third quarter and first nine
months of 2010, respectively, were applied against the related principal balance for loans recorded
under the cost-recovery method. Partially offsetting the aforementioned factors was the reduction
in funding costs and improved spreads in commercial loans. The overall average cost of funding
decreased by 18 basis points and 48 basis points for the quarter and first nine months of 2010,
respectively, compared to the corresponding 2009 periods as the Corporation benefited from the
lower deposit pricing on its core and brokered CDs and from the roll-off and repayments of higher
cost funds, such as maturing brokered CDs and repurchase agreements. The higher yield on
commercial loans resulted from a wider LIBOR spread, higher spreads on loan renewals and improved
pricing, as the Corporation has been increasing the use of interest rate floors in new commercial
loan agreements.
On an adjusted tax-equivalent basis and excluding valuations, net interest income decreased by
$23.2 million, or 16%, for the third quarter of 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 and by
$46.8 million, or 11%, for the first nine months of 2010 compared to the first nine months of 2009.
The decrease for 2010 includes a decrease of $6.1 million and $17.4 million for the third quarter
and first
60
nine months of 2010, respectively, compared to the same period in 2009 in the tax-equivalent
adjustment. The tax-equivalent adjustment increases interest income on tax-exempt securities and
loans by an amount which makes tax-exempt income comparable, on a pre-tax basis, to the
Corporations taxable income as previously stated. The decrease in the tax-equivalent adjustment
was mainly related to decreases in the interest rate spread on tax-exempt assets, primarily due to
a higher proportion of taxable assets to total interest-earning assets resulting from the
maintenance of a higher liquidity position and lower yields on U.S. agency and MBS held by the
Corporations IBE subsidiary. The Corporation replaced securities called and prepayments and sales
of MBS with shorter-term securities.
Provision and Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses
The provision for loan and lease losses is charged to earnings to maintain the allowance for
loan and lease losses at a level that the Corporation considers adequate to absorb probable losses
inherent in the portfolio. The adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses is also based
upon a number of additional factors including trends in charge-offs and delinquencies, current
economic conditions, the fair value of the underlying collateral and the financial condition of the
borrowers, and, as such, includes amounts based on judgments and estimates made by the Corporation.
Although the Corporation believes that the allowance for loan and lease losses is adequate, factors
beyond the Corporations control, including factors affecting the economies of Puerto Rico, the
United States, the U.S. Virgin Islands and the British Virgin Islands, may contribute to
delinquencies and defaults, thus necessitating additional reserves.
For the quarter and nine-month period ended on September 30, 2010, the Corporation recorded a
provision for loan and lease losses of $120.5 million and $438.2 million, respectively, compared to
$148.1 million and $442.7 million for the comparable periods in 2009. Much of the decrease in the
provision was related to the construction loans portfolio in Florida and the C&I loan portfolio in
Puerto Rico, primarily due to lower charges to specific reserves for impaired loans in Florida, the
slower migration of loans to non-performing status and the overall reduction of the loan portfolio.
The decreases in the provisioning for these portfolios were partially offset by an increase in the
provision for the residential mortgage loans portfolio affected by increases in historical loss
rates and declines in collateral value. The Corporation has continued to build its reserves based
on recent appraisals and broker price opinions, charge-off trends and environmental factors and
increased general reserve factors for all of its portfolios. The provision to net-charge offs
ratio of 104% for the third quarter of 2010 reflects, among other things, the fact that
approximately 59% of net charge-offs recorded during the quarter was related to loans for which the
Corporation had previously established adequate specific reserves, including non-performing loans
sold during the quarter. Expressed as a percent of period-end total loans receivable, the reserve
coverage ratio increased to 5.00% at September 30, 2010, compared with 3.79% at December 31, 2009.
In terms of geography, in Puerto Rico, the Corporation recorded a provision of $112.6 million
and $312.5 million in the second quarter and first nine months of 2010, respectively, compared to
$107.4 million and $286.9 million, respectively, for the comparable periods in 2009. The increase
for the third quarter of 2010 is mainly related to the residential mortgage and construction loan
portfolio. The provision for residential mortgage loans in Puerto Rico for the third quarter of
2010, compared to the same period in 2009, increased by $11.7 million affected by negative trends
in loss rates and falling property values confirmed by recent appraisals and/or broker price
opinions. The reserve factors for residential mortgage loans were recalibrated in 2010 as part of
further segmentation and analysis of this portfolio for purposes of computing the required specific
and general reserves. The review included the incorporation of updated loss factors to loans
expected to liquidate considering the expected realization of the values of similar assets at
disposition. The provision for construction loans in Puerto Rico increased by $7.8 million for the
third quarter of 2010 compared to the same period in 2009 driven by higher charges to specific
reserves and increases to the general reserve factors. The provision for C&I loans in Puerto Rico
decreased by $15.4 million for the third quarter of 2010, compared to the same period a year ago,
driven by the slower migration of loans to non-performing and/or impaired status, the overall
reduction in the C&I portfolio size and the determination that lower reserves were required for
certain loans that were individually evaluated for impairment in 2010, based on the underlying
value of the collateral, when compared to the reserves required for these loans in periods prior to
2010. The provision for commercial mortgage loans in Puerto Rico for the third quarter of 2010,
compared to the same period in 2009, increased by $5.6 million also affected by declines in
collateral values reflected in increases in net charge-offs. The provision for consumer loans,
including finance leases, in Puerto Rico decreased by $4.5 million for the third quarter of 2010,
compared to the same period in 2009, mainly related to improvements in delinquency and charge-offs
trends.
In Puerto Rico, the increase in the provision for the first nine months of 2010, compared to
the first nine months of 2009, was mainly related to the residential and commercial mortgage loan
portfolio, which increased by $36.3 million and $20.3 million, respectively, driven by higher
charge-offs driven by pressures on collateral values. The provision for construction loans
increased by $18.1 million mainly related to higher charges to specific reserves in 2010. This was
partially offset by a decrease of $53.2 million in the provision for the C&I loan portfolio
attributable to the factors discussed above with respect to the third quarter change.
With respect to the loan portfolio in the United States, the Corporation recorded a provision
of $4.1 million and $108.9 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2010,
respectively, compared to $32.3 million and $133.1 million, respectively, for the comparable
periods in 2009. The decrease for the third quarter and first nine months was mainly related to
the construction loan portfolio and reflected lower charges to specific reserves, the slower
migration of loans to non-performing status and the overall reduction of the Corporations exposure
to construction loans in Florida. The provision for construction loans in the United States
decreased by $15.3 million and $34.7 million for the third quarter and first nine months of 2010,
compared to the same periods a year ago, as the non-
61
performing construction loans portfolio in this region decreased by 79% to $74.8 million,
compared to $355.0 million as of September 30, 2009. Charge-offs for construction loans in Florida
during the third quarter of 2010 were mainly concentrated on previously identified impaired loans
that were sold during the quarter or impaired loans with previously established adequate specific
reserves. As of September 30, 2010, approximately $93.4 million, or 87%, of the total exposure to
construction loans in Florida was individually measured for impairment. The Corporation continues
to reduce its credit exposure in this market through the disposition of assets and different loss
mitigation initiatives as the end of this difficult economic cycle appears to be approaching. Over
the last 12 months, the Corporation has completed the sale of approximately $231.4 million of
impaired construction and commercial mortgage loans and other non-performing assets in Florida.
The provision recorded for the loan portfolio in the Virgin Islands amounted to $3.8 million
and $16.8 million in the third quarter and first nine months of 2010, a decrease of $4.6 million
and $5.9 million, respectively, compared to the same periods a year ago mainly associated with
decreases in general reserve factors allocated to this loan portfolio that incorporate the
significantly lower historical charge-offs in this region. Refer to the discussions under Credit
Risk Management below for an analysis of the allowance for loan and lease losses, non-performing
assets, impaired loans and related information and refer to the discussions under Financial
Condition and Operating Analysis Loan Portfolio and under Risk Management Credit Risk
Management below for additional information concerning the Corporations loan portfolio exposure
in the geographic areas where the Corporation does business.
Non-Interest Income
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Other service charges on loans |
|
$ |
1,963 |
|
|
$ |
1,796 |
|
|
$ |
5,205 |
|
|
$ |
4,848 |
|
Service charges on deposit accounts |
|
|
3,325 |
|
|
|
3,458 |
|
|
|
10,294 |
|
|
|
9,950 |
|
Mortgage banking activities |
|
|
6,474 |
|
|
|
3,000 |
|
|
|
11,114 |
|
|
|
6,179 |
|
Rental income |
|
|
|
|
|
|
390 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,246 |
|
Insurance income |
|
|
1,658 |
|
|
|
2,316 |
|
|
|
6,079 |
|
|
|
6,915 |
|
Other operating income |
|
|
4,970 |
|
|
|
4,964 |
|
|
|
15,548 |
|
|
|
13,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest income before net gain on investments
and loss on early extinguishment of repurchase
agreements |
|
|
18,390 |
|
|
|
15,924 |
|
|
|
48,240 |
|
|
|
42,698 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gain on VISA shares |
|
|
|
|
|
|
3,784 |
|
|
|
10,668 |
|
|
|
3,784 |
|
Net gain on sale of investments |
|
|
48,281 |
|
|
|
30,490 |
|
|
|
93,217 |
|
|
|
58,633 |
|
OTTI on equity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(603 |
) |
|
|
(388 |
) |
OTTI on debt securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(209 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1,270 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net gain on investments |
|
|
48,281 |
|
|
|
34,065 |
|
|
|
103,282 |
|
|
|
60,759 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loss on early extinguishment of repurchase agreements |
|
|
(47,405 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
(47,405 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
19,266 |
|
|
$ |
49,989 |
|
|
$ |
104,117 |
|
|
$ |
103,457 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest income primarily consists of other service charges on loans; service charges
on deposit accounts; commissions derived from various banking, securities and insurance activities;
gains and losses on mortgage banking activities; and net gains and losses on investments and
impairments.
Other service charges on loans consist mainly of service charges on credit card-related
activities and other non-deferrable fees (e.g. agent, commitment, unused and drawing fees).
Service charges on deposit accounts include monthly fees and other fees on deposit accounts.
Income from mortgage banking activities includes gains on sales and securitization of loans
and revenues earned administering residential mortgage loans originated by the Corporation and
subsequently sold with servicing retained. In addition, lower-of-cost-or-market valuation
adjustments to the Corporations residential mortgage loans held for sale portfolio and servicing
rights, if any, are recorded as part of mortgage banking activities.
Rental income represents income generated by the Corporations subsidiary, First Leasing, on
the daily rental of various types of motor vehicles. As part of its strategies to focus on its
core business, the Corporation divested its short-term auto rental business during the fourth
quarter of 2009.
Insurance income consists of insurance commissions earned by the Corporations subsidiary
FirstBank Insurance Agency, Inc., and the Banks subsidiary in the U.S. Virgin Islands, FirstBank
Insurance V.I., Inc. These subsidiaries offer a wide variety of insurance business.
62
The other operating income category is composed of miscellaneous fees such as debit, credit
card and point of sale (POS) interchange fees and check and cash management fees and includes
commissions from the Corporations broker-dealer subsidiary, FirstBank Puerto Rico Securities.
The net gain (loss) on investment securities reflects gains or losses as a result of sales
that are consistent with the Corporations investment policies as well as OTTI charges on the
Corporations investment portfolio.
Non-interest income decreased $30.7 million to $19.3 million for the third quarter of 2010
from $50.0 million for the third quarter of 2009. The decrease in non-interest income reflected:
|
|
|
Lower gains on sale of investments securities, other than the sale of
mortgage-backed securities (MBS) that was matched with the early termination of repurchase agreements, as the Corporation realized gains of
approximately $1.7 million on the sale of approximately $61.9 million of MBS, versus the $34.0 million aggregate gain recorded on the sale of
approximately $613 million of U.S. agency MBS, $98 million of U.S Treasury Notes and VISA
Class A shares in the third quarter of 2009. A nominal loss of approximately $0.3 million
was recorded in the third quarter of 2010, resulting from the aforementioned transaction in
which the Corporation sold approximately $1.2 billion in MBS, combined with the unwinding
of a matching set of repurchase agreements as part of a balance sheet repositioning
strategy. |
|
|
|
|
A $0.7 million decrease in income from insurance activities. |
The aforementioned decreases were partially offset by the $3.5 million increase in gains from
mortgage-banking activities, driven by gains (including the recognition of servicing rights) of
$6.6 million recorded on the sale and securitization of approximately $169.2 million of residential
mortgage loans in the secondary market, compared to gains of $2.1 million on $107.1 million
residential mortgage loans sold and securitized during the third quarter of 2009. As part of its
balance sheet strategies the Corporation is originating a higher proportion of conforming
residential mortgage loans that can be sold in the secondary market.
Non-interest income increased $0.7 million to $104.1 million for the first nine months of 2010
from $103.5 million for the first nine months of 2009. The increase in non-interest income
reflected:
|
|
|
A $4.9 million increase in gains from mortgage banking activities as gains (including
the recognition of servicing rights) of $10.4 million were recorded on the sale and
securitization of approximately $315.0 million of residential mortgage loans for the first
nine months of 2010 compared to $5.9 million for the same period in 2009. |
|
|
|
|
Commissions of $2.1 million earned by FirstBank Puerto Rico Securities, a recently
organized broker-dealer subsidiary engaged in a municipal securities underwriting business
for local Puerto Rico municipal bond issuers. |
|
|
|
|
A $0.4 million increase in loan fees. |
|
|
|
|
A $0.3 million increase in service charges on deposit accounts. |
Partially offsetting the aforementioned increases was,
|
|
|
A decrease of $5.6 million on realized gains of investment securities when excluding the
aforementioned nominal loss of $0.3 million resulting from the sale of MBS and early
termination of repurchase agreements. |
|
|
|
|
A $0.8 million decrease in income from insurance activities |
Also, no income from vehicle rental activities was recorded in 2010 as the Corporation divested
its short-term auto rental business during the fourth quarter of 2009.
63
Non-Interest Expenses
The following table presents the detail of non-interest expenses for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Employees compensation and benefits |
|
$ |
29,849 |
|
|
$ |
34,403 |
|
|
$ |
92,535 |
|
|
$ |
103,117 |
|
Occupancy and equipment |
|
|
14,655 |
|
|
|
15,291 |
|
|
|
43,957 |
|
|
|
47,513 |
|
Deposit insurance premium |
|
|
14,702 |
|
|
|
6,884 |
|
|
|
46,724 |
|
|
|
26,659 |
|
Other taxes, insurance and supervisory fees |
|
|
5,401 |
|
|
|
4,206 |
|
|
|
16,141 |
|
|
|
15,743 |
|
Professional fees recurring |
|
|
4,043 |
|
|
|
3,391 |
|
|
|
13,218 |
|
|
|
9,352 |
|
Professional fees non-recurring |
|
|
490 |
|
|
|
415 |
|
|
|
2,206 |
|
|
|
982 |
|
Servicing and processing fees |
|
|
2,188 |
|
|
|
2,784 |
|
|
|
6,751 |
|
|
|
7,342 |
|
Business promotion |
|
|
3,226 |
|
|
|
2,879 |
|
|
|
8,771 |
|
|
|
9,831 |
|
Communications |
|
|
2,060 |
|
|
|
2,083 |
|
|
|
6,002 |
|
|
|
6,228 |
|
Net loss on REO operations |
|
|
8,193 |
|
|
|
5,015 |
|
|
|
22,702 |
|
|
|
17,016 |
|
Other |
|
|
3,875 |
|
|
|
5,426 |
|
|
|
19,648 |
|
|
|
19,510 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
88,682 |
|
|
$ |
82,777 |
|
|
$ |
278,655 |
|
|
$ |
263,293 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-interest expenses increased $5.9 million to $88.7 million for the third quarter of 2010
from $82.8 million for the third quarter of 2009. The increase reflected:
|
|
|
An increase of $7.8 million in the FDIC deposit insurance premium, as premium rates
increased and the level of deposits grew. |
|
|
|
An increase of $3.2 million in losses from REO operations, mainly due to higher losses
on sales, and write-downs to the value, of repossessed residential and commercial
properties in both Puerto Rico and Florida as well as higher costs associated with a larger
inventory. |
The aforementioned increases were partially offset by a decrease of $4.6 million in employees
compensation, reflecting reductions in bonuses and other benefits and a lower headcount. Other cost
reductions were achieved in occupancy costs and by the divesture of the daily auto rental business.
Non-interest expenses increased $15.4 million to $278.7 million for the first nine months of
2010 from $263.3 million for the same period in 2009. The increase reflected:
|
|
|
An increase of $20.1 million in the FDIC deposit insurance premium. |
|
|
|
A $6.8 million increase in the reserve for probable losses on outstanding unfunded loan
commitments included as part of Other expenses in the above table. |
|
|
|
An increase of $5.7 million in losses from REO operations due to write-downs and costs
associated with a larger inventory. |
|
|
|
A $5.1 million increase in professional fees, attributable in part to higher legal fees
related to collections and foreclosure procedures and mortgage appraisals. |
The aforementioned increases were partially offset by decreases in expenses such as:
|
|
|
A $10.6 million decrease in employees compensation and benefit expenses, mainly due to
a lower headcount and lower bonuses and other compensation benefits. The number of full
time equivalent employees decreased by approximately 247, or 9%, over the last 12 months. |
|
|
|
The impact in the first nine months of 2009 of a non-recurring $2.6 million charge to
property tax expense attributable to the reassessed value of certain properties and
reduction in maintenance, rental and other occupancy costs. |
|
|
|
A $1.1 million reduction in business promotion expenses, and |
|
|
|
The impact in the first nine months of 2009 of a $4.0 million impairment charge
associated with the core deposit intangible asset in the Corporations Florida operations
included as part of Other expenses in the above table. |
The Corporation intends to continue to improve its operating efficiency by further reducing
controllable expenses, consolidating its infrastructure in a new service center building,
rationalizing its business operations and enhancing its technological infrastructure through
targeted investments. During the third quarter of 2010, the Corporation completed the transfer of
various operations and personnel to a new centralized operations building, which is expected to
result in additional savings in occupancy and other operating costs while improving operational
efficiencies.
A total of 960 employees, mostly in support functions, have been already relocated to this new facility.
64
Income Taxes
Income tax expense includes Puerto Rico and Virgin Islands income taxes as well as applicable
U.S. federal and state taxes. The Corporation is subject to Puerto Rico income tax on its income
from all sources. As a Puerto Rico corporation, First BanCorp is treated as a foreign corporation
for U.S. income tax purposes and is generally subject to United States income tax only on its
income from sources within the United States or income effectively connected with the conduct of a
trade or business within the United States. Any such tax paid is creditable, within certain
conditions and limitations, against the Corporations Puerto Rico tax liability. The Corporation
is also subject to U.S. Virgin Islands taxes on its income from sources within that jurisdiction.
Any such tax paid is also creditable against the Corporations Puerto Rico tax liability, subject
to certain conditions and limitations.
Under the Puerto Rico Internal Revenue Code of 1994, as amended (PR Code), First BanCorp is
subject to a maximum statutory tax rate of 39%. In 2009, the Puerto Rico Government approved Act
No. 7 (the Act) to stimulate Puerto Ricos economy and to reduce the Puerto Rico Governments
fiscal deficit. The Act imposes a series of temporary and permanent measures, including the
imposition of a 5% surtax over the total income tax determined, which is applicable to
corporations, among others, whose combined income exceeds $100,000, effectively resulting in an
increase in the maximum statutory tax rate from 39% to 40.95% and an increase in the capital gain
statutory tax rate from 15% to 15.75%. This temporary measure is effective for tax years that
commenced after December 31, 2008 and before January 1, 2012. The PR Code also includes an
alternative minimum tax of 22% that applies if the Corporations regular income tax liability is
less than the alternative minimum tax requirements.
The Corporation has maintained an effective tax rate lower than the maximum statutory rate
mainly by investing in government obligations and mortgage-backed securities exempt from U.S. and
Puerto Rico income taxes and by doing business through the IBE of the Bank and
through the Banks subsidiary FirstBank Overseas Corporation, in which the interest income and gain
on sales is exempt from Puerto Rico and U.S. income taxation. Under the Act, all IBEs are subject
to a special 5% tax on their net income not otherwise subject to tax pursuant to the PR Code.
This temporary measure is also effective for tax years that commence after December 31, 2008 and
before January 1, 2012. The IBE of the Bank and FirstBank Overseas Corporation were created under the
International Banking Entity Act of Puerto Rico, which provides for total Puerto Rico tax exemption
on net income derived by IBEs operating in Puerto Rico. IBEs that operate as a unit of a bank pay
income taxes at normal rates to the extent that the IBEs net income exceeds 20% of the banks
total net taxable income.
For the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010, the Corporation recognized an
income tax benefit of $1.0 million and an income tax expense of $9.7 million, respectively,
compared to an income tax expense of $113.5 million and $1.2 million recorded for the same periods
in 2009. The variance in income tax expense mainly resulted from the impact in the third quarter
of 2009 of a non-cash charge of approximately $152.2 million to increase the valuation allowance
for the Corporations deferred tax asset. The income tax benefit recorded for the third quarter of
2010 was mainly related to the operations of FirstBank Overseas, which had a pre-tax loss of $30.5
million during the third quarter, driven by its share of the loss on the early extinguishment of
repurchase agreements. This entity was profitable for the nine-month period ended September 30,
2010. Meanwhile, the income tax expense for the first nine months of 2010 is related to the
operations of profitable subsidiaries.
As of September 30, 2010, the deferred tax asset, net of a valuation allowance of $290.5
million, amounted to $101.2 million compared to $109.2 million as of December 31, 2009. The
decrease was associated with a $3.5 million increase in the valuation allowance related to deferred
tax assets created prior to 2010 and the creation of deferred tax liabilities in connection with
unrealized gains on available for sale securities; such charge was recorded as part of other
comprehensive income.
Accounting for income taxes requires that companies assess whether a valuation allowance
should be recorded against their deferred tax assets based on the consideration of all available
evidence, using a more likely than not realization standard. Valuation allowances are
established, when necessary, to reduce deferred tax assets to the amount that is more likely than
not to be realized. In making such assessment, significant weight is to be given to evidence that
can be objectively verified, including both positive and negative evidence. The accounting for
income taxes guidance requires the consideration of all sources of taxable income available to
realize the deferred tax asset, including the future reversal of existing temporary differences,
future taxable income exclusive of the reversal of temporary differences and carryforwards, taxable
income in carryback years and tax planning strategies. In estimating taxes, management assesses
the relative merits and risks of the appropriate tax treatment of transactions taking into account
statutory, judicial and regulatory guidance, and recognizes tax benefits only when deemed probable.
In assessing the weight of positive and negative evidence, a significant negative factor that
resulted in an increase in the valuation allowance was that the Corporations banking subsidiary,
FirstBank Puerto Rico, continues in a three-year historical cumulative loss position as of the end
of the third quarter of 2010, mainly as a result of charges to the provision for loan and lease
losses, especially in the construction loan portfolio in both the Puerto Rico and Florida markets,
as a result of the economic downturn. As of September 30, 2010, management concluded that $101.2
million of the deferred tax assets will be realized. In assessing the likelihood of realizing the
deferred tax assets, management has considered all four sources of taxable income mentioned above
and, even though the Corporation expects to be profitable in the near future and to be able to
realize the deferred tax asset, given current uncertain economic conditions, the Corporation has
only relied on tax-planning strategies as the main source of taxable income to realize the deferred
tax
65
asset amount. Among the most significant tax-planning strategies identified are: (i) sale of
appreciated assets, (ii) consolidation of profitable and unprofitable companies (in Puerto Rico
each company files a separate tax return; no consolidated tax returns are permitted), and (iii)
deferral of deductions without affecting their utilization. In line with these strategies,
effective July 1, 2010 the operations conducted by First Leasing and Grupo Empresas de Servicios
Financieros (PR Finance Group) as separate subsidiaries were merged with and into FirstBank Puerto
Rico. Management will continue monitoring the likelihood of realizing the deferred tax assets in
future periods. If future events differ from managements September 30, 2010 assessment, an
additional valuation allowance may need to be established which may have a material adverse effect
on the Corporations results of operations. Similarly, to the extent the realization of a portion,
or all, of the tax asset becomes more likely than not based on changes in circumstances (such as,
improved earnings, changes in tax laws or other relevant changes), a reversal of that portion of
the deferred tax asset valuation allowance will then be recorded.
The increase in the valuation allowance does not have any impact on the Corporations
liquidity, nor does such an allowance preclude the Corporation from using tax losses, tax credits
or other deferred tax assets in the future.
On October 26, 2010, the Governor of Puerto Rico submitted a proposal to amend the existing PR
Code for review and consideration by the Legislature. Implementation of the amended tax code would
be divided in various phases. The first phase would be in effect for the income tax return for 2010, while the
second phase would be implemented between 2011 and 2016. The
following amendments are included in the first phase and could affect the Corporation is results
and/or operations.
|
|
|
The carryover period to deduct the net operating losses incurred from 2005 to 2012,
would be increased from 7 to 10 years. |
|
|
|
A new requirement would be established for financial institutions related to
applications or requests for extensions of credit. The Bill requires the filing of an
informative return for all credit transactions, including: loans application (commercial
or personal), credit line, margin account, credit card, mortgage guarantee loans or any
other type of transactions to borrow money. The informative return will apply to any credit
transaction of $250,000 or more; or $500,000 or more if related to the acquisition of
residential property. |
Although
the presented Bills only includes the details of the first phase, the
Governors announcement included proposed changes for the
second phase, including possible tax rates reductions for non-exempt
corporations. The effect of the proposed Bills on the Corporations results from operations has not been
determined, given that the Bills are currently under consideration and are subject to amendments.
FINANCIAL CONDITION AND OPERATING DATA ANALYSIS
Assets
Total assets were approximately $16.7 billion as of September 30, 2010, down from
approximately $19.6 billion as of December 31, 2009. The Corporation has deleveraged its balance
sheet in order to preserve capital, principally by selling investments and reducing the size of the
loan portfolio. During the first nine months of 2010, the investment portfolio decreased by
approximately $1.3 billion, while the loan portfolio, net of the allowance for loan and lease
losses, decreased by $1.8 billion. This decrease in securities and loans, resulting from
deleveraging and balance sheet repositioning strategies, allowed a reduction of $3.6 billion in
wholesale funding since the end of 2009, including repurchase agreements, advances and brokered
CDs. The reduction in securities during the first nine months of 2010 was driven by the sale of $2.1 billion
of MBS and $252 million in U.S. Treasury notes during the first nine months of 2010, combined with
the call of approximately $1.2 billion of investment securities, mainly U.S. agency debt
securities, prior to their contractual maturities, and principal repayments of MBS. This was
partially offset by purchases of shorter-term securities, U.S. Treasury, U.S. agency MBS and debt
securities. Among the sales of MBS during the first nine months of 2010 was the aforementioned
sale of $1.2 billion in investment securities that was combined with the early termination of
repurchase agreements. The deleveraging was achieved without a material impact to earnings. Refer
to the net interest income discussion above for additional details of this transaction.
Significant decreases in loans have been achieved mainly through the non-renewal of matured
commercial loans, such as temporary loan facilities to the Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands
governments, through the charge-off of portions of loans deemed uncollectible and, to a lesser
extent, the sale of non-performing loans. In addition, a reduced volume of loan originations has
contributed to this deleveraging strategy. In terms of cash and cash equivalents, the Corporation
has invested some of its excess liquidity in overnight funding due to the current economic
environment resulting in an increase of $200.5 million since December 2009. The Corporation
intends to continue with the targeted deleveraging of its balance sheet through reduction of the
construction portfolio, sales of investment securities on an opportunistic basis and the sale of
non-performing assets.
