-3- 

-4- 

Investment Policy

The Bank’s investment portfolio policy is to maximize income consistent with liquidity, asset quality, and regulatory constraints. The policy is reviewed periodically by the Board of Directors. Individual transactions, portfolio composition, and performance are reviewed and approved monthly by the Board of Directors.

Employees

The Bank had 114120 full-time employees and threetwo part-time employees at December 31, 2017.2018. The Bank is not a party to any collective bargaining agreement, and the Bank believes that its employee relations are good.

Competition

The banking business is highly competitive. The Bank competes with other depository institutions and other financial service organizations, including brokers, finance companies, financial technology companies, mutual funds, savings and loan associations, credit unions and certain governmental agencies. Many of these competitors have substantially greater resources than we do and offer services that we do not currently provide. Such competitors may also have greater lending limits than the Bank. In addition, nonbank competitors are generally not subject to the extensive regulations applicable to us. Price (the interest charged on loans and paid on deposits) remains a means of competition within the services industry. Use and advances in technology, such as internet and mobile banking, electronic payment processing channels, and cybersecurity are expected to have a significant impact on the competitive landscape of the financial services industry. The Bank also competes on the basis of service and convenience in providing financial services. The Bank ranks secondthird out of twenty-one banks in a fivesix county region (Baker,(Colquitt, Baker, Worth, Lowndes, Brooks, Colquitt, Lowndes, and Worth)Tift) in deposit market share.

Monetary Policies

The results of operations of the Bank are affected by credit policies of monetary authorities, particularly the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System (the “Federal Reserve”). The instruments of monetary policy employed by the Federal Reserve include open market operations in U. S. government agency securities, changes in the discount rate on bank borrowings, and changes in reserve requirements against bank deposits. In view of changing conditions in the national economy and in the money markets, as well as the effect of action by monetary and fiscal authorities, including the Federal Reserve, no prediction can be made as to possible future changes in interest rates, deposit levels, loan demand, or the business and earnings of the Bank.

Payment of Dividends

The Corporation is a legal entity separate and distinct from the Bank. Most of the revenue of the Corporation results from dividends paid to it by the Bank. There are statutory and regulatory requirements applicable to the payment of dividends by the Bank, as well as by the Corporation to its shareholders.

Under the regulations of the Georgia Department of Banking and Finance (“DBF”), a state bank with positive retained earnings may declare dividends without DBF approval if it meets all the following requirements:

The payment of dividends by the Corporation and the Bank may also be affected or limited by other factors, such as the requirement to maintain adequate capital above regulatory guidelines. In addition, if, in the opinion of the applicable regulatory authority, a bank under its jurisdiction is engaged in or is about to engage in an unsafe or unsound practice (which, depending upon the financial condition of the bank, could include the payment of dividends), such authority may require, after notice and hearing, that such bank cease and desist from such practice. The FDIC has issued a policy statement providing that insured banks should generally only pay dividends out of current operating earnings. In addition to the formal statutes and regulations, regulatory authorities consider the adequacy of each of the Bank’s total capital in relation to its assets, deposits and other such items. Capital adequacy considerations could further limit the availability of dividends to the Bank. At December 31, 2017,2018, net assets available from the Bank to pay dividends without prior approval from regulatory authorities totaled $1,932,331.$2,375,242. For 2017,2018, the Corporation’s cash dividend payout to shareholders was $1,120,872.$1,196,332. 

Supervision and Regulation

The following is a brief summary of the supervision and regulation of the Corporation and the Bank as financial institutions and is not intended to be a complete discussion of all NYSE American LLC, state or federal rules, statutes and regulations affecting their operations, or that apply generally to business corporations or companies listed on NYSE American LLC. Changes in the rules, statutes and regulations applicable to the Corporation and the Bank can affect the operating environment in substantial and unpredictable ways.

General.The Corporation is a registered bank holding company subject to regulation by the Federal Reserve under the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended (the “Federal Reserve“BHC Act”). The Corporation is required to file annual and quarterly financial information with the Federal Reserve and is subject to periodic examination by the Federal Reserve.