66
Loan Portfolio
The following table presents the composition of the Corporations loan portfolio, including
loans held for sale, as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Residential mortgage loans, including loans held for sale |
|
$ |
3,457,531 |
|
|
$ |
3,616,283 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
1,742,462 |
|
|
|
1,693,424 |
|
Construction loans |
|
|
1,114,647 |
|
|
|
1,492,589 |
|
Commercial and Industrial loans (1) |
|
|
3,824,916 |
|
|
|
4,927,304 |
|
Loans to local financial institutions collateralized by
real estate mortgages |
|
|
295,855 |
|
|
|
321,522 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial loans |
|
|
6,977,880 |
|
|
|
8,434,839 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finance leases |
|
|
289,573 |
|
|
|
318,504 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and other loans |
|
|
1,464,238 |
|
|
|
1,579,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans, gross |
|
$ |
12,189,222 |
|
|
$ |
13,949,226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
As of September 30, 2010, includes $1.8 billion
of commercial loans that are secured by real estate but
are not dependent upon the real estate for repayment. |
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations total loans decreased by $1.8 billion, when
compared with the balance as of December 31, 2009. All major loan categories decreased from 2009
levels, driven by repayments of approximately $1.4 billion from credit facilities extended to the
Puerto Rico government as well as charge-offs, pay-downs and sales of loans. The slight increase
in commercial mortgage loans was mainly related to the approximately$109.1 million of construction
loans that were converted to commercial mortgage loans during the third quarter of 2010, of which
$78 million have Puerto Rico government guarantees.
Of the total gross loan portfolio of $12.2 billion as of September 30, 2010, approximately 84%
has credit risk concentration in Puerto Rico, 8% in the United States (mainly in the state of
Florida) and 8% in the Virgin Islands, as shown in the following table:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
(In thousands) |
|
Puerto Rico |
|
|
Virgin Islands |
|
|
Florida |
|
|
Consolidated |
|
Residential mortgage loans |
|
$ |
2,673,014 |
|
|
$ |
442,466 |
|
|
$ |
342,051 |
|
|
$ |
3,457,531 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans (1) |
|
|
814,480 |
|
|
|
192,917 |
|
|
|
107,250 |
|
|
|
1,114,647 |
|
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
1,227,059 |
|
|
|
68,441 |
|
|
|
446,962 |
|
|
|
1,742,462 |
|
Commercial and Industrial loans |
|
|
3,631,273 |
|
|
|
163,284 |
|
|
|
30,359 |
|
|
|
3,824,916 |
|
Loans to a local financial institution collateralized by real estate mortgages |
|
|
295,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
295,855 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial loans |
|
|
5,968,667 |
|
|
|
424,642 |
|
|
|
584,571 |
|
|
|
6,977,880 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Finance leases |
|
|
289,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
289,573 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer loans |
|
|
1,355,571 |
|
|
|
78,347 |
|
|
|
30,320 |
|
|
|
1,464,238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loans |
|
$ |
10,286,825 |
|
|
$ |
945,455 |
|
|
$ |
956,942 |
|
|
$ |
12,189,222 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 - |
|
Construction loans of Florida operations include approximately $18.5 million of
condo-conversion loans. |
Loan Production
First BanCorp relies primarily on its retail network of branches to originate residential and
consumer loans. The Corporation supplements its residential mortgage originations with wholesale
servicing released mortgage loan purchases from mortgage bankers. The Corporation manages its
construction and commercial loan originations through centralized units and most of its
originations come from existing customers as well as through referrals and direct solicitations.
For commercial loan originations, the Corporation also has regional offices to provide services to
designated territories.
Total loan production, including purchases, refinancings and draws from existing commitments,
for the quarter and nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 was $895.6 million and $2.2 billion,
respectively, compared to $1.4 billion and $3.6 billion, respectively, for the comparable periods
in 2009. The decrease in loan production for 2010 was mainly associated with the reduction in
credit facilities extended to the Puerto Rico Government. During the first nine months of 2010,
credit facilities to the Puerto Rico government amounted to $485.9 million compared to
approximately $1.3 billion for the comparable period in 2009. Originations in 2009 included a $1.0
billion facility extended to the Puerto Rico Sales Tax Financing Corp. (COFINA under its Spanish
acronym), an instrumentality of the Government of Puerto Rico that has already been repaid and a
$115 million refinancing of a commercial relationship. Other decreases were observed in
construction loan originations due to the Corporations strategic decision to reduce its exposure
to
construction projects in both the Puerto Rico and United States markets and decreases in the
origination of residential mortgage loans due to the current economic environment.
67
The following table details First BanCorps loan production, including purchases and
refinancings, for the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended September 30, |
|
|
Nine-month Period Ended September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Residential real estate |
|
$ |
106,557 |
|
|
$ |
129,527 |
|
|
$ |
373,445 |
|
|
$ |
453,465 |
|
C&I and commercial mortgage |
|
|
601,198 |
|
|
|
1,076,881 |
|
|
|
1,220,103 |
|
|
|
2,370,338 |
|
Construction |
|
|
45,866 |
|
|
|
82,140 |
|
|
|
143,214 |
|
|
|
339,162 |
|
Finance leases |
|
|
21,609 |
|
|
|
20,565 |
|
|
|
65,865 |
|
|
|
60,387 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
120,305 |
|
|
|
138,570 |
|
|
|
380,900 |
|
|
|
391,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total loan production |
|
$ |
895,535 |
|
|
$ |
1,447,683 |
|
|
$ |
2,183,527 |
|
|
$ |
3,614,960 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential Real Estate Loans
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations residential real estate loan portfolio decreased
by $158.8 million as compared to the balance as of December 31, 2009. The majority of the
Corporations outstanding balance of residential mortgage loans consists of fixed-rate, fully
amortizing, full documentation loans. In accordance with the Corporations underwriting
guidelines, residential real estate loans are mostly fully documented loans, and the Corporation is
not actively involved in the origination of negative amortization loans or adjustable-rate mortgage
loans. The decrease was a combination of loan sales and securitizations that in aggregate amounted
to $315.0 million, charge-offs of $44.1 million and pay downs and foreclosures. Residential loan
originations were lower compared to 2009 as a result of the weak economic environment in Puerto
Rico, reflected in high unemployment rates. Refer to the Contractual Obligations and Commitments
discussion below for additional information about outstanding commitments to sell mortgage loans.
Commercial and Construction Loans
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations commercial and construction loan portfolio
decreased by $1.5 billion, as compared to the balance as of December 31, 2009, due mainly to
repayments of approximately $1.4 billion from credit facilities extended to the Puerto Rico
government and/or political subdivisions combined with net charge-offs of $273.2 million, the sale
of approximately $163 million associated with various impaired loans in Florida and pay downs. The
Corporations commercial loans are primarily variable- and adjustable-rate loans.
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had $273.1 million outstanding of credit facilities
granted to the Puerto Rico government and/or its political subdivisions, down from $1.2 billion as
of December 31, 2009, and $57.2 million granted to the Virgin Islands government, down from $134.7
million as of December 31, 2009. A substantial portion of these credit facilities consists of
obligations that have a specific source of income or revenues identified for their repayment, such
as property taxes collected by the central Government and/or municipalities. Another portion of
these obligations consists of loans to public corporations that obtain revenues from rates charged
for services or products, such as electric power and water utilities. Public corporations have
varying degrees of independence from the central Government of Puerto Rico and many receive
appropriations or other payments from it. The Corporation also has loans to various municipalities
in Puerto Rico for which the good faith, credit and unlimited taxing power of the applicable
municipality has been pledged to their repayment.
The largest loan to one borrower as of September 30, 2010 in the amount of $295.9 million is
with one mortgage originator in Puerto Rico, Doral Financial Corporation. This commercial loan is
secured by individual real estate loans, mostly 1-4 residential mortgage loans.
The Corporations construction lending volume has been stagnant for the last two years due to
the slowdown in the U.S. housing market and the current economic environment in Puerto Rico. The
Corporation has reduced its exposure to condo-conversion loans in its Florida operations and ceased
originating construction loans in Florida. Its construction loan originations in Puerto Rico are
mainly draws from existing commitments. Approximately 95% of the construction loan originations in
2010 are related to disbursements from previously established commitments and new loans are mainly
associated with construction loans to individuals. In Puerto Rico, absorption rates on low income
residential projects financed by the Corporation showed signs of improvement during 2010 but the
market is still under pressure because of an oversupply of housing units compounded by lower demand
and diminished consumer purchasing power and confidence. The unemployment rate in Puerto Rico is
close to 16%.
During the third quarter of 2010, $109.1 million of construction loans were converted to
commercial mortgage loans, of which $78 million have Puerto Rico government guarantees. The
Corporation expects additional conversions of construction loans to commercial loans or commercial
mortgage loans in the amounts of $9.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2010 and $133.1 million in
2011. As a key initiative to increase the absorption rate in residential construction
projects, the Corporation has engaged in discussions with developers to review sales strategies and
provide additional incentives to supplement the Puerto Rico Government housing stimulus package
enacted in September 2010. From September 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011, the Government of Puerto Rico
will provide tax and transaction fees incentives to both purchasers and sellers (whether a Puerto
Rico resident or not) of new and existing
68
residential property, as well as commercial property with
a sales price of no more than $3 million. Among its significant provisions, the housing stimulus
package provides various types of income and property taxes exemptions as well as reduced closing
costs, including:
|
|
|
Purchase/Sale of New Residential Property within the Period |
|
- |
|
Any long term capital gain upon selling new residential property will be
100% exempt from the payment of income taxes. Exemption for five years on payment
of property tax. Cost of stamps and seals are waived during the period. |
|
|
|
Purchase/Sale of Existing Residential Property, or Commercial Property with a Sales
Price of No More than $3 Million, within the Period (Qualified Property) |
|
- |
|
Any long term capital gain upon selling Qualified Property within the
Period will be 100% exempt from the payment of income taxes. The long term capital
gain derived from the future sale of the foregoing property will be 50% exempt from
the payment income taxes, including the basic alternative tax and the alternative
minimum tax. 50% of the cost of required stamps and seals are waived during the
period. |
|
|
|
Rental Income from Residential Properties |
|
- |
|
Income derived from the rental of new or existing residential property
will be exempt from income taxes for a period of up to 10 calendar years, commencing
on January 1, 2011. |
This legislation should help to alleviate some of the stress in the construction industry and
might show tangible results in the last quarter of the year.
The construction loan portfolio in Puerto Rico decreased by $183.8 million during the first
nine months of 2010 driven by charge-offs of $73.0 million and the aforementioned conversion of
loans to commercial mortgage loans. In Florida, the construction portfolio decreased by $192.3
million, also driven by charge-offs of $81.8 million recorded during the first nine months of 2010
and the sale of approximately $115.7 million of non-performing construction loans in Florida.
The composition of the Corporations construction loan portfolio as of September 30, 2010 by
category and geographic location follows:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto |
|
|
Virgin |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
Rico |
|
|
Islands |
|
|
Florida |
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Loans for residential housing projects: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
High-rise (1) |
|
$ |
177,719 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
177,719 |
|
Mid-rise (2) |
|
|
77,642 |
|
|
|
4,939 |
|
|
|
17,733 |
|
|
|
100,314 |
|
Single-family detach |
|
|
103,244 |
|
|
|
5,692 |
|
|
|
14,285 |
|
|
|
123,221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total for residential housing projects |
|
|
358,605 |
|
|
|
10,631 |
|
|
|
32,018 |
|
|
|
401,254 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans to individuals secured by residential
properties |
|
|
12,440 |
|
|
|
15,491 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
27,931 |
|
Condo-conversion loans |
|
|
9,886 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
18,483 |
|
|
|
28,369 |
|
Loans for commercial projects |
|
|
214,944 |
|
|
|
120,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
335,061 |
|
Bridge loans residential |
|
|
56,303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,500 |
|
|
|
60,803 |
|
Bridge loans commercial |
|
|
3,003 |
|
|
|
26,047 |
|
|
|
13,901 |
|
|
|
42,951 |
|
Land loans residential |
|
|
73,879 |
|
|
|
18,036 |
|
|
|
24,865 |
|
|
|
116,780 |
|
Land loans commercial |
|
|
79,429 |
|
|
|
2,126 |
|
|
|
13,548 |
|
|
|
95,103 |
|
Working capital |
|
|
8,702 |
|
|
|
1,025 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
9,727 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total before net deferred fees and allowance for loan
losses |
|
|
817,191 |
|
|
|
193,473 |
|
|
|
107,315 |
|
|
|
1,117,979 |
|
|
|
|
(2,711 |
) |
|
|
(556 |
) |
|
|
(65 |
) |
|
|
(3,332 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total construction loan portfolio, gross |
|
|
814,480 |
|
|
|
192,917 |
|
|
|
107,250 |
|
|
|
1,114,647 |
|
Allowance for loan losses |
|
|
(126,656 |
) |
|
|
(33,878 |
) |
|
|
(24,390 |
) |
|
|
(184,924 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total construction loan portfolio, net |
|
$ |
687,824 |
|
|
$ |
159,039 |
|
|
$ |
82,860 |
|
|
$ |
929,723 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
For purposes of the above table, high-rise portfolio is composed of
buildings with more than 7 stories, mainly composed of three projects that
represent approximately 86% of the Corporations total outstanding high-rise
residential construction loan portfolio in Puerto Rico. |
|
(2) |
|
Mid-rise relates to buildings of up to 7 stories. |
69
The following table presents further information on the Corporations construction
portfolio as of and for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Total undisbursed funds under existing commitments |
|
$ |
211,685 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction loans in non-accrual status |
|
$ |
558,148 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge offs Construction loans (1) |
|
$ |
154,842 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses Construction loans |
|
$ |
184,924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing construction loans to total construction loans |
|
|
50.07 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan losses construction loans to total construction loans |
|
|
16.59 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs (annualized) to total average construction loans (1) |
|
|
14.87 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes charge-offs of $81.8 million related to construction loans in Florida and $73.0
million related to construction loans in Puerto Rico. |
The following summarizes the construction loans for residential housing projects in
Puerto Rico segregated by the estimated selling price of the units:
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
Under $300k |
|
$ |
125,674 |
|
$300k $600k |
|
|
148,124 |
|
Over $600k (1) |
|
|
84,807 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
358,605 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Mainly composed of two high-rise projects and two single-family
detached projects that account for approximately 46% and 32%,
respectively, of the residential housing projects in Puerto Rico with
selling prices over $600k. |
For the majority of the construction loans for residential housing projects in Florida,
the estimated selling price of the units is under $300,000.
Consumer Loans and Finance Leases
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations consumer loan and finance leases portfolio
decreased by $144.3 million, as compared to the portfolio balance as of December 31, 2009. This is
mainly the result of repayments and charge-offs that on a combined basis more than offset the
volume of loan originations during the first nine months of 2010. Nevertheless, the Corporation
experienced a decrease in net charge-offs for consumer loans and finance leases that amounted to
$40.6 million for the first nine months of 2010, as compared to $45.9 million for the same period a
year ago.
Investment Activities
As part of its strategy to diversify its revenue sources and maximize its net interest income,
First BanCorp maintains an investment portfolio that is classified as available-for-sale or
held-to-maturity. The Corporations available-for-sale and held-to-maturity portfolio as of
September 30, 2010 amounted to $3.5 billion, a reduction of $1.3 million when compared to
$4.8 billion as of December 31, 2009. The reduction was the net result of approximately $2.1
billion of MBS sold during the first nine months of 2010 (mainly U.S. agency MBS) with a weighted
average yield of 4.47%, $252 million of U.S. Treasury Notes sold with a weighted average yield of
2.84%, the call of approximately $1.2 billion of investment securities (mainly U.S. agency debt
securities) with a weighted average yield of 2.08% and MBS prepayments, partially offset by the
purchase of approximately $850 million in aggregate of 2,3,5 and 7 year U.S. Treasury Notes with an
average yield of 1.82%, the purchase of approximately $921 million of debt securities (mainly 2- to
3-year U.S. agency debt securities) with a yield of 1.86% and the purchase of $696 million of MBS
with a weighted-average yield of 3.57%.
Over 90% of the Corporations available-for-sale and held-to-maturity securities portfolio is
invested in U.S. Government and Agency debentures and fixed-rate U.S. government sponsored-agency
MBS (mainly GNMA, FNMA and FHLMC fixed-rate securities). The Corporations investment in equity
securities classified as available for sale is minimal, approximately $0.1 million, which consists
of common stock of a financial institution in Puerto Rico.
70
The following table presents the carrying value of investments at the indicated dates:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Money market investments |
|
$ |
215,494 |
|
|
$ |
24,286 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities held to maturity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies obligations |
|
|
8,480 |
|
|
|
8,480 |
|
Puerto Rico Government obligations |
|
|
23,837 |
|
|
|
23,579 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
455,650 |
|
|
|
567,560 |
|
Corporate bonds |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
489,967 |
|
|
|
601,619 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Investment securities available for sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
U.S. Government and agencies obligations |
|
|
1,323,656 |
|
|
|
1,145,139 |
|
Puerto Rico Government obligations |
|
|
236,480 |
|
|
|
136,326 |
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
1,415,973 |
|
|
|
2,889,014 |
|
Equity securities |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
303 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,976,180 |
|
|
|
4,170,782 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other equity securities, including $63.0 million and $68.4 million of
FHLB stock as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively |
|
|
64,310 |
|
|
|
69,930 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
3,745,951 |
|
|
$ |
4,866,617 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities at the indicated dates consist of:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(In thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Held-to-maturity securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC certificates |
|
$ |
3,100 |
|
|
$ |
5,015 |
|
FNMA certificates |
|
|
452,550 |
|
|
|
562,545 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
455,650 |
|
|
|
567,560 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Available-for-sale securities |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FHLMC certificates |
|
|
2,052 |
|
|
|
722,249 |
|
GNMA certificates |
|
|
982,605 |
|
|
|
418,312 |
|
FNMA certificates |
|
|
233,435 |
|
|
|
1,507,792 |
|
Collateralized Mortgage Obligations issued or guaranteed by FHLMC, FNMA and GNMA |
|
|
120,481 |
|
|
|
156,307 |
|
Other mortgage pass-through certificates |
|
|
77,400 |
|
|
|
84,354 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,415,973 |
|
|
|
2,889,014 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total mortgage-backed securities |
|
$ |
1,871,623 |
|
|
$ |
3,456,574 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
71
The carrying values of investment securities classified as available-for-sale and
held-to-maturity as of September 30, 2010 by contractual maturity (excluding mortgage-backed
securities and equity securities) are shown below:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Carrying |
|
|
Weighted |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Average Yield % |
|
U.S. Government and agencies obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due within one year |
|
$ |
8,480 |
|
|
|
0.30 |
% |
Due after one year through five years |
|
|
1,323,656 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,332,136 |
|
|
|
1.37 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Puerto Rico Government obligations |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due within one year |
|
|
|
|
|
|
0.00 |
% |
Due after one year through five years |
|
|
127,256 |
|
|
|
5.33 |
% |
Due after five years through ten years |
|
|
123,624 |
|
|
|
5.29 |
% |
Due after ten years |
|
|
9,437 |
|
|
|
5.85 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
260,317 |
|
|
|
5.33 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Corporate bonds |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Due after ten years |
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
5.80 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
2,000 |
|
|
|
5.80 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
1,594,453 |
|
|
|
2.02 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage-backed securities |
|
|
1,871,623 |
|
|
|
4.11 |
% |
Equity securities |
|
|
71 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total investment securities available for sale and held to maturity |
|
$ |
3,466,147 |
|
|
|
3.15 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net interest income of future periods will be affected by the Corporations decision to
deleverage its investment securities portfolio to preserve its capital position and from balance
sheet repositioning strategies. Also, net interest income could be affected by prepayments of
mortgage-backed securities. Acceleration in the prepayments of mortgage-backed securities would
lower yields on these securities, as the amortization of premiums paid upon acquisition of these
securities would accelerate. Conversely, acceleration in the prepayments of mortgage-backed
securities would increase yields on securities purchased at a discount, as the amortization of the
discount would accelerate. These risks are directly linked to future period market interest rate
fluctuations. Also, net interest income in future periods might be affected by the Corporations
investment in callable securities. Approximately $1.2 billion of investment securities, mainly
U.S. Agency debentures, with an average yield of 2.08% were called during the first nine months of
2010. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation has approximately $623.8 million in debt
securities (U.S. agency and Puerto Rico government securities) with embedded calls and with an
average yield of 2.88%. Refer to the Risk Management section below for further analysis of the
effects of changing interest rates on the Corporations net interest income and of the interest
rate risk management strategies followed by the Corporation. Also refer to Note 4 to the
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements for additional information regarding the
Corporations investment portfolio.
RISK MANAGEMENT
Risks are inherent in virtually all aspects of the Corporations business activities and
operations. Consequently, effective risk management is fundamental to the success of the
Corporation. The primary goals of risk management are to ensure that the Corporations risk taking
activities are consistent with the Corporations objectives and risk tolerance and that there is an
appropriate balance between risk and reward in order to maximize stockholder value.
The Corporation has in place a risk management framework to monitor, evaluate and manage the
principal risks assumed in conducting its activities. First BanCorps business is subject to eight
broad categories of risks: (1) liquidity risk, (2) interest rate risk, (3) market risk, (4) credit
risk, (5) operational risk, (6) legal and compliance risk, (7) reputational risk, and
(8) contingency risk. First BanCorp has adopted policies and procedures designed to identify and
manage risks to which the Corporation is exposed, specifically those relating to liquidity risk,
interest rate risk, credit risk, and operational risk.
The Corporations risk management policies are described below as well as in the Managements
Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations section of First BanCorps
2009 Annual Report on Form 10-K.
Liquidity and Capital Adequacy
Liquidity is the ongoing ability to accommodate liability maturities and deposit withdrawals,
fund asset growth and business operations, and meet contractual obligations through unconstrained
access to funding at reasonable market rates. Liquidity management involves forecasting funding
requirements and maintaining sufficient capacity to meet the needs for liquidity and accommodate
fluctuations in asset and liability levels due to changes in the Corporations business operations
or unanticipated events.
The Corporation manages liquidity at two levels. The first is the liquidity of the parent
company, which is the holding company that owns the banking and non-banking subsidiaries. The
second is the liquidity of the banking subsidiary. As of September 30, 2010,
72
FirstBank could not pay
any dividend to the parent company except upon receipt of prior approval by the FED. The Asset and Liability Committee of the Board of Directors is
responsible for establishing the Corporations liquidity policy as well as approving operating and
contingency procedures, and monitoring liquidity on an ongoing basis. Managements Investment and
Asset Liability Committee (MIALCO), using measures of liquidity developed by management, which
involve the use of several assumptions, reviews the Corporations liquidity position on a monthly
basis. The MIALCO oversees liquidity management, interest rate risk and other related matters. The
MIALCO, which reports to the Board of Directors Asset and Liability Committee, is composed of
senior management officers, including the Chief Executive Officer, the Chief Financial Officer, the
Chief Risk Officer, the Retail Financial Services Director, the Risk Manager of the Treasury and
Investments Division, the Asset/Liability Manager and the Treasurer. The Treasury and Investments
Division is responsible for planning and executing the Corporations funding activities and
strategy, monitoring liquidity availability on a daily basis and reviewing liquidity measures on a
weekly basis. The Treasury and Investments Accounting and Operations area of the Comptrollers
Department is responsible for calculating the liquidity measurements used by the Treasury and
Investment Division to review the Corporations liquidity position.
In order to ensure adequate liquidity through the full range of potential operating
environments and market conditions, the Corporation conducts its liquidity management and business
activities in a manner that will preserve and enhance funding stability, flexibility and diversity.
Key components of this operating strategy include a strong focus on the continued development of
customer-based funding, the maintenance of direct relationships with wholesale market funding
providers, and the maintenance of the ability to liquidate certain assets when, and if,
requirements warrant.
The Corporation develops and maintains contingency funding plans. These plans evaluate the
Corporations liquidity position under various operating circumstances and allow the Corporation to
ensure that it will be able to operate through periods of stress when access to normal sources of
funds is constrained. The plans project funding requirements during a potential period of stress,
specify and quantify sources of liquidity, outline actions and procedures for effectively managing
through a difficult period, and define roles and responsibilities. In the Contingency Funding Plan,
the Corporation stresses the balance sheet and the liquidity position to critical levels that imply
difficulties in getting new funds or even maintaining its current funding position, thereby
ensuring the ability to honor its commitments, and establishing liquidity triggers monitored by the
MIALCO in order to maintain the ordinary funding of the banking business. Three different scenarios
are defined in the Contingency Funding Plan: local market event, credit rating downgrade, and a
concentration event. They are reviewed and approved annually by the Board of Directors Asset and
Liability Committee.
The Corporation manages its liquidity in a proactive manner, and maintains a position that it
regards as adequate. Multiple measures are utilized to monitor the Corporations liquidity
position, including basic surplus and time-based measures. The Corporation has maintained basic
surplus (cash, short-term assets minus short-term liabilities, and secured lines of credit) well in
excess of the self-imposed minimum limit of 5% of total assets. As of September 30, 2010, the
estimated basic surplus ratio was approximately 11% including un-pledged investment securities,
FHLB lines of credit, and cash. At the end of the quarter, the Corporation had $186 million
available for additional credit on FHLB lines of credit. Unpledged liquid securities as of
September 30, 2010 mainly consisted of fixed-rate U.S. agency debentures and MBS totaling
approximately $843 million. The Corporation does not rely on uncommitted inter-bank lines of credit
(federal funds lines) to fund its operations and does not include them in the basic surplus
computation. The Corporation does not have any unsecured debt, other than brokered CDs, maturing
during the remainder of 2010 and has $3.2 billion of brokered CDs maturing over the next twelve
months. At September 30, 2010, the holding company had $43.5 million of cash and cash equivalents.
Cash and cash equivalents at the Bank as of September 30, 2010 were approximately $904.3 million.
While the Corporation has increased its liquidity levels due to the current economic environment,
it has continued to issue brokered CDs pursuant to temporary approvals received from the FDIC to
renew or roll over certain amounts of brokered CDs through December 31, 2010.
Sources of Funding
The Corporation utilizes different sources of funding to help ensure that adequate levels of
liquidity are available when needed. Diversification of funding sources is of great importance to
protect the Corporations liquidity from market disruptions. The principal sources of short-term
funds are deposits, including brokered CDs, securities sold under agreements to repurchase, and
lines of credit with the FHLB. The Asset Liability Committee of the Board of Directors reviews
credit availability on a regular basis. The Corporation has also securitized and sold mortgage
loans as a supplementary source of funding. Issuances of commercial paper have also in the past
provided additional funding. Long-term funding has also been obtained through the issuance of
notes and, to a lesser extent, long-term brokered CDs. The cost of these different alternatives,
among other things, is taken into consideration.
The Corporation is in the process of deleveraging its balance sheet by reducing the amounts of
brokered CDs and during 2010 repaid the remaining balance of $900 million in FED advances
outstanding as of December 31, 2009. The reductions in brokered CDs are consistent with the
requirements of the Order that preclude the issuance of brokered CDs without FDIC approval. The
reductions in brokered CDs and FED advances are being partly offset by increases in retail
deposits. Brokered CDs decreased $872.9 million to $6.7 billion as of September 30, 2010 from $7.6
billion as of December 31, 2009. At the same time, as the Corporation focuses on reducing its
reliance on brokered deposits, it is seeking to add core deposits.
73
While liquidity is an ongoing challenge for all financial institutions, management believes
that the Corporations available borrowing capacity and efforts to grow deposits will be adequate
to provide the necessary funding for the 2010 business plans. Nevertheless, managements
alternative capital preservation strategies can be implemented should adverse liquidity conditions
arise. Refer to Capital discussion below for additional information about capital raising
efforts that would impact capital and liquidity levels.
The Corporations principal sources of funding are:
Brokered CDs A large portion of the Corporations funding has been retail brokered CDs issued
by the Bank subsidiary, FirstBank Puerto Rico. Total brokered CDs decreased from $7.6 billion at
year-end 2009 to $6.7 billion as of September 30, 2010. Although all the regulatory capital
ratios exceeded the established well capitalized levels at September 30, 2010, because of the
Order with the FDIC, FirstBank cannot be treated as a well capitalized institution under
regulatory guidance and cannot replace maturing brokered CDs without the prior approval of the
FDIC. Since the issuance of the Order, the FDIC has granted the Bank temporary waivers to enable
it to continue accessing the brokered deposit market through December 31, 2010. The Bank will
request approvals for future periods. The Corporation has been using proceeds from repayments
and sales of loans and investments to pay down maturing borrowings, including brokered CDs.
Also, the Corporation successfully implemented its core deposit growth strategy that resulted in
an increase of $747.4 million, or 15%, in non-brokered deposits during the first nine months of
2010.
The average remaining term to maturity of the retail brokered CDs outstanding as of September 30,
2010 is approximately 1.2 years. Approximately 3% of the principal value of these certificates
is callable at the Corporations option.
The use of brokered CDs has been particularly important for the growth of the Corporation. The
Corporation encounters intense competition in attracting and retaining regular retail deposits in
Puerto Rico. The brokered CDs market is very competitive and liquid, and the Corporation has
been able to obtain substantial amounts of funding in short periods of time. This strategy has
enhanced the Corporations liquidity position, since the brokered CDs are insured by the FDIC up
to regulatory limits and can be obtained faster compared to regular retail deposits. Should the
FDIC fail to approve waivers for the renewal of brokered CDs, the Corporation would accelerate
the de-leveraging through a systematic disposition of assets to meet its liquidity needs. During
the first nine months of 2010, the Corporation issued $3.2 billion in brokered CDs to renew
maturing brokered CDs having an average interest rate of 1.28%. Management believes it will
continue to obtain waivers from the restrictions in the issuance of brokered CDs under the Order
to meet its obligations and execute its business plans.
The following table presents a maturity summary of brokered and retail CDs with
denominations of $100,000 or higher as of September 30, 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Three months or less |
|
$ |
1,390,761 |
|
Over three months to six months |
|
|
732,011 |
|
Over six months to one year |
|
|
1,796,927 |
|
Over one year |
|
|
3,983,862 |
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
7,903,561 |
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit in denominations of $100,000 or higher include brokered CDs of
$6.7 billion issued to deposit brokers in the form of large ($100,000 or more) certificates of
deposit that are generally participated out by brokers in shares of less than $100,000 and are
therefore insured by the FDIC. Certificates of deposit also include $20.4 million of deposits
through the Certificate of Deposit Account Registry Service (CDARS). In an effort to meet customer
needs and provide its customers with the best products and services available, the Corporations
bank subsidiary, FirstBank Puerto Rico, has joined a program that gives depositors the opportunity
to insure their money beyond the standard FDIC coverage. CDARS can offer customers access to FDIC
insurance coverage beyond the $250 thousand per account without limit by placing deposits in
multiple banks through a single bank gateway, when they enter into the CDARS Deposit Placement
Agreement, while earning attractive returns on their deposits.
Retail deposits The Corporations deposit products also include regular savings accounts, demand
deposit accounts, money market accounts and retail CDs. Total deposits, excluding brokered CDs,
increased by $747.4 million to $5.9 billion from the balance of $5.1 billion as of December 31,
2009, reflecting increases in core-deposit products such as money market, savings, retail CD and
interest-bearing checking accounts. A significant portion of the increase was related to increases
in money market accounts and retail CDs in Florida. Successful marketing campaigns and attractive
rates were the main reason for the increase in Florida. Refer to Note 11 in the accompanying
unaudited financial statements for further details.
Refer to the Net Interest Income discussion above for information about average balances of
interest-bearing deposits, and the average interest rate paid on deposits for the quarter and
nine-month periods ended September 30, 2010 and 2009.
74
Securities sold under agreements to repurchase - The Corporations investment portfolio is
substantially funded with repurchase agreements. Securities sold under repurchase agreements were
$1.4 billion as of September 30, 2010, compared with $3.1 billion as of December 31, 2009. The
decrease relates to the Corporations balance sheet repositioning strategies as approximately $1.0
billion of repurchase agreements were early terminated, as previously discussed, and to the
Corporations decision to deleverage its balance sheet by paying down maturing short-term
repurchase agreements. One of the Corporations strategies has been the use of structured
repurchase agreements and long-term repurchase agreements to reduce exposure to interest rate risk
by lengthening the final maturities of its liabilities while keeping funding costs at reasonable
levels. All of the $1.4 billion of repurchase agreements outstanding as of September 30, 2010
consist of structured repurchase agreements. The access to this type of funding was affected by the
liquidity turmoil in the financial markets witnessed in the second half of 2008 and in 2009.
Certain counterparties are still not willing to extend the term of maturing repurchase agreements.
Nevertheless, in addition to short-term repos, the Corporation has been able to maintain access to
credit by using cost-effective sources such as FED and FHLB advances. Refer to Note 13 in the
accompanying notes to the unaudited interim consolidated financial statements for further details
about repurchase agreements outstanding by counterparty and maturities.
Under the Corporations repurchase agreements, as is the case with derivative contracts, the
Corporation is required to deposit cash or qualifying securities to meet margin requirements. To
the extent that the value of securities previously pledged as collateral declines because of
changes in interest rates, a liquidity crisis or any other factor, the Corporation will be required
to deposit additional cash or securities to meet its margin requirements, thereby adversely
affecting its liquidity. Given the quality of the collateral pledged, the Corporation has not
experienced significant margin calls from counterparties arising from credit-quality-related
write-downs in valuations with only $0.45 million of cash deposited in connection with
collateralized interest rate swap agreements.
Advances from the FHLB The Corporations Bank subsidiary is a member of the FHLB system and
obtains advances to fund its operations under a collateral agreement with the FHLB that requires
the Bank to maintain qualifying mortgages as collateral for advances taken. As of September 30,
2010 and December 31, 2009, the outstanding balance of FHLB advances was $835.4 million and $978.4
million, respectively. Approximately $409.4 million of outstanding advances from the FHLB has
maturities of over one year. As part of its precautionary initiatives to safeguard access to credit
and obtain low interest rates, the Corporation has been pledging assets with the FHLB while at the
same time the FHLB has been revising its credit guidelines and haircuts in the computation of the
availability of credit lines.
FED Discount window During 2009, the FED encouraged banks to borrow from the Discount Window in
an effort to restore liquidity and calm to the credit markets. As market conditions improved,
participating financial institutions have been asked to shift to regular funding sources, and repay
borrowings such as advances from the FED Discount Window. During the first half of 2010, the
Corporation repaid the remaining balance of $900 million in FED advances outstanding as of December
31, 2009.
Credit Lines - The Corporation maintains unsecured and un-committed lines of credit with other
banks. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations total unused lines of credit with other banks
amounted to $165 million. The Corporation has not used these lines of credit to fund its
operations.
Though currently not in use, other sources of short-term funding for the Corporation include
commercial paper and federal funds purchased. Furthermore, in previous years the Corporation
entered into several financing transactions to diversify its funding sources, including the
issuance of notes payable and junior subordinated debentures as part of its longer-term liquidity
and capital management activities. No assurance can be given that these sources of liquidity will
be available and, if available, that they will be on acceptable comparable terms.
With respect to the
Corporations $231.9 million of outstanding subordinated
debentures, the Corporation provided, within the time frame prescribed
by the indentures governing the subordinated
debentures by extending the interest payment period at any time
and
from time to time during the term of the subordinated debentures
for up to twenty consecutive quarterly periods.
The Corporation elected
to defer the interest payments that were due in September 2010 because
the Federal Reserve
did not approve the Corporations
request submitted pursuant to the Written Agreement to pay interest on the subordinated debentures.
The Corporations principal uses of funds are the origination of loans and the repayment of
maturing deposits and borrowings. The Corporation has committed substantial resources to its
mortgage banking subsidiary, FirstMortgage Inc. As a result, residential real estate loans as a
percentage of total loans receivable have increased over time from 14% at December 31, 2004 to 28%
at September 30, 2010. Commensurate with the increase in its mortgage banking activities, the
Corporation has also invested in technology and
personnel to enhance the Corporations secondary mortgage market capabilities. The enhanced
capabilities improve the Corporations liquidity profile as they allow the Corporation to derive
liquidity, if needed, from the sale of mortgage loans in the secondary market. The U.S. (including
Puerto Rico) secondary mortgage market is still highly liquid in large part because of the sale or
guarantee
75
programs of the FHA, VA, HUD, FNMA and FHLMC. The Corporation obtained Commitment
Authority to issue GNMA mortgage-backed securities from GNMA and, under this program, the
Corporation completed the securitization of approximately $164.9 million of FHA/VA mortgage loans
into GNMA MBS during 2010. Any regulatory actions affecting GNMA, FNMA or FHLMC could adversely
affect the secondary mortgage market.
Impact of Credit Ratings on Access to Liquidity and Valuation of Liabilities
The Corporations credit as a long-term issuer is currently rated CCC+ by Standard & Poors
(S&P) and B- by Fitch Ratings Limited (Fitch); both with negative outlook. At the FirstBank
subsidiary level, long-term issuer rating is currently B3 by Moodys Investor Service (Moodys),
six notches below their definition of investment grade; CCC+ by S&P seven notches below their
definition of investment grade, and B- by Fitch, six notches below their definition of investment
grade. The outlook on the Banks credit ratings from the three rating agencies is negative.
During the second quarter of 2010, the Corporation and its subsidiary bank suffered credit
rating downgrades from Moodys (B1 to B3), S&P (B to CCC+), and Fitch (B to B-) rating services.
Furthermore, in June 2010 Moodys and Fitch placed the Corporation on Credit Watch Negative and
S&P placed a Negative Outlook. The Corporation does not have any outstanding debt or derivative
agreements that would be affected by the recent credit downgrades. Furthermore, given our
non-reliance on corporate debt or other instruments directly linked in terms of pricing or volume
to credit ratings, the liquidity of the Corporation so far has not been affected in any material
way by the downgrades. The Corporations ability to access new non-deposit sources of funding,
however, could be adversely affected by these credit ratings and any additional downgrades.
The Corporations liquidity, however, is contingent upon its ability to obtain new external
sources of funding to finance its operations. The Corporations current credit ratings and any
further downgrades in credit ratings can hinder the Corporations access to external funding and/or
cause external funding to be more expensive, which could in turn adversely affect results of
operations. Also, changes in credit ratings may further affect the fair value of certain
liabilities and unsecured derivatives that consider the Corporations own credit risk as part of
the valuation.
Cash Flows
Cash and cash equivalents were $904.6 million and $216.1 million at September 30, 2010 and
2009, respectively. These balances increased by $200.5 million and decreased by $189.6 million from
December 31, 2009 and 2008, respectively. The following discussion highlights the major activities
and transactions that affected the Corporations cash flows during the first nine months of 2010
and 2009.
Cash Flows from Operating Activities
First BanCorps operating assets and liabilities vary significantly in the normal course of
business due to the amount and timing of cash flows. Management believes cash flows from
operations, available cash balances and the Corporations ability to generate cash through short-
and long-term borrowings will be sufficient to fund the Corporations operating liquidity needs.
For
the first nine months of 2010, net cash provided by operating
activities was $175.7
million. Net cash generated from operating activities was higher than net loss reported largely as
a result of adjustments for non-cash operating items such as the provision for loan and lease
losses partially offset by adjustments to net income from the gain on sale of investments.
For the first nine months of 2009, net cash provided by operating activities was $195.0
million, which was higher than net loss reported largely as a result of adjustments for non-cash
operating items such as the provision for loan and lease losses.
Cash Flows from Investing Activities
The Corporations investing activities primarily relate to originating loans to be held to
maturity and purchasing, selling and repayments of available-for-sale and held-to-maturity
investment portfolios. For the first nine months of 2010, net cash provided by investing activities
was $2.9 billion, primarily reflecting proceeds from loans, as well as proceeds from securities
sold or called during the first nine months of 2010 and MBS prepayments. Partially offsetting
these sources of cash were cash used for loan origination disbursements and certain purchases of
available-for-sale securities, as discussed above.
For the first nine months of 2009, net cash used in investing activities was $1.2 billion,
primarily for loan origination disbursements and purchases of available-for-sale investment
securities to mitigate in part the impact of investment securities called by counterparties prior
to maturity and MBS prepayments.
76
Cash Flows from Financing Activities
The Corporations financing activities include primarily the receipt of deposits and issuance
of brokered CDs, the issuance and repayments of long-term debt, the issuance of equity instruments
and activities related to its short-term funding. In addition, the Corporation paid monthly
dividends on its preferred stock and quarterly dividends on its common stock until it announced the
suspension of dividends beginning in August 2009. In the first nine months of 2010, net cash used
in financing activities was $2.9 billion due to the Corporations balance sheet repositioning
strategies and deleveraging of the balance sheet, including the early termination of repurchase
agreements and related costs and pay down of maturing repurchase agreements as well as advances
from the FHLB and the FED and brokered CDs. Partially offsetting these cash reductions was the
growth of the core deposit base.
In the first nine months of 2009, net cash provided by financing activities was $800.0 million
due to the investment of $400 million by the U.S. Treasury in preferred stock of the Corporation
through the U.S. Treasury TARP Capital Purchase Program and due to the use of the FED Discount
Window Program, advances from the FHLB and short-term repurchase agreements to refinance brokered
CDs at a lower cost and finance the Corporations investing activities. Partially offsetting these
cash proceeds was the payment of cash dividends and pay down of maturing borrowings, in particular
brokered CDs.
Capital
The Corporations stockholders equity amounted to $1.3 billion as of September 30, 2010, a
decrease of $277.1 million compared to the balance as of December 31, 2009, driven by the net loss
of $272.9 million for the first nine months of 2010 and $8 million of issue costs related to the
Exchange Offer, partially offset by an increase of $3.8 million in accumulated other comprehensive
income. Based on the Agreement with the FED, currently neither First BanCorp nor FirstBank, is
permitted to pay dividends on capital securities without prior approval.
Effective June 2, 2010, FirstBank, by and through its Board of Directors, entered into the
Order with the FDIC (see Description of Business). Although all the regulatory capital ratios
exceeded the established well capitalized levels at September 30, 2010, because of the Order with
the FDIC, FirstBank cannot be treated as a well capitalized institution under regulatory
guidance. Set forth below are First BanCorps, and FirstBank Puerto Ricos regulatory capital
ratios as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, based on existing established FED and FDIC
guidelines.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Banking Subsidiary |
|
|
First |
|
|
|
|
|
To be well |
|
|
BanCorp |
|
FirstBank |
|
capitalized |
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital (Total capital to risk-weighted assets) |
|
|
13.26 |
% |
|
|
12.81 |
% |
|
|
10.00 |
% |
Tier 1 capital ratio (Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets) |
|
|
11.96 |
% |
|
|
11.52 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
Leverage ratio |
|
|
8.34 |
% |
|
|
8.03 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total capital (Total capital to risk-weighted assets) |
|
|
13.44 |
% |
|
|
12.87 |
% |
|
|
10.00 |
% |
Tier 1 capital ratio (Tier 1 capital to risk-weighted assets) |
|
|
12.16 |
% |
|
|
11.70 |
% |
|
|
6.00 |
% |
Leverage ratio |
|
|
8.91 |
% |
|
|
8.53 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
The decrease in regulatory capital ratios is mainly related to the net loss reported for
the first nine months of 2010 that was substantially offset by the decrease in risk-weighted assets
consistent with the Corporations decision to deleverage its balance sheet to preserve its capital
position. Significant decreases in risk-weighted assets have been achieved mainly through the non
renewal of commercial loans with 100% risk weightings, such as temporary loan facilities to the
Puerto Rico government and others, and through the charge-offs of portions of loans deemed
uncollectible. Also, a reduced volume of loan originations and sales of investments contributed to
mitigate, to some extent, the effect of net losses on capital ratios.
Capital Restructuring Initiatives
As previously reported, the Corporation submitted a Capital Plan to the FED and the FDIC in July
2010. The primary objective of this Capital Plan is to improve the Corporations capital structure
in order to 1) enhance its ability to operate in the current economic environment, 2) be in a
position to continue executing business strategies to return to profitability and 3) achieve the
minimum capital ratios set forth in the FDIC Order over time. The minimum capital ratios are 8%
for Leverage (Tier 1 Capital to Average Total Assets), 10% for Tier 1 Capital to Risk-Weighted
Assets and 12% for Total Capital to Risk-Weighted Assets. The Capital Plan sets forth the
following capital restructuring initiatives as well as various deleveraging strategies:
77
|
(1) |
|
The exchange of shares of the Corporations preferred stock held by the U.S. Treasury
for common stock; |
|
|
(2) |
|
The exchange of shares of the Corporations common stock for any and all of the
Corporations outstanding Series A through E preferred stock; and |
|
|
(3) |
|
A $500 million capital raise through the issuance of new common shares for cash. |
During the third quarter of 2010, the Corporation completed transactions designed to accomplish the
first two initiatives. On July 20, 2010, the Corporation closed a transaction with the U.S.
Treasury for the exchange of the $400 million of Series F preferred stock that the U.S. Treasury
acquired pursuant to the TARP Capital Purchase Program and accrued dividends on that stock for new
shares of Series G mandatorily convertible preferred stock. A key benefit of this transaction was
obtaining the right, under the terms of the new Series G convertible preferred stock, to compel the
conversion of this stock into shares of the Corporations common stock, provided that the
Corporation meets a number of conditions. On August 30, 2010, the Corporation completed its
Exchange Offer to issue shares of its common stock in exchange for its outstanding Series A through
E preferred stock, which resulted in the issuance of 227,015,210 new shares of common stock in
exchange for 19,482,128 shares of preferred stock with an aggregate liquidation amount of $487
million, or 89% of the outstanding Series A through E preferred stock.
In addition, on August, 24, 2010, the Corporation obtained its stockholders approval to increase
the number of authorized shares of common stock from 750 million to 2 billion and decrease the par
value of its common stock from $1.00 to $0.10 per share. These approvals and the issuance of
common stock in exchange for Series A through E Preferred Stock satisfy all but one of the
substantive conditions to the Corporations ability to compel the conversion of the 424,174 shares
of the new series of Series G Preferred Stock, issued to the U.S. Treasury. The other substantive
condition to the Corporations ability to compel the conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock is
the issuance of a minimum aggregate amount of $500 million of additional capital, subject to terms,
other than the price per share, reasonably acceptable to the U.S. Treasury in its sole discretion.
These first two initiatives were designed to improve the Corporations ability to successfully
raise additional capital through a sale of its common stock, which is the last component of the
Capital Plan. On September 16, 2010, the Corporation filed a registration statement for a proposed
underwritten public offering of $500 million ($575 million including an overallotment option) (the
Capital Raise) of its common stock with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The completion of the Exchange Offer and the exchange agreement with the U.S. Treasury
resulted in significant improvements in the Corporations tangible and Tier 1 common equity ratios.
The Corporations tangible common equity ratio increased to 5.21% as of September 30, 2010, from
3.20% as of December 31, 2010, and the Tier 1 common equity to risk-weighted assets ratio as of
September 30, 2010 increased to 6.62% from 4.10% as of December 31, 2009.
The tangible common equity ratio and tangible book value per common share are non-GAAP
measures generally used by the financial community to evaluate capital adequacy. Tangible common
equity is total equity less preferred equity, goodwill and core deposit intangibles. Tangible
assets are total assets less goodwill and core deposit intangibles. Management and many stock
analysts use the tangible common equity ratio and tangible book value per common share in
conjunction with more traditional bank capital ratios to compare the capital adequacy of banking
organizations with significant amounts of goodwill or other intangible assets, typically stemming
from the use of the purchase accounting method of accounting for mergers and acquisitions. Neither
tangible common equity nor tangible assets or related measures should be considered in isolation or
as a substitute for stockholders equity, total assets or any other measure calculated in
accordance with GAAP. Moreover, the manner in which the Corporation calculates its tangible common
equity, tangible assets and any other related measures may differ from that of other companies
reporting measures with similar names.
78
The following table is a reconciliation of the Corporations tangible common equity and
tangible assets for the periods ended September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009, respectively:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Tangible Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity GAAP |
|
$ |
1,321,979 |
|
|
$ |
1,599,063 |
|
Preferred equity |
|
|
(411,876 |
) |
|
|
(928,508 |
) |
Goodwill |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
Core deposit intangible |
|
|
(14,673 |
) |
|
|
(16,600 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible common equity |
|
$ |
867,332 |
|
|
$ |
625,857 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible Assets: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total assets GAAP |
|
$ |
16,678,879 |
|
|
$ |
19,628,448 |
|
Goodwill |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
Core deposit intangible |
|
|
(14,673 |
) |
|
|
(16,600 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible assets |
|
$ |
16,636,108 |
|
|
$ |
19,583,750 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Common shares outstanding |
|
|
319,558 |
|
|
|
92,542 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible common equity ratio |
|
|
5.21 |
% |
|
|
3.20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tangible book value per common share |
|
$ |
2.71 |
|
|
$ |
6.76 |
|
The Tier 1 common equity to risk-weighted assets ratio is calculated by dividing (a) Tier
1 capital less non-common elements including qualifying perpetual preferred stock and qualifying
trust preferred securities, by (b) risk-weighted assets, which assets are calculated in accordance
with applicable bank regulatory requirements. The Tier 1 common equity ratio is not required by
GAAP or on a recurring basis by applicable bank regulatory requirements. However, this ratio was
used by the Federal Reserve in connection with its stress test administered to the 19 largest U.S.
bank holding companies under the Supervisory Capital Assessment Program (SCAP), the results of
which were announced on May 7, 2009. Management is currently monitoring this ratio, along with the
other ratios discussed above, in evaluating the Corporations capital levels and believes that, at
this time, the ratio may continue to be of interest to investors.
79
The following table reconciles stockholders equity (GAAP) to Tier 1 common equity:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Tier 1 Common Equity: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total equity GAAP |
|
$ |
1,321,979 |
|
|
$ |
1,599,063 |
|
Qualifying preferred stock |
|
|
(411,876 |
) |
|
|
(928,508 |
) |
Unrealized (gain) loss on available-for-sale securities (1) |
|
|
(30,295 |
) |
|
|
(26,617 |
) |
Disallowed deferred tax asset (2) |
|
|
(43,552 |
) |
|
|
(11,827 |
) |
Goodwill |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
|
|
(28,098 |
) |
Core deposit intangible |
|
|
(14,673 |
) |
|
|
(16,600 |
) |
Cumulative change gain in fair value of liabilities
accounted for under a fair value option |
|
|
(2,654 |
) |
|
|
(1,535 |
) |
Other disallowed assets |
|
|
(636 |
) |
|
|
(24 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity |
|
$ |
790,195 |
|
|
$ |
585,854 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total risk-weighted assets |
|
$ |
11,930,854 |
|
|
$ |
14,303,496 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Tier 1 common equity to risk-weighted assets ratio |
|
|
6.62 |
% |
|
|
4.10 |
% |
|
|
|
1- |
|
Tier 1 capital excludes net unrealized gains (losses) on
available-for-sale debt securities and net unrealized gains on
available-for-sale equity securities with readily determinable fair
values, in accordance with regulatory risk-based capital guidelines. In
arriving at
Tier 1 capital, institutions are required to deduct net unrealized losses on
available-for-sale equity securities with readily determinable fair values,
net of tax. |
|
2- |
|
Approximately $64 million of the Corporations deferred tax assets at September 30, 2010
December 31, 2009 $102 million) were included without limitation in
regulatory capital pursuant to the risk-based capital guidelines, while
approximately $44 million of such assets at September 30, 2010 (December 31,
2009 $12 million) exceeded the limitation imposed by these guidelines and, as
disallowed deferred tax assets, were deducted in arriving at Tier 1 capital.
According to regulatory capital guidelines, the deferred tax assets that are
dependent upon future taxable income are limited for inclusion in Tier 1
capital to the lesser of: (i) the amount of such deferred tax asset that the
entity expects to realize within one year of the calendar quarter end-date,
based on its projected future taxable income for that year, or (ii) 10% of the
amount of the entitys Tier 1 capital. Approximately $7 million of the
Corporations other net deferred tax liability at September 30, 2010 (December
31, 2009 $5 million) represented primarily the deferred tax effects of
unrealized gains and losses on available-for-sale debt securities, which are
permitted to be excluded prior to deriving the amount of net deferred tax
assets subject to limitation under the guidelines. |
Completing the Capital Plan initiatives would result in dilution to the Corporations
current stockholders. If the Corporation needs to continue to recognize significant reserves and
cannot complete a Capital Raise, the Corporation and FirstBank may not be able to comply with the
minimum capital requirements included in the capital plans required by the Agreements.
Nevertheless, if the Corporation is unable to complete the full capital raise, other capital
preservation strategies are contemplated, including among others, an accelerated deleverage
strategy and the divesture of profitable businesses, which could allow us to meet the minimum
capital requirements required by the Order. The Corporation anticipates that it will need to
continue to dedicate significant resources and efforts to comply with these Agreements, which may
increase operational costs or adversely affect the amount of time management has to conduct
operations.
Off -Balance Sheet Arrangements
In the ordinary course of business, the Corporation engages in financial transactions that are
not recorded on the balance sheet, or may be recorded on the balance sheet in amounts that are
different from the full contract or notional amount of the transaction. These transactions are
designed to (1) meet the financial needs of customers, (2) manage the Corporations credit, market
or liquidity risks, (3) diversify the Corporations funding sources and (4) optimize capital.
As a provider of financial services, the Corporation routinely enters into commitments with
off-balance sheet risk to meet the financial needs of its customers. These financial instruments
may include loan commitments and standby letters of credit. These commitments are subject to the
same credit policies and approval process used for on-balance sheet instruments. These instruments
involve, to varying degrees, elements of credit and interest rate risk in excess of the amount
recognized in the statement of financial position. As of September 30, 2010, commitments to extend
credit and commercial and financial standby letters of credit amounted to approximately
$841.0 million and $81.1 million, respectively. Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend
to customers as long as the conditions established in the contract are met. Generally, the
Corporations mortgage banking activities do not enter into interest rate lock agreements with
prospective borrowers.
80
Contractual Obligations and Commitments
The following table presents a detail of the maturities of the Corporations contractual
obligations and commitments, which consist of CDs, long-term contractual debt obligations,
commitments to sell mortgage loans and commitments to extend credit:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Contractual Obligations and Commitments |
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
Less than 1 year |
|
|
1-3 years |
|
|
3-5 years |
|
|
After 5 years |
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Contractual obligations: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Certificates of deposit |
|
$ |
8,747,169 |
|
|
$ |
4,410,760 |
|
|
|
4,085,180 |
|
|
|
237,068 |
|
|
|
14,161 |
|
Federal funds purchased and securities sold
under agreements to repurchase |
|
|
1,400,000 |
|
|
|
100,000 |
|
|
|
500,000 |
|
|
|
800,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
Advances from FHLB |
|
|
835,440 |
|
|
|
426,000 |
|
|
|
356,000 |
|
|
|
53,440 |
|
|
|
|
|
Notes payable |
|
|
25,057 |
|
|
|
7,404 |
|
|
|
6,600 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
11,053 |
|
Other borrowings |
|
|
231,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
231,959 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total contractual obligations |
|
$ |
11,239,625 |
|
|
$ |
4,944,164 |
|
|
$ |
4,947,780 |
|
|
$ |
1,090,508 |
|
|
$ |
257,173 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to sell mortgage loans |
|
$ |
62,517 |
|
|
$ |
62,517 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Standby letters of credit |
|
$ |
81,111 |
|
|
$ |
81,111 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to extend credit: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Lines of credit |
|
$ |
570,077 |
|
|
$ |
570,077 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Letters of credit |
|
|
55,679 |
|
|
|
55,679 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commitments to originate loans |
|
|
215,241 |
|
|
|
165,241 |
|
|
|
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total commercial commitments |
|
$ |
840,997 |
|
|
$ |
790,997 |
|
|
$ |
50,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The Corporation has obligations and commitments to make future payments under contracts,
such as debt and lease agreements, and under other commitments to sell mortgage loans at fair value
and to extend credit. Commitments to extend credit are agreements to lend to a customer as long as
there is no violation of any condition established in the contract. Other contractual obligations
result mainly from contracts for the rental and maintenance of equipment. Since certain commitments
are expected to expire without being drawn upon, the total commitment amount does not necessarily
represent future cash requirements. For most of the commercial lines of credit, the Corporation has
the option to reevaluate the agreement prior to additional disbursements. There have been no
significant or unexpected draws on existing commitments. In the case of credit cards and personal
lines of credit, the Corporation can cancel the unused credit facility at any time and without
cause. In the ordinary course of business, the Corporation enters into operating leases and other
commercial commitments. There have been no significant changes in such contractual obligations
since December 31, 2009.
Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. (Lehman) was the counterparty to First BanCorp on
certain interest rate swap agreements. During the third quarter of 2008, Lehman failed to pay the
scheduled net cash settlement due to us, which constituted an event of default under those interest
rate swap agreements. The Corporation terminated all interest rate swaps with Lehman and replaced
them with other counterparties under similar terms and conditions. In connection with the unpaid
net cash settlement due as of September 30, 2010 under the swap agreements, the Corporation has an
unsecured counterparty exposure with Lehman, which filed for bankruptcy on October 3, 2008, of
approximately $1.4 million. This exposure was reserved in the third quarter of 2008. The
Corporation had pledged collateral of $63.6 million with Lehman to guarantee its performance under
the swap agreements in the event payment thereunder was required. The book value of pledged
securities with Lehman as of September 30, 2010 amounted to approximately $64.5 million.
The Corporation believes that the securities pledged as collateral should not be part of the
Lehman bankruptcy estate given the facts that the posted collateral constituted a performance
guarantee under the swap agreements and was not part of a financing agreement, and that ownership
of the securities was never transferred to Lehman. Upon termination of the interest rate swap
agreements, Lehmans obligation was to return the collateral to the Corporation. During the fourth
quarter of 2009, the Corporation discovered that Lehman Brothers, Inc., acting as agent of Lehman,
had deposited the securities in a custodial account at JP Morgan Chase, and that, shortly before
the filing of the Lehman bankruptcy proceedings, it had provided instructions to have most of the
securities transferred to Barclays Capital (Barclays) in New York. After Barclayss refusal to
turn over the securities, during December 2009, the Corporation filed a lawsuit against Barclays in
federal court in New York demanding the return of the securities.
During February 2010, Barclays filed a motion with the court requesting that the Corporations
claim be dismissed on the grounds that the allegations of the complaint are not sufficient to
justify the granting of the remedies therein sought. Shortly thereafter, the Corporation filed its
opposition motion. A hearing on the motions was held in court on April 28, 2010. The court, on that
date, after hearing the arguments by both sides, concluded that the Corporations equitable-based
causes of action, upon which the return of the investment securities is being demanded, contain
allegations that sufficiently plead facts warranting the denial of Barclays motion to
81
dismiss the
Corporations claim. Accordingly, the judge ordered the case to proceed to trial. Subsequent to the
decision handed down
by the court, the district court judge transferred the case to the Lehman bankruptcy court for
trial. While the Corporation believes it has valid reasons to support its claim for the return of
the securities, the Corporation may not succeed in its litigation against Barclays to recover all
or a substantial portion of the securities.
Additionally, the Corporation continue to pursue its claim filed in January 2009 in the
proceedings under the Securities Protection Act with regard to Lehman Brothers Incorporated in
Bankruptcy Court, Southern District of New York. An estimated loss was not accrued as we are unable
to determine the timing of the claim resolution or whether we will succeed in recovering all or a
substantial portion of the collateral or its equivalent value. If additional relevant negative
facts become available in future periods, a need to recognize a partial or full reserve of this
claim may arise. Considering that the investment securities have not yet been recovered by us,
despite our efforts in this regard, we decided to classify such investments as non-performing
during the second quarter of 2009.
Interest Rate Risk Management
First BanCorp manages its asset/liability position in order to limit the effects of changes in
interest rates on net interest income and to maintain stable profitability under varying interest
rate environments. The MIALCO oversees interest rate risk and focuses on, among other things,
current and expected conditions in world financial markets, competition and prevailing rates in the
local deposit market, liquidity, securities market values, recent or proposed changes to the
investment portfolio, alternative funding sources and related costs, hedging and the possible
purchase of derivatives such as swaps and caps, and any tax or regulatory issues which may be
pertinent to these areas. The MIALCO approves funding decisions in light of the Corporations
overall growth strategies and objectives.
The Corporation performs on a quarterly basis a consolidated net interest income simulation
analysis to estimate the potential change in future earnings from projected changes in interest
rates. These simulations are carried out over a one to five-year time horizon, assuming gradual
upward and downward interest rate movements of 200 basis points, achieved during a twelve-month
period. Simulations are carried out in two ways:
(1) using a static balance sheet prepared as of the simulation date, and
(2) using a dynamic balance sheet based on recent patterns and current strategies.
The balance sheet is divided into groups of assets and liabilities detailed by maturity or
re-pricing and their corresponding interest yields and costs. As interest rates rise or fall, these
simulations incorporate expected future lending rates, current and expected future funding sources
and costs, the possible exercise of options, changes in prepayment rates, deposit decay and other
factors that may be important in projecting the future growth of net interest income.
The Corporation uses a simulation model to project future movements in the Corporations
balance sheet and income statement. The starting point of the projections generally corresponds to
the actual values on the balance sheet on the date of the simulation.
These simulations are highly complex, and use many simplifying assumptions that are intended
to reflect the general behavior of the Corporation over the period in question. It is highly
unlikely that actual events will match these assumptions in all cases. For this reason, the results
of these simulations are only approximations of the true sensitivity of net interest income to
changes in market interest rates.
The following table presents the results of the simulations as of September 30, 2010 and
December 31, 2009. Consistent with prior years, these exclude non-cash changes in the fair value
of derivatives and liabilities measured at fair value:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
|
Net Interest Income Risk (Projected for the next 12 months) |
|
Net Interest Income Risk (Projected for the next 12 months) |
|
|
Static Simulation |
|
Growing Balance Sheet |
|
Static Simulation |
|
Growing Balance Sheet |
(Dollars in millions) |
|
$ Change |
|
% Change |
|
$ Change |
|
% Change |
|
$ Change |
|
% Change |
|
$ Change |
|
% Change |
+ 200 bps ramp |
|
$ |
31.9 |
|
|
|
6.80 |
% |
|
$ |
24.5 |
|
|
|
5.08 |
% |
|
$ |
10.6 |
|
|
|
2.16 |
% |
|
$ |
16.0 |
|
|
|
3.39 |
% |
- 200 bps ramp |
|
$ |
(16.5 |
) |
|
|
(3.53 |
)% |
|
$ |
(7.1 |
) |
|
|
(1.48 |
)% |
|
$ |
(31.9 |
) |
|
|
(6.53 |
)% |
|
$ |
(33.0 |
) |
|
|
(6.98 |
)% |
The Corporation continues to manage its balance sheet structure to control the overall
interest rate risk and preserve its capital position through a deleveraging
and balance sheet repositioning strategy. During 2010, the investment portfolio decreased by
approximately $1.3 billion, while the loan portfolio decreased by $1.8 billion. This decrease in
assets resulting from the deleveraging strategy allowed a reduction of $3.6 billion in wholesale
funding since the end of the fourth quarter of 2009, including repurchase agreements and brokered
certificate of deposits. In addition, the Corporation continues to grow its core deposit base
while adjusting the mix of its funding sources to better match the expected average life of the
assets.
82
Taking into consideration the above-mentioned facts for modeling purposes, the net interest
income for the next twelve months under a non-static balance sheet scenario, is estimated to
increase by $24.5 million in a gradual parallel upward move of 200 basis points.
Following the Corporations risk management policies, modeling of the downward parallel
rates moves by anchoring the short end of the curve (falling rates with a flattening curve), was
performed, even though, given the current level of rates as of September 30, 2010, some market
interest rate were projected to be zero. Under this scenario, where a considerable spread
compression is projected, net interest income for the next twelve months in a non-static balance
sheet scenario is estimated to decrease by $7.1 million.
Derivatives
First BanCorp uses derivative instruments and other strategies to manage its exposure to
interest rate risk caused by changes in interest rates beyond managements control.
The following summarizes major strategies, including derivative activities, used by the
Corporation in managing interest rate risk:
Interest rate cap agreements Interest rate cap agreements provide the right to receive
cash if a reference interest rate rises above a contractual rate. The value increases as the
reference interest rate rises. The Corporation enters into interest rate cap agreements for
protection from rising interest rates. Specifically, the interest rate on certain private label
mortgage pass-through securities and certain of the Corporations commercial loans to other
financial institutions is generally a variable rate limited to the weighted-average coupon of the
pass-through certificate or referenced residential mortgage collateral, less a contractual
servicing fee. During the second quarter of 2010, the counterparty for interest rate caps for
certain private label mortgage pass-through securities was taken over by the FDIC, immediately
canceling all outstanding commitments. Interest rate caps with a notional amount of $113 million
are no longer considered to be derivative financial instruments. The total exposure to fair value
of $3.0 million related to such contracts was reclassified to an account receivable.
Interest rate swaps Interest rate swap agreements generally involve the exchange of
fixed- and floating-rate interest payment obligations without the exchange of the underlying
notional principal amount. As of September 30, 2010, most of the interest rate swaps outstanding
are used for protection against rising interest rates. In the past, interest rate swaps volume
was much higher since they were used to convert fixed-rate brokered CDs (liabilities), mainly
those with long-term maturities, to a variable rate to mitigate the interest rate risk inherent
in variable rate loans. All interest rate swaps related to brokered CDs were called during 2009
in the face of lower interest rate levels, and, as a consequence, the Corporation exercised its
call option on the swapped-to-floating brokered CDs.
Structured repurchase agreements The Corporation uses structured repurchase agreements,
with embedded call options, to reduce the Corporations exposure to interest rate risk by
lengthening the contractual maturities of its liabilities, while keeping funding costs low.
Another type of structured repurchase agreement includes repurchase agreements with embedded cap
corridors; these instruments also provide protection in a rising rate scenario.
For detailed information regarding the volume of derivative activities (e.g. notional amounts),
location and fair values of derivative instruments in the Statement of Financial Condition and the
amount of gains and losses reported in the Statement of Income (Loss), refer to Note 8 in the
accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements.
The following tables summarize the fair value changes in the Corporations derivatives as well as
the sources of the fair values:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Nine-month period ended |
|
(In thousands) |
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
Fair value of contracts outstanding at the beginning of the period |
|
$ |
(531 |
) |
Contracts terminated or called during the period |
|
|
(2,587 |
) |
Changes in fair value during the period |
|
|
(2,556 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Fair value of contracts outstanding as of September 30, 2010 |
|
$ |
(5,674 |
) |
|
|
|
|
83
Source of Fair Value
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Payments Due by Period |
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Less Than |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
Maturity |
|
|
In Excess |
|
|
Total |
|
(In thousands) |
|
One Year |
|
|
1-3 Years |
|
|
3-5 Years |
|
|
of 5 Years |
|
|
Fair Value |
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Pricing from observable market inputs |
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
(742 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
(5,003 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,674 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
27 |
|
|
$ |
(742 |
) |
|
$ |
44 |
|
|
$ |
(5,003 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,674 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Derivative instruments, such as interest rate swaps, are subject to market risk. As is
the case with investment securities, the market value of derivative instruments is largely a
function of the financial markets expectations regarding the future direction of interest rates.
Accordingly, current market values are not necessarily indicative of the future impact of
derivative instruments on earnings. This will depend, for the most part, on the shape of the yield
curve as well as the level of interest rates.
As of September 30, 2010, all of the derivative instruments held by the Corporation were
considered economic undesignated hedges.
The use of derivatives involves market and credit risk. The market risk of derivatives stems
principally from the potential for changes in the value of derivative contracts based on changes in
interest rates. The credit risk of derivatives arises from the potential of default from the
counterparty. To manage this credit risk, the Corporation deals with counterparties of good credit
standing, enters into master netting agreements whenever possible and, when appropriate, obtains
collateral. Master netting agreements incorporate rights of set-off that provide for the net
settlement of contracts with the same counterparty in the event of default. Currently, the
Corporation is mostly engaged in derivative instruments with counterparties with a credit rating of
single A or better. All of the Corporations interest rate swaps are supported by securities
collateral agreements, which allow the delivery of securities to and from the counterparties
depending on the fair value of the instruments, to minimize credit risk.
Refer to Note 20 of the accompanying unaudited consolidated financial statements for
additional information regarding the fair value determination of derivative instruments.
Set forth below is a detailed analysis of the Corporations credit exposure by counterparty
with respect to derivative instruments outstanding as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009.
84
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued |
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exposure at |
|
|
Negative |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Interest Receivable |
|
Counterparty |
|
Rating (1) |
|
Notional |
|
|
Fair Value (2) |
|
|
Fair Values |
|
|
Fair Values |
|
|
(Payable) |
|
Interest rate swaps with rated counterparties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JP Morgan |
|
A+ |
|
$ |
43,195 |
|
|
$ |
637 |
|
|
$ |
(5,788 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,151 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Credit Suisse First Boston (3) |
|
A+ |
|
|
5,502 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(383 |
) |
|
|
(383 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs |
|
A |
|
|
6,515 |
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
472 |
|
|
|
|
|
Morgan Stanley |
|
A |
|
|
109,058 |
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
164,270 |
|
|
|
1,110 |
|
|
|
(6,171 |
) |
|
|
(5,061 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Other derivatives (4) |
|
|
|
|
128,076 |
|
|
|
427 |
|
|
|
(1,040 |
) |
|
|
(613 |
) |
|
|
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
292,346 |
|
|
$ |
1,537 |
|
|
$ |
(7,211 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,674 |
) |
|
$ |
(136 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Based on the S&P and Fitch Long Term Issuer Credit Ratings. |
|
(2) |
|
For each counterparty, this amount includes derivatives with positive fair value excluding the
related accrued interest receivable / payable. |
|
(3) |
|
Master netting agreement in place. |
|
(4) |
|
Credit exposure with several local companies for which a credit rating is not readily
available. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Accrued |
|
(In thousands) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Exposure at |
|
|
Negative |
|
|
Total |
|
|
Interest Receivable |
|
Counterparty |
|
Rating (1) |
|
Notional |
|
|
Fair Value (2) |
|
|
Fair Values |
|
|
Fair Values |
|
|
(Payable) |
|
Interest rate swaps with rated counterparties: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
JP Morgan |
|
A+ |
|
$ |
67,345 |
|
|
$ |
621 |
|
|
$ |
(4,304 |
) |
|
$ |
(3,683 |
) |
|
$ |
|
|
Credit Suisse First Boston |
|
A+ |
|
|
49,311 |
|
|
|
2 |
|
|
|
(764 |
) |
|
|
(762 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Goldman Sachs |
|
A |
|
|
6,515 |
|
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
557 |
|
|
|
|
|
Morgan Stanley |
|
A |
|
|
109,712 |
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
238 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
232,883 |
|
|
|
1,418 |
|
|
|
(5,068 |
) |
|
|
(3,650 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other derivatives (3) |
|
|
|
|
284,619 |
|
|
|
4,518 |
|
|
|
(1,399 |
) |
|
|
3,119 |
|
|
|
(269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
517,502 |
|
|
$ |
5,936 |
|
|
$ |
(6,467 |
) |
|
$ |
(531 |
) |
|
$ |
(269 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Based on the S&P and Fitch Long Term Issuer Credit Ratings. |
|
(2) |
|
For each counterparty, this amount includes derivatives with positive fair value excluding the
related accrued interest receivable / payable. |
|
(3) |
|
Credit exposure with several local companies for which a credit rating is not readily
available. Approximately $4.2 million of the credit exposure with local companies relates to caps
referenced to mortgages bought from a local financial institution that was taken over by another
institution during the second quarter of 2010 through an FDIC-assisted transaction. |
A Hull-White Interest Rate Tree approach is used to value the option components of
derivative instruments. The discounting of the cash flows is performed using US dollar LIBOR-based
discount rates or yield curves that account for the industry sector and the credit rating of the
counterparty and/or the Corporation. Although most of the derivative instruments are fully
collateralized, a credit spread is considered for those that are not secured in full. The
cumulative mark-to-market effect of credit risk in the valuation of derivative instruments resulted
in an unrealized gain of approximately $1.3 million as of September 30, 2010, of which an
unrealized gain of $0.8 million was recorded in the first nine months of 2010 and an unrealized
loss of $1.4 million was recorded in the first nine months of 2009. The Corporation compares the
valuations obtained with valuations received from counterparties, as an internal control procedure.
Credit Risk Management
First BanCorp is subject to credit risk mainly with respect to its portfolio of loans
receivable, derivatives and off-balance sheet instruments, mainly loan commitments. Loans
receivable represents loans that First BanCorp holds for investment and, therefore, First BanCorp
is at risk for the term of the loan. Loan commitments represent commitments to extend credit,
subject to specific conditions, for specific amounts and maturities. These commitments may expose
the Corporation to credit risk and are subject to the same review and approval process as for
loans. Refer to Contractual Obligations and Commitments above for further details. The credit
risk of derivatives arises from the potential of the counterpartys default on its contractual
obligations. To manage this credit risk, the Corporation deals with counterparties of good credit
standing, enters into master netting agreements whenever possible and, when appropriate, obtains
collateral. For further details and information on the Corporations derivative credit risk
exposure, refer to the Interest Rate Risk Management section above. The Corporation manages its
credit risk through credit policy, underwriting, independent loan review and quality control
procedures, comprehensive financial analysis, and established management committees. The
Corporation also employs proactive collection and loss mitigation efforts. Furthermore, personnel
performing structured loan workout functions are responsible for avoiding defaults and minimizing
losses upon default within each region and for each business
85
segment. The group utilizes
relationship officers, collection specialists and attorneys. In the case of residential
construction projects, the workout function monitors project specifics, such as project management
and marketing, as deemed necessary.
The Corporation may also have risk of default in the securities portfolio. The securities held
by the Corporation are principally fixed-rate mortgage-backed securities and U.S. Treasury and
agency securities. Thus, a substantial portion of these instruments is backed by mortgages, a
guarantee of a U.S. government-sponsored entity or the full faith and credit of the U.S. government
and is deemed to be of the highest credit quality.
Management, comprised of the Corporations Chief Risk Officer, Credit Risk Officers, Chief
Lending Officer, and other senior executives, have the primary responsibility for setting
strategies to achieve the Corporations credit risk goals and objectives. These goals and
objectives are documented in the Corporations Credit Policy.
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses and Non-performing Assets
Allowance for Loan and Lease Losses
The allowance for loan and lease losses represents the estimate of the level of reserves
appropriate to absorb inherent credit losses. The amount of the allowance was determined by
empirical analysis and judgments regarding the quality of each individual loan portfolio. All known
relevant internal and external factors that affected loan collectibility were considered, including
analyses of historical charge-off experience, migration patterns, changes in economic conditions,
and changes in loan collateral values. For example, factors affecting the economies of Puerto Rico,
Florida (USA), the US Virgin Islands and the British Virgin Islands may contribute to delinquencies
and defaults above the Corporations historical loan and lease losses. Such factors are subject to
regular review and may change to reflect updated performance trends and expectations, particularly
in times of severe stress such as have been experienced since 2008. The process includes judgmental
and quantitative elements that may be subject to significant change. There is no certainty that the
allowance will be adequate over time to cover credit losses in the portfolio because of continued
adverse changes in the economy, market conditions, or events adversely affecting specific
customers, industries or markets. To the extent actual outcomes differ from our estimates, the
credit quality of our customer base materially decreases or the risk profile of a market, industry,
or group of customers changes materially, or if the allowance is determined to not be adequate,
additional provisions for credit losses could be required, which could adversely affect our
business, financial condition, liquidity, capital, and results of operations in future periods.
The allowance for loan and lease losses provides for probable losses that have been identified
with specific valuation allowances for individually evaluated impaired loans and for probable
losses believed to be inherent in the loan portfolio that have not been
specifically identified. Internal risk ratings are assigned to each business loan at the time
of approval and are subject to subsequent periodic reviews by the Corporations senior management.
The allowance for loan and lease losses is reviewed on a quarterly basis as part of the
Corporations continued evaluation of its asset quality.
A specific valuation allowance is established for those commercial and real estate loans
classified as impaired, primarily when the collateral value of the loan (if the impaired loan is
determined to be collateral dependent) or the present value of the expected future cash flows
discounted at the loans effective rate is lower than the carrying amount of that loan. The
specific valuation allowance is computed on commercial, construction and real estate loans of $1
million or more, Troubled Debt Restructured loans (TDRs), which are individually evaluated, as
well as smaller residential mortgage loans considered impaired based on their delinquency and
loan-to-value levels. When foreclosure is probable, the impairment measure is based on the fair
value of the collateral. The fair value of the collateral is generally obtained from appraisals.
Updated appraisals are obtained when the Corporation determines that loans are impaired and are
updated annually thereafter. In addition, appraisals and/or broker price opinions are also obtained
for residential mortgage loans based on specific characteristics such as delinquency levels, age of
the appraisal, and loan-to-value ratios. Deficiencies from the excess of the recorded investment in
collateral dependent loans over the resulting fair value of the collateral are generally
charged-off when deemed uncollectible. For residential mortgage loans, since the second quarter of
2010, the determination of reserves included the incorporation of updated loss factors applicable
to loans expected to liquidate over the next 12 months considering the expected realization of
similar asset values at disposition.
For all other loans, which include small, homogeneous loans, such as auto loans, consumer
loans, finance lease loans, and residential mortgages, in amounts under $1 million and commercial
and construction loans not considered impaired, the Corporation maintains a general valuation
allowance. The Corporation updates the factors used to compute the reserve factors on a quarterly
basis. The general reserve is primarily determined by applying loss factors according to the loan
type and assigned risk category (pass, special mention and substandard not impaired; all doubtful
loans are considered impaired). The general reserve for consumer loans is based on factors such as
delinquency trends, credit bureau score bands, portfolio type, geographical location, bankruptcy
trends, recent market transactions, and other environmental factors such as economic forecasts.
The analysis of the residential mortgage pools is performed at the individual loan level and then
aggregated to determine the expected loss ratio. The model applies risk-adjusted prepayment curves,
default curves, and severity curves to each loan in the pool. The severity is affected by the
expected house price scenario based on recent house price trends. Default curves are used in the
model to determine expected delinquency levels. The risk-adjusted timing of liquidation and
associated costs are used in the model and are risk-adjusted for the area in which the property is
86
located (Puerto Rico, Florida, or Virgin Islands). For commercial loans, including construction
loans, the general reserve is based on historical loss ratios, trends in non-accrual loans, loan
type, risk-rating, geographical location, changes in collateral values for collateral dependent
loans and macroeconomic data that correlates to portfolio performance for the geographical region.
The methodology of accounting for all probable losses in loans not individually measured for
impairment purposes is made in accordance with authoritative accounting guidance that requires that
losses be accrued when they are probable of occurring and estimable.
The blended general reserve factors utilized for most portfolios increased during 2010 due to
the continued increase in charge-offs and the continued deterioration in the economy and property
values. The blended general reserve factor for commercial mortgage loans increased from 2.41% in
December 2009 to 4.01% at September 30, 2010. The construction loans blended general factor
increased from 9.82% in December, 2009 to 15.38% at September 30, 2010. The consumer and finance
leases reserve factor increased from 4.36% in December 2009 to 4.52% at September 30, 2010. The
C&I blended general reserve factor increased from 2.44% in December 2009 to 2.50% at September 30,
2010. The blended general reserve factor for residential mortgage loans increased from 0.91% in
December 2009 to 1.25% at September 30, 2010, due to the recalibration of the loss factors and the
effect of house price deterioration based on recent appraisals. There was an increase in the
amount of specific reserves for residential mortgage loans resulting from the aforementioned
updates to loss factors for loans expected to liquidate over the next 12 months. The higher level
of impaired residential mortgage loans is mainly related to the modification of loans through the
Home Affordable Modification Program of the Federal government, for which a sustained period of
repayment performance under the modified terms was observed. These impaired loans are not
necessarily classified as a non-performing loan.
Substantially all of the Corporations loan portfolio is located within the boundaries of the
U.S. economy. Whether the collateral is located in Puerto Rico, the U.S. and British Virgin Islands
or the U.S. mainland (mainly in the state of Florida), the performance of the Corporations loan
portfolio and the value of the collateral supporting the transactions are dependent upon the
performance of and conditions within each specific area real estate market. Economic reports
related to the real estate market in Puerto Rico indicate that the real estate market is
experiencing readjustments in value driven by the loss of income due to the unemployment of
consumers, reduced demand and the general economic conditions. The Corporation sets adequate
loan-to-value ratios upon original approval following the regulatory and credit policy standards.
The real estate market for the U.S. Virgin Islands remains fairly stable. In the Florida market,
residential real estate has experienced a very slow turnover, but the Corporation continues to
reduce its credit exposure through disposition of assets and different loss mitigation initiatives
as the end of this difficult credit cycle in the Florida region appears to be approaching.
87
As shown in the following table, the allowance for loan and lease losses increased to
$608.5 million at September 30, 2010, compared with $528.1 million at December 31, 2009. The $80.4
million increase in the allowance primarily reflected increases in specific reserves associated
with impaired loans, predominantly construction, commercial and residential mortgage loans. The
Corporation has continued to build its reserves based on recent appraisals and broker price
opinions, charge-offs trends and environmental factors and increased general reserve factors for
all of its portfolios. Expressed as a percent of period-end total loans receivable, the reserve
coverage ratio increased to 5.00% at September 30, 2010, compared with 3.79% at December 31, 2009.
The provision to net-charge offs ratio of 104% for the third quarter of 2010 reflects, among other
things, the fact that approximately 59% of net charge-offs recorded during the quarter was related
to loans for which the Corporation had previously established adequate specific reserves, including
non-performing loans sold during the quarter. Refer to the Provision for Loan and Lease Losses
discussion above for additional information. The following table sets forth an analysis of the
activity in the allowance for loan and lease losses during the periods indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, beginning of period |
|
$ |
604,304 |
|
|
$ |
407,746 |
|
|
$ |
528,120 |
|
|
$ |
281,526 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision (recovery) for loan and lease losses: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
19,961 |
|
|
|
6,896 |
|
|
|
80,007 |
|
|
|
36,804 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
11,546 |
|
|
|
19,376 |
|
|
|
71,865 |
|
|
|
50,408 |
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
27,280 |
|
|
|
44,665 |
|
|
|
61,120 |
|
|
|
116,741 |
|
Construction |
|
|
48,451 |
|
|
|
56,883 |
|
|
|
188,149 |
|
|
|
200,050 |
|
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
13,244 |
|
|
|
20,270 |
|
|
|
37,099 |
|
|
|
38,668 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total provision for loan and lease losses |
|
|
120,482 |
|
|
|
148,090 |
|
|
|
438,240 |
|
|
|
442,671 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Charge-offs: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
(13,183 |
) |
|
|
(10,955 |
) |
|
|
(44,152 |
) |
|
|
(21,446 |
) |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
(11,635 |
) |
|
|
(5,263 |
) |
|
|
(48,942 |
) |
|
|
(19,983 |
) |
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
(20,041 |
) |
|
|
(6,491 |
) |
|
|
(70,149 |
) |
|
|
(27,876 |
) |
Construction |
|
|
(58,522 |
) |
|
|
(47,374 |
) |
|
|
(155,095 |
) |
|
|
(138,755 |
) |
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
(17,106 |
) |
|
|
(16,918 |
) |
|
|
(48,971 |
) |
|
|
(52,776 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(120,487 |
) |
|
|
(87,001 |
) |
|
|
(367,309 |
) |
|
|
(260,836 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recoveries: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
74 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
|
|
78 |
|
|
|
73 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
180 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
351 |
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
115 |
|
|
|
876 |
|
|
|
428 |
|
|
|
1,107 |
|
Construction |
|
|
99 |
|
|
|
50 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
61 |
|
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
3,759 |
|
|
|
1,650 |
|
|
|
8,365 |
|
|
|
6,882 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
4,227 |
|
|
|
2,649 |
|
|
|
9,475 |
|
|
|
8,123 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs |
|
|
(116,260 |
) |
|
|
(84,352 |
) |
|
|
(357,834 |
) |
|
|
(252,713 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses, end of period |
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
$ |
471,484 |
|
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
$ |
471,484 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to period end total
loans receivable |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
3.43 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
3.43 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net charge-offs annualized to average loans
outstanding during the period |
|
|
3.74 |
% |
|
|
2.53 |
% |
|
|
3.67 |
% |
|
|
2.52 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Provision for loan and lease losses to net charge-offs
during the period |
|
|
1.04 |
x |
|
|
1.76 |
x |
|
|
1.22 |
x |
|
|
1.75 |
x |
88
The following table sets forth information concerning the allocation of the allowance for
loan and lease losses by loan category and the percentage of loan balances in each category to the
total of such loans as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of |
|
|
As of |
|
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
|
December 31, 2009 |
|
(In thousands) |
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
|
Amount |
|
|
Percent |
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
67,098 |
|
|
|
28 |
% |
|
$ |
31,165 |
|
|
|
26 |
% |
Commercial mortgage loans |
|
|
97,782 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
63,972 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Construction loans |
|
|
184,924 |
|
|
|
9 |
% |
|
|
164,128 |
|
|
|
11 |
% |
Commercial and Industrial loans (including loans to
a local financial institution) |
|
|
179,381 |
|
|
|
34 |
% |
|
|
186,007 |
|
|
|
38 |
% |
Consumer loans and finance leases |
|
|
79,341 |
|
|
|
15 |
% |
|
|
82,848 |
|
|
|
14 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
$ |
528,120 |
|
|
|
100 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
The following table sets forth information concerning the composition of the
Corporations allowance for loan and lease losses as of September 30, 2010 and December 31, 2009 by
loan category and by whether the allowance and related provisions were calculated individually or
through a general valuation allowance:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
Consumer and |
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
C&I Loans |
|
Loans |
|
Finance Leases |
|
Total |
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans without specific reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans, net of charge-offs |
|
$ |
234,012 |
|
|
$ |
38,181 |
|
|
$ |
93,025 |
|
|
$ |
121,517 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
486,735 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans with specific reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans, net of charge-offs |
|
|
294,943 |
|
|
|
160,335 |
|
|
|
392,120 |
|
|
|
546,937 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,394,335 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
30,629 |
|
|
|
35,946 |
|
|
|
88,555 |
|
|
|
116,295 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
271,425 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
10.38 |
% |
|
|
22.42 |
% |
|
|
22.58 |
% |
|
|
21.26 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
19.47 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans with general allowance: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans |
|
|
2,919,380 |
|
|
|
1,543,946 |
|
|
|
3,635,626 |
|
|
|
446,193 |
|
|
|
1,753,811 |
|
|
|
10,298,956 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
36,469 |
|
|
|
61,836 |
|
|
|
90,826 |
|
|
|
68,629 |
|
|
|
79,341 |
|
|
|
337,101 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
1.25 |
% |
|
|
4.01 |
% |
|
|
2.50 |
% |
|
|
15.38 |
% |
|
|
4.52 |
% |
|
|
3.27 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total portfolio, excluding loans held for sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans |
|
$ |
3,448,335 |
|
|
$ |
1,742,462 |
|
|
$ |
4,120,771 |
|
|
$ |
1,114,647 |
|
|
$ |
1,753,811 |
|
|
$ |
12,180,026 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
67,098 |
|
|
|
97,782 |
|
|
|
179,381 |
|
|
|
184,924 |
|
|
|
79,341 |
|
|
|
608,526 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
1.95 |
% |
|
|
5.61 |
% |
|
|
4.35 |
% |
|
|
16.59 |
% |
|
|
4.52 |
% |
|
|
5.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans without specific reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans, net of charge-offs |
|
$ |
384,285 |
|
|
$ |
62,920 |
|
|
$ |
48,943 |
|
|
$ |
100,028 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
596,176 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Impaired loans with specific reserves: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans, net of charge-offs |
|
|
60,040 |
|
|
|
159,284 |
|
|
|
243,123 |
|
|
|
597,641 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
1,060,088 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
2,616 |
|
|
|
30,945 |
|
|
|
62,491 |
|
|
|
86,093 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
182,145 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
4.36 |
% |
|
|
19.43 |
% |
|
|
25.70 |
% |
|
|
14.41 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
17.18 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Loans with general allowance: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans |
|
|
3,151,183 |
|
|
|
1,368,617 |
|
|
|
5,059,363 |
|
|
|
794,920 |
|
|
|
1,898,104 |
|
|
|
12,272,187 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
28,549 |
|
|
|
33,027 |
|
|
|
123,516 |
|
|
|
78,035 |
|
|
|
82,848 |
|
|
|
345,975 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
0.91 |
% |
|
|
2.41 |
% |
|
|
2.44 |
% |
|
|
9.82 |
% |
|
|
4.36 |
% |
|
|
2.82 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total portfolio, excluding loans held for sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Principal balance of loans |
|
$ |
3,595,508 |
|
|
$ |
1,590,821 |
|
|
$ |
5,351,429 |
|
|
$ |
1,492,589 |
|
|
$ |
1,898,104 |
|
|
$ |
13,928,451 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
|
31,165 |
|
|
|
63,972 |
|
|
|
186,007 |
|
|
|
164,128 |
|
|
|
82,848 |
|
|
|
528,120 |
|
Allowance for loan and lease losses to principal balance |
|
|
0.87 |
% |
|
|
4.02 |
% |
|
|
3.48 |
% |
|
|
11.00 |
% |
|
|
4.36 |
% |
|
|
3.79% |
|
89
The following tables show the activity for impaired loans and the related specific
reserves during the first nine months of 2010:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(In thousands) |
|
Impaired Loans: |
|
|
|
|
Balance at beginning of year |
|
$ |
1,656,264 |
|
Loans determined impaired during the period |
|
|
802,957 |
|
Net charge-offs (1) |
|
|
(299,871 |
) |
Loans sold, net of charge-offs of $42.6 million (2) |
|
|
(120,556 |
) |
Loans foreclosed, paid in full and partial payments, net of additional disbursements |
|
|
(157,724 |
) |
|
|
|
|
Balance at end of period |
|
$ |
1,881,070 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Approximately $151.5 million, or 51%, is related to construction loans. |
|
(2) |
|
Loans sold in Florida. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Nine-Month Period Ended September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
|
C&I Loans |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Total |
|
Allowance for impaired loans, beginning of period |
|
$ |
2,616 |
|
|
$ |
30,945 |
|
|
$ |
62,491 |
|
|
$ |
86,093 |
|
|
$ |
182,145 |
|
Provision for impaired loans |
|
|
64,451 |
|
|
|
49,604 |
|
|
|
93,352 |
|
|
|
181,744 |
|
|
|
389,151 |
|
Charge-offs |
|
|
(36,438 |
) |
|
|
(44,603 |
) |
|
|
(67,288 |
) |
|
|
(151,542 |
) |
|
|
(299,871 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance for impaired loans, end of period |
|
$ |
30,629 |
|
|
$ |
35,946 |
|
|
$ |
88,555 |
|
|
$ |
116,295 |
|
|
$ |
271,425 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credit Quality
Credit trends continued to show modest signs of improvement. Non-performing loans decreased $57.9
million, while total non-performing assets decreased $41.5 million when compared to balances as of
December 31, 2009. The decrease in non-performing loans was mainly a function of charge-off
activity amounting to $357.8 million during the first nine months of 2010, problem credit
resolutions, including the sale of non-performing loans, positive results from loan modifications
and, to a lesser extent, loans brought current and a reduction in the migration of loans to
nonaccrual status compared to the experience of 2009.
Non-performing Loans and Non-performing Assets
Total non-performing assets consist of non-performing loans, foreclosed real estate and other
repossessed properties as well as non-performing investment securities. Non-performing loans are
those loans on which the accrual of interest is discontinued. When a loan is placed in
non-performing status, any interest previously recognized and not collected is reversed and charged
against interest income.
Non-performing Loans Policy
Residential Real Estate Loans The Corporation classifies real estate loans in non-performing
status when interest and principal have not been received for a period of 90 days or more or on
certain loans modified under one of the Corporations loss mitigation programs (See Past Due Loans description below).
Commercial and Construction Loans The Corporation places commercial loans (including
commercial real estate and construction loans) in non-performing status when interest and principal
have not been received for a period of 90 days or more or when there are doubts about the potential
to collect all of the principal based on collateral deficiencies or, in other situations, when
collection of all of principal or interest is not expected due to deterioration in the financial
condition of the borrower. Cash payments received on certain loans that are impaired and
collateral dependent are recognized when collected in accordance with the contractual terms of the
loans. The principal portion of the payment is used to reduce the principal balance of the loan,
whereas the interest portion is recognized on a cash basis (when collected). However, when
management believes that the ultimate collectability of principal is in doubt, the interest portion
is applied to principal. The risk exposure of this portfolio is diversified as to individual
borrowers and industries among other factors. In addition, a large portion is secured with real
estate collateral.
Finance Leases Finance leases are classified in non-performing status when interest and
principal have not been received for a period of 90 days or more.
Consumer Loans Consumer loans are classified in non-performing status when interest and
principal have not been received for a period of 90 days or more.
90
Other Real Estate Owned (OREO)
OREO acquired in settlement of loans is carried at the lower of cost (carrying value of the
loan) or fair value less estimated costs to sell off the real estate at the date of acquisition
(estimated realizable value).
Other Repossessed Property
The other repossessed property category includes repossessed boats and autos acquired in
settlement of loans. Repossessed boats and autos are recorded at the lower of cost or estimated
fair value.
Investment Securities
This category presents investment securities reclassified to non-accrual status, at their book
value.
Past Due Loans
Past due loans are accruing loans which are contractually delinquent 90 days or more. Past due
loans are either current as to interest but delinquent in the payment of principal or are insured
or guaranteed under applicable FHA and VA programs.
The Corporation has in place loan loss mitigation programs providing homeownership
preservation assistance. Loans modified through this program are reported as non-accrual loans and
interest is recognized on a cash basis. When there is reasonable assurance of repayment and the
borrower has made payments over a sustained period, the loan is returned to accrual status.
The following table presents non-performing assets as of the dates indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Non-performing loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
427,574 |
|
|
$ |
441,642 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
173,350 |
|
|
|
196,535 |
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
293,323 |
|
|
|
241,316 |
|
Construction |
|
|
558,148 |
|
|
|
634,329 |
|
Finance leases |
|
|
4,692 |
|
|
|
5,207 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
48,916 |
|
|
|
44,834 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
|
1,506,003 |
|
|
|
1,563,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO |
|
|
82,706 |
|
|
|
69,304 |
|
Other repossessed property |
|
|
15,824 |
|
|
|
12,898 |
|
Investment securities (1) |
|
|
64,543 |
|
|
|
64,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets |
|
$ |
1,669,076 |
|
|
$ |
1,710,608 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past due loans 90 days and still accruing |
|
$ |
139,795 |
|
|
$ |
165,936 |
|
Non-performing assets to total assets |
|
|
10.01 |
% |
|
|
8.71 |
% |
Non-performing loans to total loans receivable |
|
|
12.36 |
% |
|
|
11.23 |
% |
Allowance for loan and lease losses |
|
$ |
608,526 |
|
|
$ |
528,120 |
|
Allowance to total non-performing loans |
|
|
40.41 |
% |
|
|
33.77 |
% |
Allowance to total non-performing loans, excluding residential mortgage loans |
|
|
56.43 |
% |
|
|
47.06 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Collateral pledged with Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. |
91
The following table shows non-performing assets by geographic segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
December 31, |
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
Puerto Rico: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
366,470 |
|
|
$ |
376,018 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
123,550 |
|
|
|
128,001 |
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
284,684 |
|
|
|
229,039 |
|
Construction |
|
|
463,052 |
|
|
|
385,259 |
|
Finance leases |
|
|
4,692 |
|
|
|
5,207 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
46,681 |
|
|
|
40,132 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
|
1,289,129 |
|
|
|
1,163,656 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO |
|
|
58,508 |
|
|
|
49,337 |
|
Other repossessed property |
|
|
15,580 |
|
|
|
12,634 |
|
Investment securities |
|
|
64,543 |
|
|
|
64,543 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets |
|
$ |
1,427,760 |
|
|
$ |
1,290,170 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past due loans 90 days and still accruing |
|
$ |
136,266 |
|
|
$ |
128,016 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Virgin Islands: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
9,961 |
|
|
$ |
9,063 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
8,228 |
|
|
|
11,727 |
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
5,847 |
|
|
|
8,300 |
|
Construction |
|
|
20,295 |
|
|
|
2,796 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
1,064 |
|
|
|
3,540 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
|
45,395 |
|
|
|
35,426 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO |
|
|
1,203 |
|
|
|
470 |
|
Other repossessed property |
|
|
196 |
|
|
|
221 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets |
|
$ |
46,794 |
|
|
$ |
36,117 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past due loans 90 days and still accruing |
|
$ |
952 |
|
|
$ |
23,876 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Florida: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
$ |
51,143 |
|
|
$ |
56,561 |
|
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
41,572 |
|
|
|
56,807 |
|
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
2,792 |
|
|
|
3,977 |
|
Construction |
|
|
74,801 |
|
|
|
246,274 |
|
Consumer |
|
|
1,171 |
|
|
|
1,162 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
|
171,479 |
|
|
|
364,781 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO |
|
|
22,995 |
|
|
|
19,497 |
|
Other repossessed property |
|
|
48 |
|
|
|
43 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing assets |
|
$ |
194,522 |
|
|
$ |
384,321 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Past due loans 90 days and still accruing |
|
$ |
2,577 |
|
|
$ |
14,044 |
|
Total non-performing loans as of September 30, 2010 were $1.51 billion, compared to $1.56
billion as of December 31, 2009. The decrease of $57.9 million, or 4%, in non-performing loans
from December 31, 2009 primarily resulting from decreases in non-performing construction,
commercial mortgage and residential mortgage loans, which was partially offset by increases in
non-performing C&I loans.
Total non-performing construction loans decreased $76.2 million, or 12% from the end of the
fourth quarter. The decrease was mainly in the United States where non-performing construction
loans decreased $171.5 million or 70% from $246.3 million as of December 31, 2009 to $74.8 million
at September 30, 2010. The decrease was driven by sales of $115.7 million of construction loans classified as
non-performing as of December 31, 2009. The sales were part of the Corporations ongoing efforts
to reduce its non-performing assets through its Special Assets Group (SAG); the sales were executed
at an amount in excess of the aggregate carrying amount of the loans. The SAG focuses on
strategies for the accelerated reduction of non-performing assets through note sales, short sales,
loss mitigation programs, and sales of REO. In addition to the management of the resolution
process for problem loans, the SAG oversees collection efforts for all loans to prevent migration
to the non-performing and/or classified status.
92
Non-performing construction loans in Puerto Rico increased by $77.8 million from December
2009. The increase was primarily driven by four relationships in excess of $10 million entering
into non-accruing status during 2010, mainly in connection with residential housing projects. The
increase was partially offset by charge-off activity and repayments applied to the balance of
non-performing loans, including charge-offs of $26.5 million in connection with two high-rise
residential housing projects. In the Virgin Islands, the non-performing construction loan
portfolio increased by $17.5 million, driven by a $15.9 million relationship engaged in the
development of a residential real estate project.
During the third quarter of 2010, $109.1 million of construction loans were converted to
commercial mortgage loans, of which $78 million have Puerto Rico government guarantees. The
Corporation expects additional conversions of construction loans to commercial loans or commercial
mortgage loans in the amounts of $9.8 million in the fourth quarter of 2010 and $133.1 million in
2011. As a key initiative to increase the absorption rate in residential construction projects,
the Corporation has engaged in discussions with developers to review sales strategies and provide
additional incentives to supplement the Puerto Rico Government housing stimulus package enacted in
September 2010. From September 1, 2010 to June 30, 2011, the Government of Puerto Rico will
provide tax and transaction fees incentives to both purchasers and sellers (whether a Puerto Rico
resident or not) of new and existing residential property, as well as commercial property with a
sales price of no more than $3 million. This legislation should help to alleviate some of the
stress in the construction industry and might show tangible results in the last quarter of the
year. Refer to Financial Condition and Operating Data Analysis Loan Portfolio Commercial and
Construction Loans discussion above for additional information about the main provisions of the
housing stimulus package.
Non-performing commercial mortgage loans decreased by $23.2 million, or 12%, from the end of
the fourth quarter of 2009 mainly due to charge-offs, two relationships in Puerto Rico amounting to
$12.5 million in the aggregate becoming current and for which the Corporation expects to collect
principal and interest in full pursuant to the terms of the loans, and sales in Florida of $16.1
million of loans classified as non-performing as of December 31, 2009. Non-performing commercial
mortgage loans in Florida decreased by $15.2 million, or 27%, to $41.6 million when compared to
$56.8 million as of December 31, 2009. In Puerto Rico, commercial mortgage non-performing loans
decreased by $4.5 million, or 3%, since December 31, 2009. Total non-accrual commercial mortgage
loans in the Virgin Islands decreased by $3.5 million mainly attributable to restoration to accrual
status of a $3.8 million loan based on its compliance with performance terms and debt service
capacity.
C&I non-accrual loans increased $52.0 million, or 22%, from the end of the fourth quarter of
2009. The increase was related primarily to six relationships in Puerto Rico in individual amounts
exceeding $5 million with an aggregate carrying value of $85 million, of which $38.9 million (net
of a charge-off of $7.7 million) is related to the Corporations participation in a syndicated loan
downgraded in its latest annual review as disclosed in the lead bank report. This was partially offset by
net charge-offs, including a charge-off of $15.3 million relating to one relationship based on its
financial condition and a charge-off of $15.0 million associated with a loan extended to a local
financial institution in Puerto Rico and, to a lesser extent, payments received and applied to
non-performing loans.
The levels of non-accrual consumer loans, including finance leases, remained stable showing a
$3.6 million increase during the first nine months of 2010, mainly related to boat financing in
Puerto Rico.
At September 30, 2010, approximately $141.6 million of the loans placed in non-accrual status,
mainly construction and commercial loans, were current, or had delinquencies of less than 90 days
in their interest payments. Collections are being recorded on a cash basis through earnings, or on
a cost-recovery basis, as conditions warrant.
During the third quarter and first nine months of 2010, interest income of approximately $1.3
million and $5.1 million, respectively, related to $868.2 million of non-performing loans as of
September 30, 2010, mainly non-performing construction and commercial loans, was applied against
the related principal balances under the cost-recovery method. The Corporation will continue to
evaluate restructuring alternatives to mitigate losses and enable borrowers to repay their loans
under revised terms in an effort to preserve the value of the Corporations interests over the
long-term.
The allowance to non-performing loans ratio as of September 30, 2010 was 40.41%, compared to
33.77% as of December 31, 2009. The increase in the ratio is attributable in part to increases in
the allowance based on increases in reserve factors for classified loans and additional charges to
specific reserves. As of September 30, 2010, approximately $572.7 million, or 38%, of total
non-performing loans have been charged-off to their net realizable value as shown in the following
table.
93
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
Commercial |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction |
|
|
Consumer and |
|
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
|
Mortgage Loans |
|
|
C&I Loans |
|
|
Loans |
|
|
Finance Leases |
|
|
Total |
|
As of September 30, 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans charged-off to realizable value |
|
$ |
307,398 |
|
|
$ |
34,028 |
|
|
$ |
101,473 |
|
|
$ |
129,814 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
572,713 |
|
Other non-performing loans |
|
|
120,176 |
|
|
|
139,322 |
|
|
|
191,850 |
|
|
|
428,334 |
|
|
|
53,608 |
|
|
|
933,290 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
$ |
427,574 |
|
|
$ |
173,350 |
|
|
$ |
293,323 |
|
|
$ |
558,148 |
|
|
$ |
53,608 |
|
|
$ |
1,506,003 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance to non-performing loans |
|
|
15.69 |
% |
|
|
56.41 |
% |
|
|
61.15 |
% |
|
|
33.13 |
% |
|
|
148.00 |
% |
|
|
40.41 |
% |
Allowance to non-performing loans, excluding
non-performing loans charged-off to realizable value |
|
|
55.83 |
% |
|
|
70.18 |
% |
|
|
93.50 |
% |
|
|
43.17 |
% |
|
|
148.00 |
% |
|
|
65.20 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
As of December 31, 2009 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Non-performing loans charged-off to realizable value |
|
$ |
320,224 |
|
|
$ |
38,421 |
|
|
$ |
19,244 |
|
|
$ |
139,787 |
|
|
$ |
|
|
|
$ |
517,676 |
|
Other non-performing loans |
|
|
121,418 |
|
|
|
158,114 |
|
|
|
222,072 |
|
|
|
494,542 |
|
|
|
50,041 |
|
|
|
1,046,187 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total non-performing loans |
|
$ |
441,642 |
|
|
$ |
196,535 |
|
|
$ |
241,316 |
|
|
$ |
634,329 |
|
|
$ |
50,041 |
|
|
$ |
1,563,863 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Allowance to non-performing loans |
|
|
7.06 |
% |
|
|
34.19 |
% |
|
|
75.74 |
% |
|
|
25.87 |
% |
|
|
165.56 |
% |
|
|
33.77 |
% |
Allowance to non-performing loans, excluding
non-performing loans charged-off to realizable value |
|
|
25.67 |
% |
|
|
42.50 |
% |
|
|
82.31 |
% |
|
|
33.19 |
% |
|
|
165.56 |
% |
|
|
50.48 |
% |
The Corporation provides homeownership preservation assistance to its customers through a loss
mitigation program in Puerto Rico and through programs sponsored by the Federal Government. Due to
the nature of the borrowers financial condition, restructurings or loan modifications through
these program as well as other restructurings of individual commercial, commercial mortgage loans,
construction loans and residential mortgages in the U.S. mainland fit the definition of TDR. A
restructuring of a debt constitutes a TDR if the creditor for economic or legal reasons related to
the debtors financial difficulties grants a concession to the debtor that it would not otherwise
consider. Modifications involve changes in one or more of the loan terms that bring a defaulted
loan current and provide sustainable affordability. Changes may include the refinancing of any
past-due amounts, including interest and escrow, the extension of the maturity of the loans and
modifications of the loan rate. As of September 30, 2010, the Corporations TDR loans consisted of
$185.6 million of residential mortgage loans, $41.7 million commercial and industrial loans, $90.3
million commercial mortgage loans and $55.0 million of construction loans. From the $372.6 million
total TDR loans, approximately $174.1 million are in compliance with modified terms, $41.7 million
are 30-89 days delinquent, and $156.8 million are classified as non-accrual as of September 30,
2010.
Included in the $372.6 million of TDR loans are certain impaired condo-conversion loans
restructured into two separate agreements (loan splitting) in the fourth quarter of 2009. At that
time, each of these loans was restructured into two notes, one that represents the portion of the
loan that is expected to be fully collected along with contractual interest and the second note
that represents the portion of the original loan that was charged-off. The restructuring of these
loans was made after analyzing the borrowers and guarantors capacities to service the debt and
ability to perform under the modified terms. As part of the restructuring of the loans, the second
note of each loan requires a monthly payment of principal and interest that amortize the debt over
25 years at a market rate of interest. An interest rate reduction was granted for the second note.
The carrying value of the notes deemed collectible amounted to $22.0 million as of September 30,
2010 and the charge-offs recorded prior to 2010 associated with these loans were $29.7 million.
The loans that have been deemed collectible continue to be individually evaluated for impairment
purposes and a specific reserve of $0.5 million was allocated to these loans as of September 30,
2010.
Total non-performing assets, which include non-performing loans, were $1.67 billion at September
30, 2010. This was down $41.5 million, or 2%, from $1.71 billion at December 31, 2009. The REO
portfolio, which is part of non-performing assets, increased by $13.4 million, mainly in Puerto
Rico, reflecting increases in both commercial and residential properties. Consistent with the
Corporations assessment of the value of properties and current and future market conditions,
management is executing strategies to accelerate the sale of the real estate acquired in
satisfaction of debt. During 2010, the Corporation sold approximately $41.5 million of REO
properties.
The over 90-day delinquent, but still accruing, loans, excluding loans guaranteed by the U.S.
Government, decreased to $60.8 million, or 0.50% of total loans receivable, at September 30, 2010,
from $96.7 million, or 0.69% of total loans receivable, at December 31, 2009.
Net Charge-offs and Total Credit Losses
Total net charge-offs for the first nine months of 2010 were $357.8 million or 3.67% of average
loans on an annualized basis, compared to $252.7 million or an annualized 2.52% of average loans
for the first nine months of 2009. Even though the increase in net charge-offs in absolute numbers
was higher in Puerto Rico, loss rates (charge-offs to average loans) for all major loan categories
continued to be significantly higher in the United States than in Puerto Rico.
94
Construction loans net charge-offs in the first nine months of 2010 were $154.8 million, or an
annualized 14.87%, up from $138.7 million, or an annualized 11.61% of related loans, in the first
nine months of 2009. Construction loan charge-offs have been significantly impacted by individual
loan charge-offs in excess of $10 million coupled with charge-offs related to loans sold. There
were six loan relationships with charge-offs in excess of $10 million for the first nine months of
2010, or accounting for $83.5 million of total construction loans charge-offs. Construction loans
net charge-offs in Puerto Rico were $73.0 million, including $37.2 million in charge-offs
associated with three relationships in excess of $10 million mainly related to high-rise
residential projects. Construction loans net charge-offs in the United States amounted to $81.8
million, of which $45.2 million are related to loans sold during the period. The Corporation
continued its ongoing management efforts including obtaining updated appraisals for the collateral
for impaired loans and assessing a projects status within the context of market environment
expectations; generally, appraisal updates are requested annually. This portfolio remains
susceptible to the ongoing housing market disruptions, particularly in Puerto Rico. In the United
States, based on the portfolio management process, including charge-off activity over the past year
and several sales of problem credits, the credit issues in this portfolio have been substantially
addressed. As of September 30, 2010, the construction loan portfolio in Florida amounted to $107
million, compared to $981 million as of June 30, 2006 when construction lending was halted in this
segment. The Corporation is engaged in continuous efforts to identify alternatives that enable
borrowers to repay their loans while protecting the Corporations investments.
C&I loans net charge-offs in the first nine months of 2010 were $69.7 million, or an annualized
1.98%, almost entirely related to the Puerto Rico portfolio, compared to the $26.8 million, or an
annualized 0.76% of related loans, recorded in the first nine months of 2009. There was a $15.3
million charge-off in the first nine months associated with the previously mentioned non-performing
loan based on the financial condition of the borrower and a $15.0 million charge-off associated
with a loan extended to R&G Financial that was adequately reserved prior to 2010. The Corporation
also recognized a $7.7 million charge-off on the aforementioned participation in a
syndicated non-performing loan. Remaining C&I net charge-offs in the first nine months of
2010 were concentrated in Puerto Rico, where they were distributed across several industries, with
the largest individual charge-off amounting to $6.6 million.
Commercial mortgage loans net charge-offs in the first nine months of 2010 were $48.6 million, or
an annualized 4.09%, a $28.6 million increase from the first nine months of 2009. The first nine
months charge-offs were mainly from Florida loans, which account for $39.4 million of total
commercial mortgage net charge-offs, including$23.7 million on loans sold during 2010.
Residential mortgage net charge-offs were $44.1 million, or an annualized 1.67% of related average
loans. This was up from $21.4 million, or an annualized 0.81%, of related average balances in the
first nine months of 2009. The higher loss level is mainly related to reductions in property
values. Approximately $31.8 million in charge-offs for the first nine months ($23.2 million in
Puerto Rico, $8.0 million in Florida and $0.6 million in the Virgin Islands) resulted from
valuations, for impairment purposes, of residential mortgage loan portfolios considered homogeneous
given high delinquency and loan-to-value levels, compared to $11.2 million recorded in the first
nine months of 2009, mainly in Puerto Rico. The total amount of the residential mortgage loan
portfolio that was evaluated for impairment purposes amounted to approximately $350.7 million as of
September 30, 2010, of which loans aggregating $307.4 million have been charged-off to their net
realizable value, representing approximately 72% of the total non-performing residential mortgage
loan portfolio outstanding as of September 30, 2010 and a reserve was allocated to the remaining
balance. Net charge-offs for residential mortgage loans also include $8.5 million related to loans
foreclosed during the first nine months, compared to $8.3 million recorded for loans foreclosed in
the first nine months of 2009. The ratio of net charge-offs to average loans in the Corporations
residential mortgage loan portfolio of 1.67% for the nine-month period ended September 30, 2010 is
lower than the approximately 2.05% average charge-off rate for commercial banks in the U.S.
mainland for the second quarter of 2010, as per statistical releases published by the Federal
Reserve, and loss rates in the Corporations Puerto Rico operations continue to be lower than loss
rates experienced in the Florida market.
Net charge-offs of consumer loans and finance leases in the first nine months of 2010 were $40.6
million compared to net charge-offs of $45.9 million for the first nine months of 2009. Annualized
net charge-offs as a percentage of related loans decreased to 2.96% from 3.02% for the first nine
months of 2009. Performance of this portfolio on both absolute and relative terms continued to be
consistent with managements views regarding the underlying quality of the portfolio.
95
The following table presents annualized charge-offs to average loans held-in-portfolio:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
For the Quarter Ended |
|
For the Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
September 30, 2009 |
|
September 30, 2010 |
|
September 30, 2009 |
Residential mortgage loans |
|
|
1.52 |
% |
|
|
1.21 |
% |
|
|
1.67 |
% |
|
|
0.81 |
% |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
2.88 |
% |
|
|
1.35 |
% |
|
|
4.09 |
% |
|
|
1.73 |
% |
Commercial and industrial |
|
|
1.82 |
% |
|
|
0.49 |
% |
|
|
1.98 |
% |
|
|
0.76 |
% |
Construction loans |
|
|
18.84 |
% |
|
|
11.80 |
% |
|
|
14.87 |
% |
|
|
11.61 |
% |
Consumer loans (1) |
|
|
3.00 |
% |
|
|
3.09 |
% |
|
|
2.96 |
% |
|
|
3.02 |
% |
Total loans |
|
|
3.74 |
% |
|
|
2.53 |
% |
|
|
3.67 |
% |
|
|
2.52 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Includes lease financing. |
The above ratios are based on annualized charge-offs and are not necessarily indicative
of the results expected for the entire year or in subsequent periods.
The following table presents charge-offs (annualized) to average loans held-in-portfolio by
geographic segment:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
September 30, |
|
September 30, |
|
September 30, |
|
September 30, |
|
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
|
2010 |
|
2009 |
PUERTO RICO: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
1.61 |
% |
|
|
0.66 |
% |
|
|
1.60 |
% |
|
|
0.65 |
% |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
2.49 |
% |
|
|
1.15 |
% |
|
|
1.21 |
% |
|
|
0.83 |
% |
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
1.92 |
% |
|
|
0.54 |
% |
|
|
2.11 |
% |
|
|
0.75 |
% |
Construction |
|
|
8.30 |
% |
|
|
7.23 |
% |
|
|
10.19 |
% |
|
|
6.36 |
% |
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
2.97 |
% |
|
|
2.97 |
% |
|
|
2.95 |
% |
|
|
2.89 |
% |
Total loans |
|
|
2.61 |
% |
|
|
1.64 |
% |
|
|
2.74 |
% |
|
|
1.58 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
VIRGIN ISLANDS: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
0.13 |
% |
|
|
0.10 |
% |
|
|
0.20 |
% |
|
|
0.11 |
% |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
3.57 |
% |
Commercial and Industrial (1) |
|
|
-0.01 |
% |
|
|
-0.69 |
% |
|
|
-0.55 |
% |
|
|
0.83 |
% |
Construction |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
0.05 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
1.56 |
% |
|
|
3.79 |
% |
|
|
2.01 |
% |
|
|
3.51 |
% |
Total loans |
|
|
0.18 |
% |
|
|
0.33 |
% |
|
|
0.14 |
% |
|
|
0.87 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FLORIDA: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential mortgage |
|
|
2.59 |
% |
|
|
6.26 |
% |
|
|
4.02 |
% |
|
|
2.66 |
% |
Commercial mortgage |
|
|
4.20 |
% |
|
|
1.92 |
% |
|
|
10.63 |
% |
|
|
3.19 |
% |
Commercial and Industrial |
|
|
0.02 |
% |
|
|
0.00 |
% |
|
|
3.53 |
% |
|
|
2.14 |
% |
Construction (2) |
|
|
101.18 |
% |
|
|
27.23 |
% |
|
|
45.74 |
% |
|
|
26.05 |
% |
Consumer and finance leases |
|
|
8.37 |
% |
|
|
6.77 |
% |
|
|
5.68 |
% |
|
|
7.31 |
% |
Total loans |
|
|
18.34 |
% |
|
|
10.93 |
% |
|
|
15.47 |
% |
|
|
10.71 |
% |
|
|
|
1- |
|
For the third quarter of 2010 and 2009 and for the nine month period endede September 30,
2010, recoveries in commercial and industrial loans in the Virgin Islands exceeded charge-offs. |
|
2- |
|
For the third quarter of 2010, net charge-offs for the construction loan portfolio in Florida
were $40 million which once annualized for ratio calculation exceeded the average balance of this
portfolio. |
Total credit losses (equal to net charge-offs plus losses on REO operations) for the
first nine months of 2010 amounted to $380.5 million, or 3.87% on an annualized basis to average
loans and repossessed assets in contrast to credit losses of $269.7 million, or a loss rate of
2.68%, for the first nine months of 2009.
96
The following table presents a detail of the REO inventory and credit losses for the periods
indicated:
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Quarter Ended |
|
|
Nine-Month Period Ended |
|
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
September 30, |
|
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
2010 |
|
|
2009 |
|
|
|
(Dollars in thousands) |
|
REO |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO balances, carrying value: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
$ |
51,258 |
|
|
$ |
33,831 |
|
|
$ |
51,258 |
|
|
$ |
33,831 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
22,517 |
|
|
|
17,093 |
|
|
|
22,517 |
|
|
|
17,093 |
|
Condo-conversion projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
8,000 |
|
Construction |
|
|
8,931 |
|
|
|
8,569 |
|
|
|
8,931 |
|
|
|
8,569 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total |
|
$ |
82,706 |
|
|
$ |
67,493 |
|
|
$ |
82,706 |
|
|
$ |
67,493 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO activity (number of properties): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Beginning property inventory, |
|
|
401 |
|
|
|
215 |
|
|
|
285 |
|
|
|
155 |
|
Properties acquired |
|
|
111 |
|
|
|
83 |
|
|
|
340 |
|
|
|
207 |
|
Properties disposed |
|
|
(63 |
) |
|
|
(45 |
) |
|
|
(176 |
) |
|
|
(109 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ending property inventory |
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
449 |
|
|
|
253 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Average holding period (in days) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
|
|
250 |
|
|
|
194 |
|
Commercial |
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
|
|
248 |
|
|
|
120 |
|
Condo-conversion projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
552 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
552 |
|
Construction |
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
294 |
|
|
|
257 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
254 |
|
|
|
226 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
REO operations (loss) gain: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Market adjustments and (losses) gain on sale: |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
$ |
(4,431 |
) |
|
$ |
(2,777 |
) |
|
$ |
(6,494 |
) |
|
$ |
(7,886 |
) |
Commercial |
|
|
(1,737 |
) |
|
|
(145 |
) |
|
|
(6,627 |
) |
|
|
(588 |
) |
Condo-conversion projects |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(2,140 |
) |
|
|
(1,500 |
) |
Construction |
|
|
(71 |
) |
|
|
(600 |
) |
|
|
(1,448 |
) |
|
|
(1,565 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
(6,239 |
) |
|
|
(3,522 |
) |
|
|
(16,709 |
) |
|
|
(11,539 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Other REO operations expenses |
|
|
(1,954 |
) |
|
|
(1,493 |
) |
|
|
(5,993 |
) |
|
|
(5,477 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Net Loss on REO operations |
|
$ |
(8,193 |
) |
|
$ |
(5,015 |
) |
|
$ |
(22,702 |
) |
|
$ |
(17,016 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CHARGE-OFFS |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential charge-offs, net |
|
|
(13,109 |
) |
|
|
(10,882 |
) |
|
|
(44,074 |
) |
|
|
(21,373 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Commercial charge-offs, net |
|
|
(31,381 |
) |
|
|
(10,878 |
) |
|
|
(118,312 |
) |
|
|
(46,752 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Construction charge-offs, net |
|
|
(58,423 |
) |
|
|
(47,324 |
) |
|
|
(154,842 |
) |
|
|
(138,694 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Consumer and finance leases charge-offs, net |
|
|
(13,347 |
) |
|
|
(15,268 |
) |
|
|
(40,606 |
) |
|
|
(45,894 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Total charge-offs, net |
|
|
(116,260 |
) |
|
|
(84,352 |
) |
|
|
(357,834 |
) |
|
|
(252,713 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL CREDIT LOSSES (1) |
|
$ |
(124,453 |
) |
|
$ |
(89,367 |
) |
|
$ |
(380,536 |
) |
|
$ |
(269,729 |
) |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
LOSS RATIO PER CATEGORY (2): |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Residential |
|
|
2.00 |
% |
|
|
1.50 |
% |
|
|
1.89 |
% |
|
|
1.10 |
% |
Commercial |
|
|
2.21 |
% |
|
|
0.72 |
% |
|
|
2.65 |
% |
|
|
1.01 |
% |
Construction |
|
|
18.73 |
% |
|
|
11.84 |
% |
|
|
15.08 |
% |
|
|
11.75 |
% |
Consumer |
|
|
2.97 |
% |
|
|
3.08 |
% |
|
|
2.94 |
% |
|
|
3.00 |
% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TOTAL CREDIT LOSS RATIO (3) |
|
|
3.97 |
% |
|
|
2.67 |
% |
|
|
3.87 |
% |
|
|
2.68 |
% |
|
|
|
(1) |
|
Equal to REO operations (losses) gains plus Charge-offs, net. |
|
(2) |
|
Calculated as net charge-offs plus market adjustments and gains (losses) on sale of REO divided
by average loans and repossessed assets. |
|
(3) |
|
Calculated as net charge-offs plus net loss on REO operations divided by average loans and
repossessed assets. |
97
Operational Risk
The Corporation faces ongoing and emerging risk and regulatory pressure related to the
activities that surround the delivery of banking and financial products. Coupled with external
influences such as market conditions, security risks, and legal risk, the potential for operational
and reputational loss has increased. In order to mitigate and control operational risk, the
Corporation has developed, and continues to enhance, specific internal controls, policies and
procedures that are designated to identify and manage operational risk at appropriate levels
throughout the organization. The purpose of these mechanisms is to provide reasonable assurance
that the Corporations business operations are functioning within the policies and limits
established by management.
The Corporation classifies operational risk into two major categories: business specific and
corporate-wide affecting all business lines. For business specific risks, a risk assessment group
works with the various business units to ensure consistency in policies, processes and assessments.
With respect to corporate-wide risks, such as information security, business recovery, legal and
compliance, the Corporation has specialized groups, such as the Legal Department, Information
Security, Corporate Compliance, Information Technology and Operations. These groups assist the
lines of business in the development and implementation of risk management practices specific to
the needs of the business groups.
Legal and Compliance Risk
Legal and compliance risk includes the risk of non-compliance with applicable legal and
regulatory requirements, the risk of adverse legal judgments against the Corporation, and the risk
that a counterpartys performance obligations will be unenforceable. The Corporation is subject to
extensive regulation in the different jurisdictions in which it conducts it business, and this
regulatory scrutiny has been significantly increasing over the last several years. The Corporation
has established and continues to enhance procedures based on legal and regulatory requirements that
are designed to ensure compliance with all applicable statutory and regulatory requirements. The
Corporation has a Compliance Director who reports to the Chief Risk Officer and is responsible for
the oversight of regulatory compliance and implementation of an enterprise-wide compliance risk
assessment process. The Compliance division has officer roles in each major business areas with
direct reporting relationships to the Corporate Compliance Group.
Concentration Risk
The Corporation conducts its operations in a geographically concentrated area, as its main
market is Puerto Rico. However, the Corporation has diversified its geographical risk as evidenced
by its operations in the Virgin Islands and in Florida.
As of September 30, 2010, the Corporation had $273.1 million outstanding of credit facilities
granted to the Puerto Rico government and/or its political subdivisions, down from $1.2 billion as
of December 31, 2009, and $57.2 million granted to the Virgin Islands government down from $134.7
million as of December 31, 2009. A substantial portion of these credit facilities consists of
obligations that have a specific source of income or revenues identified for their repayment, such
as property taxes collected by the central Government and/or municipalities. Another portion of
these obligations consists of loans to public corporations that obtain revenues from rates charged
for services or products, such as electric power and water utilities. Public corporations have
varying degrees of independence from the central Government of Puerto Rico and many receive
appropriations or other payments from it. The Corporation also has loans to various municipalities
in Puerto Rico for which the good faith, credit and unlimited taxing power of the applicable
municipality has been pledged to their repayment.
The largest loan to one borrower as of September 30, 2010 in the amount of $295.9 million is
with one mortgage originator in Puerto Rico, Doral Financial Corporation. This commercial loan is
secured by individual mortgage loans on residential and commercial real estate. Of the total gross
loan portfolio of $12.2 billion as of September 30, 2010, approximately 84% has credit risk
concentration in Puerto Rico, 8% in the United States (mainly in the state of Florida) and 8% in
the Virgin Islands.
98
ITEM 3. QUANTITATIVE AND QUALITATIVE DISCLOSURES ABOUT MARKET RISK
For information regarding market risk to which the Corporation is exposed, see the information
contained in Part I Item 2 -Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and
Results of Operations Risk Management.
ITEM 4. CONTROLS AND PROCEDURES
Disclosure Control and Procedures
First BanCorps management, including its Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer,
evaluated the effectiveness of the design and operation of First BanCorps disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Rule 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934)
as of September 30, 2010. Based on this evaluation, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer concluded that the design and operation of these disclosure controls and procedures were
effective.
Internal Control over Financial Reporting
There have been no changes to the Corporations internal control over financial reporting (as
such term is defined in Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) under the Exchange Act) during the fiscal
quarter to which this report relates that have materially affected, or are reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Corporations internal control over financial reporting.
99
PART II OTHER INFORMATION
ITEM 1. LEGAL PROCEEDINGS
In the opinion of the Companys management, the pending and threatened legal proceedings of
which management is aware will not have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the
Corporation.
ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS
Our business, operating results and/or the market price of our common and preferred stock may
be significantly affected by a number of factors. For a detailed discussion of certain risk
factors that could affect the Corporations operations, financial condition or results for future
periods see the risk factors below and Item 1A, Risk Factors, in the Corporations 2009 Annual
Report on Form 10-K. These factors could also cause actual results to differ materially from
historical results or the results contemplated by the forward-looking statements contained in this
report. Also refer to the discussion in Part I Item 2 Managements Discussion and Analysis of
Financial Condition and Results of Operations in this report for additional information that may
supplement or update the discussion of risk factors in the Corporations 2009 Form 10-K.
The risks described in the Corporations 2009 Form 10-K and in this report are not the only
risks facing the Corporation. Additional risks and uncertainties not currently known to the
Corporation or currently deemed by the Corporation to be immaterial also may materially adversely
affect the Corporations business, financial condition or results of operations.
FirstBank Puerto Rico (FirstBank or the Bank) is operating under a Consent Order ( the Order)
with the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) and the Office of the Commissioner of
Financial Institutions of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico (OCIF) and we are operating under the
Written Agreement (the FED Agreementor the Written Agreement and collectively with the Order
the Agreements) with the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the FED or the
Federal Reserve).
On June 4, 2010, we announced that FirstBank agreed to the Order, dated as of June 2, 2010, issued
by the FDIC and OCIF, and we entered into the Written Agreement, dated as of June 3, 2010, with the
Federal Reserve. The Agreements stem from the FDICs examination as of the period ended June 30,
2009 conducted during the second half of 2009. Although our regulatory capital ratios exceeded the
required established minimum capital ratios for a well-capitalized institution as of September
30, 2010, because of the Order, FirstBank cannot be regarded as well-capitalized as of September
30, 2010.
Under the Order, FirstBank has agreed to address specific areas of concern to the FDIC and OCIF
through the adoption and implementation of procedures, plans and policies designed to improve the
safety and soundness of FirstBank. These actions include, among others, (1) having and retaining
qualified management; (2) increased participation in the affairs of FirstBank by its board of
directors; (3) development and implementation by FirstBank of a capital plan to attain a leverage
ratio of at least 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio of at least 10% and a total risk-based
capital ratio of at least 12%; (4) adoption and implementation of strategic, liquidity and fund
management and profit and budget plans and related projects within certain timetables set forth in
the Order and on an ongoing basis; (5) adoption and implementation of plans for reducing
FirstBanks positions in certain classified assets and delinquent and non-accrual loans within
timeframes set forth in the Order; (6) refraining from lending to delinquent or classified
borrowers already obligated to FirstBank on any extensions of credit so long as such credit remains
uncollected, except where FirstBanks failure to extend further credit to a particular borrower
would be detrimental to the best interests of FirstBank, and any such additional credit is approved
by the FirstBanks board of directors; (7) refraining from accepting, increasing, renewing or
rolling over brokered deposits without the prior written approval of the FDIC; (8) establishment of
a comprehensive policy and methodology for determining the allowance for loan and lease losses and
the review and revision of FirstBanks loan policies, including the non-accrual policy; and (9)
adoption and implementation of adequate and effective programs of independent loan review,
appraisal compliance and an effective policy for managing FirstBanks sensitivity to interest rate
risk.
The Written Agreement, which is designed to enhance our ability to act as a source of strength to
FirstBank, requires that we obtain prior Federal Reserve approval before declaring or paying
dividends, receiving dividends from FirstBank, making payments on subordinated debt or trust
preferred securities, incurring, increasing or guaranteeing debt (whether such debt is incurred,
increased or guaranteed, directly or indirectly, by us or any of our non-banking subsidiaries) or
purchasing or redeeming any capital stock. The Written Agreement also requires us to submit to the
Federal Reserve a capital plan and progress reports, comply with certain notice provisions prior to
appointing new directors or senior executive officers and comply with certain payment restrictions
on severance payments and indemnification restrictions.
We anticipate that we will need to continue to dedicate significant resources to our efforts to
comply with the Agreements, which may increase operational costs or adversely affect the amount of
time our management has to conduct our operations. If we need to continue to recognize significant
reserves, cannot raise additional capital, or cannot accomplish other contemplated alternative
capital preservation strategies, including among others, an accelerated deleverage strategy and the
divestiture of profitable businesses, we and
100
FirstBank may not be able to comply with the minimum capital requirements included in the capital
plans required by the Agreements. These capital plans, which we have submitted to, but are subject
to the approval of, our regulators, set forth our plan to attain the capital ratio requirements set
forth in the Order over time.
If, at the end of any quarter, we do not comply with any specified minimum capital ratios, we must
notify our regulators. We must notify the Federal Reserve within 30 days of the end of any quarter
of our inability to comply with a capital ratio requirement and submit an acceptable written plan
that details the steps we will take to comply with the requirement. FirstBank must immediately
notify the FDIC of its inability to comply with a capital ratio requirement and, within 45 days, it
must either increase its capital to comply with the capital ratio requirements or submit a
contingency plan to the FDIC for its sale, merger or liquidation. In the event of a liquidation of
FirstBank, the holders of our outstanding preferred stock would rank senior to the holders of our
common stock with respect to rights upon any liquidation of First BanCorp. If we fail to comply
with the Agreements, we may become subject to additional regulatory enforcement action up to and
including the appointment of a conservator or receiver for FirstBank. In many cases when a
conservator or receiver is appointed for a wholly owned bank, the bank holding company files for
bankruptcy protection.
We may need additional capital resources in the future, and these capital resources may not be
available when needed or at all.
Due to our financial results during 2009 and the first nine months of 2010, we need to access the
capital markets in order to raise additional capital to absorb future credit losses due to the
distressed economic environment and potential further deterioration in our loan portfolio, to
maintain adequate liquidity and capital resources, to finance future growth, investments or
strategic acquisitions and to implement the capital plans required by the Agreements. We have been
taking steps to obtain additional capital. If we are unable to obtain additional necessary capital
or otherwise improve our financial condition in the near future, or are unable to accomplish other
alternate capital preservation strategies, which could allow us to meet the minimum capital
requirements included in the capital plans required by the Agreements, we will be required to
notify our regulators and take the additional steps described above, which may include submitting a
contingency plan to the FDIC for the sale, liquidation or merger of FirstBank.
Certain funding sources may not be available to us and our funding sources may prove insufficient
to replace deposits and support future growth.
FirstBank relies primarily on its issuance of brokered CDs, as well as customer deposits and
advances from the Federal Home Loan Bank, to pay its operating expenses and interest on its debt,
to maintain its lending activities and to replace certain maturing liabilities. As of September 30,
2010, we had $6.7 billion in brokered deposits outstanding, representing approximately 53% of our
total deposits, and a reduction from $7.6 billion at year end 2009. The average term to maturity of
the retail brokered CDs outstanding as of September 30, 2010 was approximately 1.2 years.
Approximately 3% of the principal value of these certificates is callable at our option.
Although FirstBank has historically been able to replace maturing deposits and advances as desired,
we may not be able to replace these funds in the future if our financial condition or general
market conditions were to change or the FDIC did not approve our request to issue brokered CDs as
required by the Order. The Order requires FirstBank to obtain FDIC approval prior to issuing,
increasing, renewing or rolling over brokered CDs and to develop a plan to reduce its reliance on
brokered CDs. Although the FDIC has issued temporary approvals permitting FirstBank to renew and/or
roll over certain amounts of brokered CDs maturing through December 31, 2010, the FDIC may not
continue to issue such approvals, and, even if issued, such approvals may not be for amounts of
brokered CDs sufficient for FirstBank to meet its funding needs. The use of brokered CDs has been
particularly important for the funding of our operations. If we are unable to issue brokered CDs,
or are unable to maintain access to our other funding sources, our results of operations and
liquidity would be adversely affected.
If we are required to rely more heavily on more expensive funding sources, profitability would be
adversely affected. Although we consider currently available funding sources to be adequate for our
liquidity needs, we may seek additional debt financing in the future to achieve our long-term
business objectives. Any additional debt financing requires the prior approval from the Federal
Reserve, and the Federal Reserve may not approve such additional debt. Additional borrowings, if
sought, may not be available to us or on acceptable terms. The availability of additional financing
will depend on a variety of factors such as market conditions, the general availability of credit,
our credit ratings and our credit capacity. If additional financing sources are unavailable or are
not available on acceptable terms, our profitability and future prospects could be adversely
affected.
We depend on cash dividends from FirstBank to meet our cash obligations, but the Written Agreement
with the Federal Reserve prohibits the receipt of such dividends without prior Federal Reserve
approval, which may adversely affect our ability to fulfill our obligations.
As a holding company, dividends from FirstBank have provided a substantial portion of our cash flow
used to service the interest payments on our trust preferred securities and other obligations. As
outlined in the Written Agreement, we cannot receive any cash dividends from FirstBank without
prior written approval of the Federal Reserve. Our inability to receive approval from the Federal
Reserve to receive dividends from FirstBank could adversely affect our ability to fulfill our
obligations in the future.
101
We cannot pay any dividends on common stock or preferred stock or any interest, principal or other
sums on subordinated debentures or trust preferred securities without prior Federal Reserve
approval, which adversely affects our ability to make such payments.
The Written Agreement provides that we cannot declare or pay any dividends (including on the Series
G Preferred Stock) or make any distributions of interest, principal or other sums on subordinated
debentures or trust preferred securities without prior written approval of the Federal Reserve.
With respect to our $231.9 million of outstanding subordinated debentures, we have provided, within
the time frame prescribed by the indentures governing the subordinated debentures, a notice to the
trustees of the subordinated debentures of our election to an extension period. Under the
indentures, we have the right, from time to time, and without causing an event of default, to defer
payments of interest on the subordinated debentures by extending the interest payment period at any
time and from time to time during the term of the subordinated debentures for up to twenty
consecutive quarterly periods. We have elected to defer the interest payments that were due in
September 2010 because the Federal Reserve did not approve our request submitted pursuant to the
Written Agreement to pay interest on the subordinated debentures. To the extent our capital is
insufficient, we may elect additional extension periods for future quarterly interest payments.
Our inability to receive approval from the Federal Reserve to make distributions of interest,
principal or other sums on our trust preferred securities and subordinated debentures could result
in a default under those obligations if we need to defer such payments for longer than twenty
consecutive quarterly periods.
Banking regulators could take additional adverse action against us.
We are subject to supervision and regulation by the Federal Reserve. We are a bank holding company
and a financial holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the BHC
Act). As such, we are permitted to engage in a broader spectrum of activities than those permitted
to bank holding companies that are not financial holding companies. At this time, under the BHC
Act, we may not be able to engage in new activities or acquire shares or control of other
companies. As of September 30, 2010, we and FirstBank continue to satisfy all applicable
established capital guidelines. However, we have agreed to regulatory actions by our banking
regulators that include, among other things, the submission of a capital plan by FirstBank to
comply with more stringent capital requirements under an established time period in the capital
plan. Our regulators could take additional action against us if we fail to comply with the
Agreements, including the requirements of the submitted capital plans. Additional adverse action
against us by our primary regulators could adversely affect our business.
Credit quality may result in future additional losses.
The quality of our credits has continued to be under pressure as a result of continued recessionary
conditions in Puerto Rico and the State of Florida that have led to, among other things, higher
unemployment levels, much lower absorption rates for new residential construction projects and
further declines in property values. Our business depends on the creditworthiness of our customers
and counterparties and the value of the assets securing our loans or underlying our investments.
When the credit quality of the customer base materially decreases or the risk profile of a market,
industry or group of customers changes materially, our business, financial condition, allowance
levels, asset impairments, liquidity, capital and results of operations are adversely affected.
We have a significant construction loan portfolio, in the amount of $1.11 billion as of September
30, 2010, mostly secured by commercial and residential real estate properties. Due to their nature,
these loans entail a higher credit risk than consumer and residential mortgage loans, since they
are larger in size, concentrate more risk in a single borrower and are generally more sensitive to
economic downturns. Although we have ceased new originations of construction loans, decreasing
collateral values, difficult economic conditions and numerous other factors continue to create
volatility in the housing markets and have increased the possibility that additional losses may
have to be recognized with respect to our current nonperforming assets. Furthermore, given the
current slowdown in the real estate market, the properties securing these loans may be difficult to
dispose of if they are foreclosed.
Our allowance for loan losses may not be adequate to cover actual losses, and we may be required to
materially increase our allowance, which may adversely affect our capital, financial condition and
results of operations.
We are subject to the risk of loss from loan defaults and foreclosures with respect to the loans we
originate. We establish a provision for loan losses, which leads to reductions in our income from
operations, in order to maintain our allowance for inherent loan losses at a level which our
management deems to be appropriate based upon an assessment of the quality of the loan portfolio.
Although our management strives to utilize its best judgment in providing for loan losses, our
management may fail to accurately estimate the level of inherent loan losses or may have to
increase our provision for loan losses in the future as a result of new information regarding
existing loans, future increases in non-performing loans, changes in economic and other conditions
affecting borrowers or for other reasons beyond our control. In addition, bank regulatory agencies
periodically review the adequacy of our allowance for loan losses and may require an increase in
the provision for loan losses or the recognition of additional classified loans and loan
charge-offs, based on judgments different than those of our management.
While we have substantially increased our allowance for loan and lease losses in 2009 and the first
nine months of 2010, we may have to recognize additional provisions in the fourth quarter of 2010
and in 2011 to cover future credit losses in the portfolio. The level of the allowance reflects
managements estimates based upon various assumptions and judgments as to specific credit risks,
evaluation of
102
industry concentrations, loan loss experience, current loan portfolio quality, present economic,
political and regulatory conditions and unidentified losses inherent in the current loan portfolio.
The determination of the appropriate level of the allowance for loan and lease losses inherently
involves a high degree of subjectivity and requires management to make significant estimates and
judgments regarding current credit risks and future trends, all of which may undergo material
changes. If our estimates prove to be incorrect, our allowance for credit losses may not be
sufficient to cover losses in our loan portfolio and our expense relating to the additional
provision for credit losses could increase substantially.
Any such increases in our provision for loan losses or any loan losses in excess of our provision
for loan losses would have an adverse effect on our future financial condition and results of
operations. Given the difficulties facing some of our largest borrowers, these borrowers may fail
to continue to repay their loans on a timely basis or we may not be able to assess accurately any
risk of loss from the loans to these borrowers.
Changes in collateral values of properties located in stagnant or distressed economies may require
increased reserves.
Substantially, all of our loan portfolio is located within the boundaries of the U.S. economy. Whether the
collateral is located in Puerto Rico, the USVI, the BVI or the U.S. mainland, the performance of
our loan portfolio and the collateral value backing the transactions are dependent upon the
performance of and conditions within each specific real estate market. Recent economic reports
related to the real estate market in Puerto Rico indicate that certain pockets of the real estate
market are subject to readjustments in value driven not by demand but more by the purchasing power
of the consumers and general economic conditions. In southern Florida, we have been seeing the
negative impact associated with low absorption rates and property value adjustments due to
overbuilding. We measure the impairment based on the fair value of the collateral, if collateral
dependent, which is generally obtained from appraisals. Updated appraisals are obtained when we
determine that loans are impaired and are updated annually thereafter. In addition, appraisals are
also obtained for certain residential mortgage loans on a spot basis based on specific
characteristics such as delinquency levels, age of the appraisal and loan-to-value ratios. The
appraised value of the collateral may decrease or we may not be able to recover collateral at its
appraised value. A significant decline in collateral valuations for collateral dependent loans may
require increases in our specific provision for loan losses and an increase in the general
valuation allowance. Any such increase would have an adverse effect on our future financial
condition and results of operations.
Worsening in the financial condition of critical counterparties may result in higher losses than
expected.
The financial stability of several counterparties is critical for their continued financial
performance on covenants that require the repurchase of loans, posting of collateral to reduce our
credit exposure or replacement of delinquent loans. Many of these transactions expose us to credit
risk in the event of a default by one of our counterparties. Any such losses could adversely affect
our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Interest rate shifts may reduce net interest income.
Shifts in short-term interest rates may reduce net interest income, which is the principal
component of our earnings. Net interest income is the difference between the amounts received by us
on our interest-earning assets and the interest paid by us on our interest-bearing liabilities.
When interest rates rise, the rate of interest we pay on our liabilities rises more quickly than
the rate of interest that we receive on our interest-bearing assets, which may cause our profits to
decrease. The impact on earnings is more adverse when the slope of the yield curve flattens, that
is, when short-term interest rates increase more than long-term interest rates or when long-term
interest rates decrease more than short-term interest rates.
Increases in interest rates may reduce the value of holdings of securities.
Fixed-rate securities acquired by us are generally subject to decreases in market value when
interest rates rise, which may require recognition of a loss (e.g., the identification of
other-than-temporary impairment on our available-for-sale or held-to-maturity investments
portfolio), thereby adversely affecting our results of operations. Market-related reductions in
value also influence our ability to finance these securities.
Increases in interest rates may reduce demand for mortgage and other loans.
Higher interest rates increase the cost of mortgage and other loans to consumers and businesses and
may reduce demand for such loans, which may negatively impact our profits by reducing the amount of
loan origination income.
Accelerated prepayments may adversely affect net interest income.
Net interest income of future periods will be affected by our decision to deleverage our investment
securities portfolio to preserve our capital position. Also, net interest income could be affected
by prepayments of mortgage-backed securities. Acceleration in the prepayments of mortgage-backed
securities would lower yields on these securities, as the amortization of premiums paid upon
acquisition of these securities would accelerate. Conversely, acceleration in the prepayments of
mortgage-backed securities would increase yields on securities purchased at a discount, as the
amortization of the discount would accelerate. These risks are directly
103
linked to future period market interest rate fluctuations. Also, net interest income in future
periods might be affected by our investment in callable securities.
Changes in interest rates may reduce net interest income due to basis risk.
Basis risk is the risk of adverse consequences resulting from unequal changes in the difference,
also referred to as the spread, between two or more rates for different instruments with the same
maturity and occurs when market rates for different financial instruments or the indices used to
price assets and liabilities change at different times or by different amounts. The interest
expense for liability instruments such as brokered CDs at times does not change by the same amount
as interest income received from loans or investments. The liquidity crisis that erupted in late
2008, and that slowly began to subside during 2009 and 2010, caused a wider than normal spread
between brokered CD costs and London Interbank Offered Rates (LIBOR) for similar terms. This, in
turn, has prevented us from capturing the full benefit of a decrease in interest rates, as the
floating rate loan portfolio re-prices with changes in the LIBOR indices, while the brokered CD
rates decreased less than the LIBOR indices. To the extent that such pressures fail to subside in
the near future, the margin between our LIBOR-based assets and the higher cost of the brokered CDs
may compress and adversely affect net interest income.
If all or a significant portion of the unrealized losses in our investment securities portfolio on
our consolidated balance sheet were determined to be other-than-temporarily impaired, we would
recognize a material charge to our earnings and our capital ratios would be adversely affected.
For the year ended December 31, 2009 and the first nine months of 2010, we recognized a total of
$1.7 million and $0.6 million, respectively, in other-than-temporary impairments. To the extent
that any portion of the unrealized losses in our investment securities portfolio is determined to
be other-than-temporary and, in the case of debt securities, the loss is related to credit factors,
we would recognize a charge to earnings in the quarter during which such determination is made and
capital ratios could be adversely affected. Even if we do not determine that the unrealized losses
associated with this portfolio require an impairment charge, increases in these unrealized losses
adversely affect our tangible common equity ratio, which may adversely affect credit rating agency
and investor sentiment towards us. This negative perception also may adversely affect our ability
to access the capital markets or might increase our cost of capital. Valuation and
other-than-temporary impairment determinations will continue to be affected by external market
factors including default rates, severity rates and macro-economic factors.
Downgrades in our credit ratings could further increase the cost of borrowing funds.
Fitch Ratings Ltd.s (Fitch) long-term issuer rating of First BanCorp and FirstBank is B-, six
notches below investment grade. Standard and Poors
(S&P) long-term issuer rating of First BanCorp
and FirstBank is CCC+, or seven notches below investment grade. Moodys Investor Service
(Moodys) issuer rating of FirstBank is B3, or six notches below investment grade. On June 4,
2010, Moodys placed FirstBank on Credit Watch Negative. Furthermore, on June 25, 2010, Fitch
placed First BanCorp and FirstBank on Credit Watch Negative.
We do not have any outstanding debt or derivative agreements that would be affected by a credit
downgrade. Our liquidity is contingent upon our ability to obtain new external sources of funding
to finance our operations; however, our current credit ratings and any future downgrades in credit
ratings could hinder our access to external funding and/or cause external funding to be more
expensive, which could in turn adversely affect our results of operations. Changes in credit
ratings may also affect the fair value of certain liabilities and unsecured derivatives, measured
at fair value in the financial statements, for which our own credit risk is an element considered
in the fair value determination.
These debt and financial strength ratings are current opinions of the rating agencies. As such,
they may be changed, suspended or withdrawn at any time by the rating agencies as a result of
changes in, or unavailability of, information or based on other circumstances.
Our controls and procedures may fail or be circumvented, our risk management policies and
procedures may be inadequate and operational risk could adversely affect our consolidated results
of operations.
We may fail to identify and manage risks related to a variety of aspects of our business,
including, but not limited to, operational risk, interest-rate risk, trading risk, fiduciary risk,
legal and compliance risk, liquidity risk and credit risk. We have adopted various controls,
procedures, policies and systems to monitor and manage risk. While we currently believe that our
risk management policies and procedures are effective, the Order required us to review and revise
our policies relating to risk management, including the policies relating to the assessment of the
adequacy of the allowance for loan and lease losses and credit administration. Any improvements to
our controls, procedures, policies and systems may not be adequate to identify and manage the risks
in our various businesses. If our risk framework is ineffective, either because it fails to keep
pace with changes in the financial markets or our businesses or for other reasons, we could incur
losses, suffer reputational damage or find ourselves out of compliance with applicable regulatory
mandates or expectations.
We may also be subject to disruptions from external events that are wholly or partially beyond our
control, which could cause delays or disruptions to operational functions, including information
processing and financial market settlement functions. In addition, our
104
customers, vendors and counterparties could suffer from such events. Should these events affect us,
or the customers, vendors or counterparties with which we conduct business, our consolidated
results of operations could be negatively affected. When we record balance sheet reserves for
probable loss contingencies related to operational losses, we may be unable to accurately estimate
our potential exposure, and any reserves we establish to cover operational losses may not be
sufficient to cover our actual financial exposure, which may have a material impact on our
consolidated results of operations or financial condition for the periods in which we recognize the
losses.
Competition for our employees is intense, and we may not be able to attract and retain the highly
skilled people we need to support our business.
Our success depends, in large part, on our ability to attract and to retain key people. Competition
for the best people in most activities in which we engage can be intense, and we may not be able to
hire people or retain them, particularly in light of uncertainty concerning evolving compensation
restrictions applicable to banks but not applicable to other financial services firms. The
unexpected loss of services of one or more of our key personnel could adversely affect our business
because of the loss of their skills, knowledge of our markets and years of industry experience and,
in some cases, because of the difficulty of promptly finding qualified replacement personnel.
Similarly, the loss of key employees, either individually or as a group, can adversely affect our
customers perception of our ability to continue to manage certain types of investment management
mandates.
Further increases in the FDIC deposit insurance premium or required reserves may have a significant
financial impact on us.
The FDIC insures deposits at FDIC insured financial institutions up to certain limits. The FDIC
charges insured financial institutions premiums to maintain the Deposit Insurance Fund (the DIF).
Current economic conditions have resulted in higher bank failures and expectations of future bank
failures. In the event of a bank failure, the FDIC takes control of a failed bank and ensures
payment of deposits up to insured limits (which have recently been increased) using the resources
of the DIF. The FDIC is required by law to maintain adequate funding of the DIF, and the FDIC may
increase premium assessments to maintain such funding.
The Dodd-Frank Act signed into law on July 21, 2010 requires the FDIC to increase the DIFs
reserves against future losses, which will necessitate increased deposit insurance
premiums that are to be borne primarily by institutions with assets of greater than $10 billion.
Although the precise impact on us will not be clear until implementing rules are issued, any future
increases in assessments will decrease our earnings and could have a material adverse effect on the
value of, or market for, our common stock.
On October 19, 2010, the FDIC further addressed plans to bolster the DIF by increasing the required
reserve ratio for the industry to 1.35 percent (ratio of reserves to insured deposits) by September
30, 2020, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act. Current assessment rates will remain in effect until
such time as the industrys reserve ratio reaches 1.15 percent, which the FDIC estimates will occur
at the end of 2018. The FDIC also proposed to raise its industry target ratio of reserves to
insured deposits to 2 percent, 65 basis points above the statutory minimum, but the FDIC does not
project that goal to be met until 2027.
We may not be able to recover all assets pledged to Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc.
Lehman Brothers Special Financing, Inc. (Lehman) was the counterparty to First BanCorp on certain
interest rate swap agreements. During the third quarter of 2008, Lehman failed to pay the scheduled
net cash settlement due to us, which constituted an event of default under those interest rate swap
agreements. We terminated all interest rate swaps with Lehman and replaced them with other
counterparties under similar terms and conditions. In connection with the unpaid net cash
settlement due as of September 30, 2010 under the swap agreements, we have an unsecured
counterparty exposure with Lehman, which filed for bankruptcy on October 3, 2008, of approximately
$1.4 million. This exposure was reserved in the third quarter of 2008. We had pledged collateral of
$63.6 million with Lehman to guarantee our performance under the swap agreements in the event
payment thereunder was required. The book value of pledged securities with Lehman as of September
30, 2010 amounted to approximately $64.5 million.
We believe that the securities pledged as collateral should not be part of the Lehman bankruptcy
estate given the facts that the posted collateral constituted a performance guarantee under the
swap agreements and was not part of a financing agreement, and that ownership of the securities was
never transferred to Lehman. Upon termination of the interest rate swap agreements, Lehmans
obligation was to return the collateral to us. During the fourth quarter of 2009, we discovered
that Lehman Brothers, Inc., acting as agent of Lehman, had deposited the securities in a custodial
account at JP Morgan Chase, and that, shortly before the filing of the Lehman bankruptcy
proceedings, it had provided instructions to have most of the securities transferred to Barclays
Capital (Barclays) in New York. After Barclayss refusal to turn over the securities, during
December 2009, we filed a lawsuit against Barclays in federal court in New York demanding the
return of the securities. During February 2010, Barclays filed a motion with the court requesting
that our claim be dismissed on the grounds that the allegations of the complaint are not sufficient
to justify the granting of the remedies therein sought. Shortly thereafter, we filed our opposition
motion. A hearing on the motions was held in court on April 28, 2010. The court, on that date,
after hearing the arguments by both sides, concluded that our equitable-based causes of action,
upon which the return of the investment securities is being demanded, contain allegations that
sufficiently plead facts warranting the denial of Barclays motion to dismiss our claim.
Accordingly, the judge ordered the case to proceed to trial. Subsequent to the decision handed down
by the court, the district court judge transferred the case to the Lehman bankruptcy court for
trial. While
105
we believe we have valid reasons to support our claim for the return of the securities, we may not
succeed in our litigation against Barclays to recover all or a substantial portion of the
securities.
Additionally, we continue to pursue our claim filed in January 2009 in the proceedings under the
Securities Protection Act with regard to Lehman Brothers Incorporated in Bankruptcy Court, Southern
District of New York. An estimated loss was not accrued as we are unable to determine the timing of
the claim resolution or whether we will succeed in recovering all or a substantial portion of the
collateral or its equivalent value. If additional relevant negative facts become available in
future periods, a need to recognize a partial or full reserve of this claim may arise. Considering
that the investment securities have not yet been recovered by us, despite our efforts in this
regard, we decided to classify such investments as non-performing during the second quarter of
2009.
Our businesses may be adversely affected by litigation.
From time to time, our customers, or the government on their behalf, may make claims and take legal
action relating to our performance of fiduciary or contractual responsibilities. We may also face
employment lawsuits or other legal claims. In any such claims or actions, demands for substantial
monetary damages may be asserted against us resulting in financial liability or an adverse effect
on our reputation among investors or on customer demand for our products and services. We may be
unable to accurately estimate our exposure to litigation risk when we record balance sheet reserves
for probable loss contingencies. As a result, any reserves we establish to cover any settlements or
judgments may not be sufficient to cover our actual financial exposure, which may have a material
impact on our consolidated results of operations or financial condition.
In the ordinary course of our business, we are also subject to various regulatory, governmental and
law enforcement inquiries, investigations and subpoenas. These may be directed generally to
participants in the businesses in which we are involved or may be specifically directed at us. In
regulatory enforcement matters, claims for disgorgement, the imposition of penalties and the
imposition of other remedial sanctions are possible.
The resolution of certain pending legal actions or regulatory matters, if unfavorable, could have a
material adverse effect on our consolidated results of operations for the quarter in which such
actions or matters are resolved or a reserve is established.
Our businesses may be negatively affected by adverse publicity or other reputational harm.
Our relationships with many of our customers are predicated upon our reputation as a fiduciary and
a service provider that adheres to the highest standards of ethics, service quality and regulatory
compliance. Adverse publicity, regulatory actions, like the Agreements, litigation, operational
failures, the failure to meet customer expectations and other issues with respect to one or more of
our businesses could materially and adversely affect our reputation, ability to attract and retain
customers or obtain sources of funding for the same or other businesses. Preserving and enhancing
our reputation also depends on maintaining systems and procedures that address known risks and
regulatory requirements, as well as our ability to identify and mitigate additional risks that
arise due to changes in our businesses, the market places in which we operate, the regulatory
environment and customer expectations. If any of these developments has a material adverse effect
on our reputation, our business will suffer.
Changes in accounting standards issued by the Financial Accounting Standards Board or other
standardsetting bodies may adversely affect our financial statements.
Our financial statements are subject to the application of U.S. Generally Accepted Accounting
Principles (GAAP), which is periodically revised and expanded. Accordingly, from time to time, we
are required to adopt new or revised accounting standards issued by the Financial Accounting
Standards Board. Market conditions have prompted accounting standard setters to promulgate new
requirements that further interpret or seek to revise accounting pronouncements related to
financial instruments, structures or transactions as well as to issue new standards expanding
disclosures. The impact of accounting pronouncements that have been issued but not yet implemented
is disclosed in our annual reports on Form 10-K and quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, including
herein. An assessment of proposed standards is not provided as such proposals are subject to change
through the exposure process and, therefore, the effects on our financial statements cannot be
meaningfully assessed. It is possible that future accounting standards that we are required to
adopt could change the current accounting treatment that we apply to our consolidated financial
statements and that such changes could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition
and results of operations.
Losses in future reporting periods may require us to adjust the valuation allowance against our
deferred tax assets.
We evaluate the deferred tax assets for recoverability based on all available evidence. This
process involves significant management judgment about assumptions that are subject to change from
period to period based on changes in tax laws or variances between the future projected operating
performance and the actual results. We are required to establish a valuation allowance for deferred
tax assets if we determine, based on available evidence at the time the determination is made, that
it is more likely than not that some portion or all of the deferred tax assets will not be
realized. In evaluating the more-likely-than-not criterion, we consider all positive and negative
evidence as of the end of each reporting period. Future adjustments, either increases or decreases,
to the deferred tax asset valuation allowance will be determined based upon changes in the expected
realization of the net deferred tax assets. The realization of the deferred tax assets ultimately
depends on the existence of sufficient taxable income in either the carryback or carryforward
periods under the tax law. Due to significant estimates utilized in establishing the valuation
allowance and the potential
106
for changes in facts and circumstances, it is reasonably possible that we will be required to
record adjustments to the valuation allowance in future reporting periods. Such a charge could have
a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition and capital position.
If our goodwill or amortizable intangible assets become impaired, it may adversely affect our
operating results.
If our goodwill or amortizable intangible assets become impaired, we may be required to record a
significant charge to earnings. Under GAAP, we review our amortizable intangible assets for
impairment when events or changes in circumstances indicate the carrying value may not be
recoverable. Goodwill is tested for impairment at least annually. Factors that may be considered a
change in circumstances, indicating that the carrying value of the goodwill or amortizable
intangible assets may not be recoverable, include reduced future cash flow estimates and slower
growth rates in the industry.
The goodwill impairment evaluation process requires us to make estimates and assumptions with
regards to the fair value of our reporting units. Actual values may differ significantly from these
estimates. Such differences could result in future impairment of goodwill that would, in turn,
negatively impact our results of operations and the reporting unit where the goodwill is recorded.
We conducted our annual evaluation of goodwill during the fourth quarter of 2009. This evaluation
is a two-step process. The Step 1 evaluation of goodwill allocated to the Florida reporting unit,
which is one level below the United States Operations segment, indicated potential impairment of
goodwill. The Step 1 fair value for the unit was below the carrying amount of its equity book value
as of the December 31, 2009 valuation date, requiring the completion of Step 2. Step 2 required a
valuation of all assets and liabilities of the Florida unit, including any recognized and
unrecognized intangible assets, to determine the fair value of net assets. To complete Step 2, we
subtracted from the units Step 1 fair value the determined fair value of the net assets to arrive
at the implied fair value of goodwill. The results of the Step 2 analysis indicated that the
implied fair value of goodwill exceeded the goodwill carrying value of $27 million, resulting in no
goodwill impairment. If we are required to record a charge to earnings in our consolidated
financial statements because an impairment of the goodwill or amortizable intangible assets is
determined, our results of operations could be adversely affected.
We must respond to rapid technological changes, and these changes may be more difficult or
expensive than anticipated.
If competitors introduce new products and services embodying new technologies, or if new industry
standards and practices emerge, our existing product and service offerings, technology and systems
may become obsolete. Further, if we fail to adopt or develop new technologies or to adapt our
products and services to emerging industry standards, we may lose current and future customers,
which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of
operations. The financial services industry is changing rapidly and in order to remain competitive,
we must continue to enhance and improve the functionality and features of our products, services
and technologies. These changes may be more difficult or expensive than we anticipate.
Difficult market conditions have affected the financial industry and may adversely affect us in the
future.
Given that almost all of our business is in Puerto Rico and the U.S. mainland and given the degree
of interrelation between Puerto Ricos economy and that of the U.S., we are exposed to downturns in
the U.S. economy. Dramatic declines in the U.S. housing market over the past few years, with
falling home prices and increasing foreclosures, unemployment and under-employment, have negatively
impacted the credit performance of mortgage loans and resulted in significant write-downs of asset
values by financial institutions, including government-sponsored entities as well as major
commercial banks and investment banks. These write-downs, initially of mortgage-backed securities
but spreading to credit default swaps and other derivative and cash securities, in turn, have
caused many financial institutions to seek additional capital from private and government entities,
to merge with larger and stronger financial institutions and, in some cases, to fail.
Reflecting concern about the stability of the financial markets in general and the strength of
counterparties, many lenders and institutional investors have reduced or ceased providing funding
to borrowers, including other financial institutions. This market turmoil and tightening of credit
have led to an increased level of commercial and consumer delinquencies, erosion of consumer
confidence, increased market volatility and widespread reduction of business activity in general.
The resulting economic pressure on consumers and erosion of confidence in the financial markets has
already adversely affected our industry and may continue to adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations. A worsening of these conditions would likely
exacerbate the adverse effects of these difficult market conditions on us and other financial
institutions. In particular, we may face the following risks in connection with these events:
Our ability to assess the creditworthiness of our customers may be impaired if the models and
approaches we use to select, manage and underwrite the loans become less predictive of future
behaviors.
The models used to estimate losses inherent in the credit exposure require difficult, subjective,
and complex judgments, including forecasts of economic conditions and how these economic
predictions might impair the ability of the borrowers to repay their loans, which may no longer be
capable of accurate estimation and which may, in turn, impact the reliability of the models.
107
Our ability to borrow from other financial institutions or to engage in sales of mortgage loans
to third parties (including mortgage loan securitization transactions with government-sponsored
entities) on favorable terms, or at all, could be adversely affected by further disruptions in the
capital markets or other events, including deteriorating investor expectations.
Competitive dynamics in the industry could change as a result of consolidation of financial
services companies in connection with current market conditions.
We may be unable to comply with the Agreements, which could result in further regulatory
enforcement actions.
We expect to face increased regulation of our industry. Compliance with such regulation may
increase our costs and limit our ability to pursue business opportunities.
We may be required to pay significantly higher FDIC premiums in the future because market
developments have significantly depleted the insurance fund of the FDIC and reduced the ratio of
reserves to insured deposits.
There may be additional downward pressure on our stock price. If current levels of market
disruption and volatility continue or worsen, our ability to access capital and our business,
financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.
A prolonged economic slowdown or decline in the residential real estate market in the U.S. mainland
and in Puerto Rico and an increase in continued unemployment in Puerto Rico could continue to harm
our results of operations.
The residential mortgage loan origination business has historically been cyclical, enjoying periods
of strong growth and profitability followed by periods of shrinking volumes and industry-wide
losses. The market for residential mortgage loan originations is currently in decline and this
trend could also reduce the level of mortgage loans we may produce in the future and adversely
affect our business. During periods of rising interest rates, refinancing originations for many
mortgage products tend to decrease as the economic incentives for borrowers to refinance their
existing mortgage loans are reduced. In addition, the residential mortgage loan origination
business is impacted by home values. Over the past two years, residential real estate values in
many areas of the U.S. have decreased significantly, which has led to lower volumes and higher
losses across the industry, adversely impacting our mortgage business.
The actual rates of delinquencies, foreclosures and losses on loans have been higher during the
recent economic slowdown. Rising unemployment, higher interest rates or declines in housing prices
have had a greater negative effect on the ability of borrowers to repay their mortgage loans. Any
sustained period of increased delinquencies, foreclosures or losses could continue to harm our
ability to sell loans, the prices we receive for loans, the values of mortgage loans held-for-sale
or residual interests in securitizations, which could continue to harm our financial condition and
results of operations. In addition, any additional material decline in real estate values would
further weaken the collateral loan-to-value ratios and increase the possibility of loss if a
borrower defaults. In such event, we will be subject to the risk of loss on such real asset arising
from borrower defaults to the extent not covered by third-party credit enhancement.
Our business concentration in Puerto Rico imposes risks.
We conduct our operations in a geographically concentrated area, as our main market is Puerto Rico.
This imposes risks from lack of diversification in the geographical portfolio. Our financial
condition and results of operations are highly dependent on the economic conditions of Puerto Rico,
where adverse political or economic developments, among other things, could affect the volume of
loan originations, increase the level of non-performing assets, increase the rate of foreclosure
losses on loans and reduce the value of our loans and loan servicing portfolio.
Our credit quality may be adversely affected by Puerto Ricos current economic condition.
Since March 2006, a number of key economic indicators have shown that the economy of Puerto Rico
has been in recession.
Construction has remained weak since 2009 as Puerto Ricos fiscal situation and decreasing public
investment in construction projects affected the sector. As of September 2010, cement sales, which is an
indicator of construction activity, were 18.8% lower than in September 2009.
Nevertheless, in the last six months this indicator has stabilized at 1.5 million bags per month.
On March 12, 2010, the Puerto Rico Planning Board announced the release of Puerto Ricos projected
macroeconomic data for the fiscal year ending on June 30, 2010. The fiscal year 2009 showed a
reduction of real GNP of 3.7%, while the projections for the 2010 fiscal year pointed toward a
reduction of 3.6% and a growth of 0.4% for 2011. Although the Government Development Bank for Puerto Rico Economic Activity
Index, which is a coincident index consisting of four major monthly economic indicators, namely
total payroll employment, total electric power consumption, cement sales and gas consumption, and
which monitors the actual trend of Puerto Ricos economy, reflected a decrease in the rate of
contraction of Puerto Ricos economy in the first quarter of fiscal year 2010 (-4.67%) as compared to the
first quarter 2009 (-5.48%), results
over the past nine months have shown that economic activity has been stabilizing.
The above economic concerns and uncertainty in the private and public sectors may continue to have
an adverse effect on the credit quality of our loan portfolios, as delinquency rates have
increased, until the economy recovers.
108
The above economic concerns and uncertainty in the private and public sectors may continue to have
an adverse effect on the credit quality of our loan portfolios, as delinquency rates have
increased, until the economy stabilizes.
The failure of other financial institutions could adversely affect us.
Our ability to engage in routine funding transactions could be adversely affected by future
failures of financial institutions and the actions and commercial soundness of other financial
institutions. Financial institutions are interrelated as a result of trading, clearing,
counterparty and other relationships. We have exposure to different industries and counterparties
and routinely execute transactions with counterparties in the financial services industry,
including brokers and dealers, commercial banks, investment banks, investment companies and other
institutional clients. In certain of these transactions, we are required to post collateral to
secure the obligations to the counterparties. In the event of a bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding
involving one of such counterparties, we may experience delays in recovering the assets posted as
collateral or may incur a loss to the extent that the counterparty was holding collateral in excess
of the obligation to such counterparty.
In addition, many of these transactions expose us to credit risk in the event of a default by our
counterparty or client. In addition, the credit risk may be exacerbated when the collateral held by
us cannot be realized or is liquidated at prices not sufficient to recover the full amount of the
loan or derivative exposure due to us. Any losses resulting from our routine funding transactions
may materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations.
Legislative and regulatory actions taken now or in the future may increase our costs and impact our
business, governance structure, financial condition or results of operations.
We and our subsidiaries are subject to extensive regulation by multiple regulatory bodies. These
regulations may affect the manner and terms of delivery of our services. If we do not comply with
governmental regulations, we may be subject to fines, penalties, lawsuits or material restrictions
on our businesses in the jurisdiction where the violation occurred, which may adversely affect our
business operations. Changes in these regulations can significantly affect the services that we are
asked to provide as well as our costs of compliance with such regulations. In addition, adverse
publicity and damage to our reputation arising from the failure or perceived failure to comply with
legal, regulatory or contractual requirements could affect our ability to attract and retain
customers.
Current economic conditions, particularly in the financial markets, have resulted in government
regulatory agencies and political bodies placing increased focus and scrutiny on the financial
services industry. The U.S. government has intervened on an unprecedented scale, responding to what
has been commonly referred to as the financial crisis, by temporarily enhancing the liquidity
support available to financial institutions, establishing a commercial paper funding facility,
temporarily guaranteeing money market funds and certain types of debt issuances and increasing
insurance on bank deposits.
These programs have subjected financial institutions, particularly those participating in the U.S.
Treasurys Troubled Asset Relief Program (the TARP), to additional restrictions, oversight and
costs. In addition, new proposals for legislation are periodically introduced in the U.S.
Congress that could further substantially increase regulation of the financial services industry,
impose restrictions on the operations and general ability of firms within the industry to conduct
business consistent with historical practices, including in the areas of compensation, interest
rates, financial product offerings and disclosures, and have an effect on bankruptcy proceedings
with respect to consumer residential real estate mortgages, among other things. Federal and state
regulatory agencies also frequently adopt changes to their regulations or change the manner in
which existing regulations are applied.
In recent years, regulatory oversight and enforcement have increased substantially, imposing
additional costs and increasing the potential risks associated with our operations. If these
regulatory trends continue, they could adversely affect our business and, in turn, our consolidated
results of operations.
Financial services legislative and regulatory reforms may, if enacted or adopted, have a
significant impact on our business and results of operations and on our credit ratings.
We face increased regulation and regulatory scrutiny as a result of our participation in the TARP.
On July 20, 2010, we issued Series G Preferred Stock to the U.S. Treasury in exchange for the
shares of Series F Preferred Stock it owned plus accrued and unpaid dividends pursuant to an
Exchange Agreement with the U.S. Treasury dated July 7, 2010. We also issued to the U.S. Treasury
an amended and restated warrant to replace the original warrant that we issued to the U.S. Treasury
under the TARP. Pursuant to the terms of this issuance, we are prohibited from increasing the
dividend rate on our common stock in an amount exceeding the last quarterly cash dividend paid per
share, or the amount publicly announced (if lower), of common stock prior to October 14, 2008,
which was $0.07 per share, without approval.
On July 21, 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the Dodd-Frank
Act) was signed into law, which significantly changes the regulation of financial institutions and
the financial services industry. The Dodd-Frank Act includes, and the regulations to be developed
thereunder will include, provisions affecting large and small financial institutions alike,
including several provisions that will affect how community banks, thrifts, and small bank and
thrift holding companies will be regulated in the future.
109
The Dodd-Frank Act, among other things, imposes new capital requirements on bank holding companies;
changes the base for FDIC insurance assessments to a banks average consolidated total assets minus
average tangible equity, rather than upon its deposit base, and permanently raises the current
standard deposit insurance limit to $250,000; and expands the FDICs authority to raise insurance
premiums. The legislation also calls for the FDIC to raise the ratio of reserves to deposits from
1.15% to 1.35% for deposit insurance purposes by September 30, 2020 and to offset the effect of
increased assessments on insured depository institutions with assets of less than $10 billion. The
Dodd-Frank Act also limits interchange fees payable on debit card transactions, establishes the
Bureau of Consumer Financial Protection as an independent entity within the Federal Reserve, which
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 borrowers ability to repay and prepayment penalties. The Dodd-Frank Act
also includes provisions that affect corporate governance and executive compensation at all
publicly-traded companies and allows financial institutions to pay interest on business checking
accounts. The legislation also restricts proprietary trading, places restrictions on the owning or
sponsoring of hedge and private equity funds, and regulates the derivatives activities of banks and
their affiliates.
The Collins Amendment to the Dodd-Frank Act, among other things, eliminates certain trust preferred
securities from Tier 1 capital. TARP preferred securities are exempted from this treatment. In the
case of certain trust preferred securities issued prior to May 19, 2010 by bank holding companies
with total consolidated assets of $15 billion or more as of December 31, 2009, these regulatory
capital deductions are to be phased in incrementally over a period of three years beginning on
January 1, 2013. This provision also requires the federal banking agencies to establish minimum
leverage and risk-based capital requirements that will apply to both insured banks and their
holding companies. Regulations implementing the Collins Amendment must be issued within 18 months
of July 21, 2010. These provisions, or any other aspects of current or proposed regulatory or
legislative changes to laws applicable to the financial industry, if enacted or adopted, may impact
the profitability of our business activities or change certain of our business practices, including
the ability to offer new products, obtain financing, attract deposits, make loans, and achieve
satisfactory interest spreads, and could expose us to additional costs, including increased
compliance costs. These changes also may require us to invest significant management attention and
resources to make any necessary changes to operations in order to comply, and could therefore also
materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. Our
management is actively reviewing the provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act, many of which are to be
phased in over the next several months and years, and assessing its probable impact on our
operations. However, the ultimate effect of the Dodd-Frank Act on the financial services industry
in general, and us in particular, is uncertain at this time.
A separate legislative proposal would impose a new fee or tax on U.S. financial institutions as
part of the 2010 budget plans in an effort to reduce the anticipated budget deficit and to recoup
losses anticipated from the TARP. Such an assessment is estimated to be 15-basis points, levied
against bank assets minus Tier 1 capital and domestic deposits. It appears that this fee or tax
would be assessed only against the 50 or so largest financial institutions in the U.S., which are
those with more than $50 billion in assets, and therefore would not directly affect us. However,
the large banks that are affected by the tax may choose to seek additional deposit funding in the
marketplace, driving up the cost of deposits for all banks. The administration has also considered
a transaction tax on trades of stock in financial institutions and a tax on executive bonuses.
The U.S. Congress has also recently adopted additional consumer protection laws such as the Credit
Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act of 2009, and the Federal Reserve has adopted
numerous new regulations addressing banks credit card, overdraft and mortgage lending practices.
Additional consumer protection legislation and regulatory activity is anticipated in the near
future.
Internationally, both the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the Basel Committee) and the
Financial Stability Board (established in April 2009 by the Group of Twenty (G-20) Finance
Ministers and Central Bank Governors to take action to strengthen regulation and supervision of the
financial system with greater international consistency, cooperation and transparency) have
committed to raise capital standards and liquidity buffers within the banking system (Basel III).
On September 12, 2010, the Group of Governors and Heads of Supervision agreed to the calibration
and phase-in of the Basel III minimum capital requirements (raising the minimum Tier 1 common
equity ratio to 4.5% and minimum Tier 1 equity ratio to 6.0%, with full implementation by January
2015) and introducing a capital conservation buffer of common equity of an additional 2.5% with
implementation by January 2019. The U.S. federal banking agencies support this agreement. The Basel
Committee is expected to finalize the new capital and liquidity standards later this year and to
present them for approval of the G-20 Finance Minister and Central Bank Governors in November 2010.
Such proposals and legislation, if finally adopted, would change banking laws and our operating
environment and that of our subsidiaries in substantial and unpredictable ways. We cannot determine
whether such proposals and legislation will be adopted, or the ultimate effect that such proposals
and legislation, if enacted, or regulations issued to implement the same, would have upon our
financial condition or results of operations.
110
Monetary policies and regulations of the Federal Reserve could adversely affect our business,
financial condition and results of operations.
In addition to being affected by general economic conditions, our earnings and growth are affected
by the policies of the Federal Reserve. An important function of the Federal Reserve is to regulate
the money supply and credit conditions. Among the instruments used by the Federal Reserve to
implement these objectives are open market operations in U.S. government securities, adjustments of
the discount rate and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits. These instruments are
used in varying combinations to influence overall economic growth and the distribution of credit,
bank loans, investments and deposits. Their use also affects interest rates charged on loans or
paid on deposits.
On January 6, 2010, the member agencies of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council,
which includes the Federal Reserve, issued an interest rate risk advisory reminding banks to
maintain sound practices for managing interest rate risk, particularly in the current environment
of historically low short-term interest rates. The monetary policies and regulations of the Federal
Reserve have had a significant effect on the operating results of commercial banks in the past and
are expected to continue to do so in the future. The effects of such policies upon our business,
financial condition and results of operations may be adverse.
The imposition of additional property tax payments in Puerto Rico may further deteriorate our
commercial, consumer and mortgage loan portfolios.
On March 9, 2009, the Governor of Puerto Rico signed into law the Special Act Declaring a State of
Fiscal Emergency and Establishing an Integral Plan of Fiscal Stabilization to Save Puerto Ricos
Credit, Act No. 7 (the Credit Act). The Credit Act imposes a series of temporary and permanent
measures, including the imposition of a 0.591% special tax applicable to properties used for
residential (excluding those exempt as detailed in the Credit Act) and commercial purposes, and
payable to the Puerto Rico Treasury Department. This temporary measure is effective for tax years
that commenced after June 30, 2009 and before July 1, 2012. The imposition of this special property
tax could adversely affect the disposable income of borrowers from the commercial, consumer and
mortgage loan portfolios and may cause an increase in our delinquency and foreclosure rates.
Issuances of common stock to the U.S. Treasury and Bank of Nova Scotia (BNS) would dilute holders
of our common stock, including purchasers of our common stock in the current public offering.
The issuance of at least $500 million of common stock in the current public offering would satisfy
the remaining substantive condition to our ability to compel the U.S. Treasury to convert the
Series G Preferred Stock into approximately 380.2 million shares of common stock. This number of
shares will increase if we sell shares of common stock in the current public offering at a price
below 90% of the market price per share of common stock on the trading day immediately preceding
the pricing date of the current public offering. In addition, the issuance of shares of
common stock in the current public offering and upon the conversion of the Series G Preferred
Stock will enable BNS, pursuant to its anti-dilution right in the Stockholder Agreement, to acquire
additional shares of common stock so that it can maintain the same percentage of ownership in our
common stock of approximately 10% that it owned prior to the completion of the Exchange Offer. In
August 2010, BNS agreed to execute an amendment to the Stockholder Agreement that would provide BNS
the right to decide whether to exercise its anti-dilution right after our issuance of shares of
common stock to the participants in our Exchange Offer, in the current public offering and to the
U.S. Treasury upon the conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock. Finally, the U.S. Treasury has
an amended and restated warrant to purchase 5,842,259 shares of our common stock at an exercise
price of $0.7252 per share, which is subject to adjustment as discussed below. This warrant, which
replaced a warrant exercisable for $10.27 per share that the U.S. Treasury acquired when it
acquired the Series F Preferred Stock, was restated at the time we issued the Series G Preferred
stock in exchange for the Series F Preferred Stock. Like the original warrant, the amended and
restated warrant has an anti-dilution right that requires an adjustment to the exercise price for,
and the number of shares underlying, the warrant. This adjustment will be necessary under various
circumstances, including if we issue shares of common stock for a consideration per share that is
lower than the initial conversion price of the Series G Preferred Stock, or $0.7252, in the current
public offering.
The issuance of shares of common stock to the U.S. Treasury, to BNS and in the current public
offering will affect our current stockholders in a number of ways, including by:
diluting the voting power of the current holders of common stock; and
diluting the earnings per share and book value per share of the outstanding shares of common
stock.
Finally, the additional issuances of shares of common stock may adversely impact the market price
of our common stock.
111
Issuance of additional equity securities in the public markets and other capital management or
business strategies that we may pursue could depress the market price of our common stock and
result in the dilution of our common stockholders, including purchasers of our common stock in the
current public offering.
Generally, we are not restricted from issuing additional equity securities, including our common
stock. We may choose or be required in the future to identify, consider and pursue additional
capital management strategies to bolster our capital position. We may issue equity securities
(including convertible securities, preferred securities, and options and warrants on our common or
preferred stock) in the future for a number of reasons, including to finance our operations and
business strategy, to adjust our leverage ratio, to address regulatory capital concerns, to
restructure currently outstanding debt or equity securities or to satisfy our obligations upon the
exercise of outstanding options or warrants. Future issuances of our equity securities, including
common stock, in any transaction that we may pursue may dilute the interests of our existing common
stockholders, including purchasers of our common stock in the current public offering, and cause
the market price of our common stock to decline.
The market price of our common stock may be subject to significant fluctuations and volatility.
The stock markets have recently experienced high levels of volatility. These market fluctuations
have adversely affected, and may continue to adversely affect, the trading price of our common
stock. In addition, the market price of our common stock has been subject to significant
fluctuations and volatility because of factors specifically related to our businesses and may
continue to fluctuate or further decline. Factors that could cause fluctuations, volatility or
further decline in the market price of our common stock, many of which could be beyond our control,
include the following:
our ability to comply with the Agreements;
any additional regulatory actions against us;
our ability to complete the current public offering , the conversion into common stock of the
Series G Preferred Stock or any other issuances of common stock;
changes or perceived changes in the condition, operations, results or prospects of our businesses
and market assessments of these changes or perceived changes;
announcements of strategic developments, acquisitions and other material events by us or our
competitors, including any future failures of banks in Puerto Rico;
our announcement of the sale of common stock at a particular price per share;
changes in governmental regulations or proposals, or new governmental regulations or proposals,
affecting us, including those relating to the current financial crisis and global economic downturn
and those that may be specifically directed to us;
the continued decline, failure to stabilize or lack of improvement in general market and economic
conditions in our principal markets;
the departure of key personnel;
changes in the credit, mortgage and real estate markets;
operating results that vary from the expectations of management, securities analysts and
investors;
operating and stock price performance of companies that investors deem comparable to us;
market assessments as to whether and when the current public offering and the acquisition of
additional newly issued shares by BNS will be consummated; and
the public perception of the banking industry and its safety and soundness.
In addition, the stock market in general, and the NYSE and the market for commercial banks and
other financial services companies in particular, has experienced significant price and volume
fluctuations that sometimes have been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of
those companies. These broad market and industry factors may seriously harm the market price of our
common stock, regardless of our operating performance. In the past, following periods of volatility
in the market price of a companys securities, securities class action litigation has often been
instituted. A securities class action suit against us could result in substantial costs, potential
liabilities and the diversion of managements attention and resources. See The implementation of
the reverse stock
112
split authorized by our stockholders may adversely affect the market price of our common stock and
the trading liquidity of our common stock.
Our suspension of dividends may have adversely affected and may further adversely affect our stock
price and result in the expansion of our board of directors.
In March 2009, the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve issued a supervisory guidance letter
intended to provide direction to bank holding companies (BHCs) on the declaration and payment of
dividends, capital redemptions and capital repurchases by BHCs in the context of their capital
planning process. The letter reiterates the long-standing Federal Reserve supervisory policies and
guidance to the effect that BHCs should only pay dividends from current earnings. More
specifically, the letter heightens expectations that BHCs will inform and consult with the Federal
Reserve supervisory staff on the declaration and payment of dividends that exceed earnings for the
period for which a dividend is being paid. In consideration of the financial results reported for
the second quarter ended June 30, 2009, we decided, as a matter of prudent fiscal management and
following the Federal Reserve guidance, to suspend payment of common stock dividends and dividends
on our Preferred Stock and Series G Preferred Stock. Our Agreement with the Federal Reserve
precludes us from declaring any dividends without the prior approval of the Federal Reserve. We
cannot anticipate if and when the payment of dividends might be reinstated.
This suspension may have adversely affected and may continue to adversely affect our stock price.
Further, in general, if dividends on our preferred stock are not paid before February 28, 2011 (18
monthly dividend periods after we suspended dividend payments in August 2009), our preferred
stockholders will have the right to elect two additional members of the our board of directors
until all accrued and unpaid dividends for all past dividend periods have been declared and paid in
full.
The price of our common stock is depressed and may not recover.
The price of our common stock has declined significantly during 2010 to a closing price of $0.33
on November 8, 2010, the last trading day prior to the filing date of this Form 10-Q. Our stock
price may never recover to prior levels. Many factors discussed in this Item 1A that we cannot
predict or control may cause sudden changes in the price of our common stock or prevent the price
of our common stock from recovering.
The implementation of the reverse stock split authorized by our stockholders may adversely affect
the market price of our common stock and the trading liquidity of our common stock.
We disclosed in our registrations statement for the current public offering that before the
registration statement is declared effective, we will effect a reverse stock split in the range of
between one new share of common stock for 10 old shares of common stock and one new share of common
stock for 20 old shares of common stock, which is the range that our stockholders approved at our
Special Meeting of Stockholders on August 24, 2010. We believe that the reverse stock split will
return us to compliance with the NYSE listing requirements. See Our common stock could be
delisted if we fall below applicable compliance standards. At this time, our board of directors
has not made a decision as to what ratio to select.
Because some investors may view the reverse stock split negatively, the reverse stock split may
adversely affect the market price of our common stock. In the usual case, as a result of the
reverse stock split (all other things being equal), the market price of common stock may not rise
proportionally to the decrease in outstanding shares resulting from the reverse stock split. In
addition, the market price of our common stock may decline by a greater percentage than would occur
in the absence of the reverse stock split. The post-reverse stock split stock price may not attract
institutional investors or investment funds and may not satisfy the investing guidelines of such
investors and, consequently, the trading liquidity of our common stock may not improve. Finally,
the reverse stock split will likely increase the number of stockholders who own odd lots (less than
100 shares) and stockholders who hold odd lots typically may experience an increase in the cost of
selling their shares, and may have greater difficulty effecting sales.
Our common stock could be delisted if we fall below applicable compliance standards.
Under the NYSE rules, a listed company will be considered below compliance standards if the average
closing price of its common stock is less than $1.00 over a consecutive 30 trading-day period. One
July 10, 2010, the NYSE notified us that the average closing price of our common stock over the
consecutive 30 trading-day period ended July 6, 2010 was less than $1.00. Accordingly, the price of
our common stock was below the price criteria compliance standard. The price of our common stock
has remained below $1.00 since then. Before the registration statement relating to the current
public offering is declared effective, we will effect a reverse stock split within the range
approved by our stockholders. We believe that the reverse stock split will return us to compliance
with the NYSEs price criteria compliance standard and allow us to maintain the listing of our
common stock on the NYSE. If we are unable to effect a reverse stock split, if we are unable to
cure our failure to comply within six months following notification from the NYSE, or if the
reverse stock split does not result in our ability to maintain compliance with the applicable NYSE
listing requirements, our common stock may be suspended from trading on, or delisted from, the
NYSE, which would adversely impact the market liquidity of our common stock.
113
If we do not raise gross proceeds of at least $500 million in the current public offering, we
would not be able to fulfill the remaining substantive condition required for us to compel the
conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock into common stock, which may adversely affect investor
interest in us and will require us to continue to accrue dividends payable on the Series G
Preferred Stock.
If we are unable to sell a number of shares that results in gross proceeds to us of at least $500
million, we would not be able to fulfill the remaining substantive condition required for us to
compel the conversion of the shares of Series G Preferred Stock that the U.S. Treasury now owns.
That inability would mean that our ratios of Tier 1 common equity to risk-weighted assets and
tangible common equity to tangible assets, which are ratios that investors are likely to consider
in making investment decisions, would not benefit from the increase in outstanding common equity
resulting from the conversion. In addition, our inability to convert the Series G Preferred Stock
would mean that we would continue to need to accumulate dividends on the Series G Preferred Stock,
which are 5% per year until January 16, 2014 (or $21.2 million per year on an aggregate basis), and
9% thereafter (or $38.2 million per year on an aggregate basis) until it automatically converts
into common stock on July 7, 2017, if it is still outstanding at that time.
The holders of our debt obligations, the shares of Preferred Stock still outstanding and
the Series G Preferred Stock would have priority over our common stock with respect to payment
in the event of liquidation, dissolution or winding up and with respect to the payment of
dividends.
In any liquidation, dissolution or winding up of First BanCorp, our common stock would rank below
all debt claims against us and claims of all of our outstanding shares of preferred stock,
including the shares of Preferred Stock that were not exchanged for common stock in the Exchange
Offer, which has a liquidation preference of approximately $63 million, and the Series G Preferred
Stock, which has a liquidation preference of approximately $424.2 million, if we cannot compel the
conversion of the Series G Preferred Stock into common stock.
As a result, holders of our common stock will not be entitled to receive any payment or other
distribution of assets upon the liquidation, dissolution or winding up of First BanCorp until after
all our obligations to our debt holders have been satisfied and holders of senior equity securities
and trust preferred securities have received any payment or distribution due to them.
In addition, we are required to pay dividends on our preferred stock before we pay any dividends on
our common stock. Holders of our common stock will not be entitled to receive payment of any
dividends on their shares of our common stock unless and until we obtain the Federal Reserves
approval to resume payments of dividends on any shares of outstanding preferred stock.
Dividends on our common stock have been suspended and you may not receive funds in connection with
your investment in our common stock without selling your shares of our common stock.
The Written Agreement that we entered into with the Federal Reserve prohibits us from paying any
dividends or making any distributions without the prior approval of the Federal Reserve. Holders of
our common stock are only entitled to receive dividends as our board of directors may declare out
of funds legally available for payment of such dividends. We have suspended dividend payments on
our common stock since August 2009. Furthermore, so long as any shares of preferred stock remain
outstanding and until we obtain the Federal Reserves approval, we cannot declare, set apart or pay
any dividends on shares of our common stock (i) unless any accrued and unpaid dividends on our
preferred stock for the twelve monthly dividend periods ending on the immediately preceding
dividend payment date have been paid or are paid contemporaneously and the full monthly dividend on
our preferred stock for the then current month has been or is contemporaneously declared and paid
or declared and set apart for payment and, (ii) with respect to our Series G Preferred Stock,
unless all accrued and unpaid dividends for all past dividend periods, including the latest
completed dividend period, on all outstanding shares have been declared and paid in full. Prior to
January 16, 2012, unless we have redeemed or converted all of the shares of Series G Preferred
Stock or the U.S. Treasury has transferred all of the Series G Preferred Stock to third parties,
the consent of the U.S. Treasury will be required for us to, among other things, increase the
dividend rate per share of common stock above $0.07 per share or repurchase or redeem equity
securities, including our common stock, subject to certain limited exceptions. This could adversely
affect the market price of our common stock.
Also, we are a bank holding company and our ability to declare and pay dividends is dependent also
on certain federal regulatory considerations, including the guidelines of the Federal Reserve
regarding capital adequacy and dividends. Moreover, the Federal Reserve has issued a policy
statement stating that bank holding companies should generally pay dividends only out of current
operating earnings. In the current financial and economic environment, the Federal Reserve has
indicated that bank holding companies should carefully review their dividend policy and has
discouraged dividend pay-out ratios that are at the 100% or higher level unless both asset quality
and capital are very strong.
In addition, the terms of our outstanding junior subordinated debt securities held by trusts that
issue trust preferred securities prohibit us from declaring or paying any dividends or
distributions on our capital stock, including our common stock and preferred stock, or purchasing,
acquiring, or making a liquidation payment on such stock, if we have given notice of our election
to defer interest payments but the related deferral period has not yet commenced or a deferral
period is continuing. We elected to defer the interest payments that would be due in September 2010
and may make similar elections with respect to future quarterly interest payments.
114
Offerings of debt, which would be senior to our common stock upon liquidation and/or to preferred
equity securities, which may be senior to our common stock for purposes of dividend distributions
or upon liquidation, may adversely affect the market price of our common stock.
Subject to any required approval of our regulators, if our capital ratios or those of our banking
subsidiary fall below the required minimums, we or our banking subsidiary could be forced to raise
additional capital by making additional offerings of debt or preferred equity securities, including
medium-term notes, trust preferred securities, senior or subordinated notes and preferred stock.
Upon liquidation, holders of our debt securities and shares of preferred stock and lenders with
respect to other borrowings will receive distributions of our available assets prior to the holders
of our common stock. Additional equity offerings may dilute the holdings of our existing
stockholders or reduce the market price of our common stock, or both.
Our board of directors is authorized to issue one or more classes or series of preferred stock from
time to time without any action on the part of the stockholders. Our board of directors also has
the power, without stockholder approval, to set the terms of any such classes or series of
preferred stock that may be issued, including voting rights, dividend rights and preferences over
our common stock with respect to dividends or upon our dissolution, winding up and liquidation and
other terms. If we issue preferred shares in the future that have a preference over our common
stock with respect to the payment of dividends or upon liquidation, or if we issue preferred shares
with voting rights hat dilute the voting power of our common stock, the rights of holders of our
common stock or the market price of our common stock could be adversely affected.
ITEM 2. UNREGISTERED SALES OF EQUITY SECURITIES AND USE OF PROCEEDS
Not applicable.
ITEM 3. DEFAULTS UPON SENIOR SECURITIES
Not applicable.
ITEM 4. RESERVED
ITEM 5. OTHER INFORMATION
Not applicable.
ITEM 6. EXHIBITS
12.1 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.
12.2 Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preference Dividends.
31.1 CEO Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
31.2 CFO Certification pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.1 CEO Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
32.2 CFO Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.
115
SIGNATURES
Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Corporation has duly
caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized:
|
|
|
|
|
|
First BanCorp.
Registrant
|
|
By: |
/s/ Aurelio Alemán |
|
Date: November 9, 2010 |
Aurelio Alemán |
|
|
President and Chief Executive Officer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
By: |
/s/ Orlando Berges
|
|
Date: November 9, 2010 |
Orlando Berges |
|
|
Executive Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer |
|
|
116