The Federal ReserveBHC Act requires every bank holding company to obtain the Federal Reserve’s prior approval before (1) it may acquire direct or indirect ownership or control of more than 5% of the voting shares of any bank that it does not already control; (2) it or any of its non-bank subsidiaries may acquire all or substantially all of the assets of a bank; and (3) it may merge or consolidate with any other bank holding company. In addition, a bank holding company is generally prohibited from engaging in, or acquiring, direct or indirect control of the voting shares of any company engaged in non-banking activities. This prohibition does not apply to activities listed in the Federal ReserveBHC Act or found by the Federal Reserve, by order or regulation, to be closely related to banking or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto. Some of the activities that the Federal Reserve has determined by regulation or order to be closely related to banking are:

Although the activities of bank holding companies have traditionally been limited to the business of banking and activities closely related or incidental to banking (as discussed above), the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (the “GLB Act”) relaxed the previous limitations and permitted bank holding companies to engage in a broader range of financial activities. Specifically, bank holding companies may elect to become financial holding companies which may affiliate with securities firms and insurance companies and engage in other activities that are financial in nature. Among the activities that are deemed “financial in nature” include:

Under this legislation, the Federal Reserve serves as the primary “umbrella” regulator of financial holding companies with supervisory authority over each parent company and limited authority over its subsidiaries. The primary regulator of each subsidiary of a financial holding company will depend on the type of activity conducted by the subsidiary. For example, broker-dealer subsidiaries will be regulated largely by securities regulators and insurance subsidiaries will be regulated largely by insurance authorities.

The Corporation has no current plans to register as a financial holding company.

The Corporation must also register with the DBF and file periodic information with the DBF. As part of such registration, the DBF requires information with respect to the financial condition, operations, management and intercompany relationships of the Corporation and the Bank and related matters. The DBF may also require such other information as is necessary to keep itself informed as to whether the provisions ofconcerning compliance with Georgia law and the regulations and orders issued thereunder by the DBF have been complied with, and the DBF may examine the Corporation and the Bank.

The Corporation is an “affiliate” of the Bank under the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 (the “Federal Reserve Act”), which imposes certain restrictions on (1) loans by the Bank to the Corporation, (2) investments in the stock or securities of the Corporation by the Bank, (3) the Bank’sBank taking of the stock or securities of an “affiliate” as collateral for loans by the Bank to a borrower, and (4) the purchase of assets from the Corporation by the Bank. Further, a bank holding company and its subsidiaries are prohibited from engaging in certain tie-in arrangements in connection with any extension of credit, lease or sale of property or furnishing of services.

The Bank is regularly examined by the FDIC. As a state banking association organized under Georgia law, the Bank is subject to the supervision of and the regular examination of the DBF. Both the FDIC and the DBF must grant prior approval of any merger, consolidation or other corporation reorganization involving the Bank.

The Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (the “Dodd-Frank Act”) was enacted in 2010, and resultingresulted in sweeping changes in the regulation of financial institutions aimed at strengthening the sound operation of the financial services sector. In 2017, both the House of Representatives and the Senate introduced legislation that would repeal or modify provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act and significantly impact financial services regulation. AlthoughIn May 2018, certain provisions of these bills were signed into law as part of the bills vary in content, certain key aspects include revisions to rules related to mortgage loans,Economic Growth, Regulatory Relief and Consumer Protection Act (the “Economic Growth Act”) and repealed or modified significant portions of the Dodd-Frank Act. Specifically, the Economic Growth Act delayed implementation of rules related to the Home Mortgage Disclosure Act, reformreformed and simplification ofsimplified certain Volcker Rule requirements, and raisingraised the threshold for applying enhanced prudential standards to bank holding companies with total consolidated assets equal to or greater than $50 billion to those with total consolidated assets equal to or greater than $250 billion. While recent federal legislation, including the Economic Growth Act, has scaled back portions of the Dodd-Frank Act, uncertainty about the timing and scope of such changes, as well as the cost of complying with a new regulatory regime, remains.

Capital Adequacy.Banks and bank holding companies are subject to various regulatory capital requirements administered by state and federal banking agencies. Capital adequacy guidelines involve quantitative measures of assets, liabilities and certain off-balance-sheet items calculated under regulatory accounting practices. Capital amounts and classifications are also subject to qualitative judgments by regulators about components, risk weighting and other factors.

The Federal Reserve and the FDIC have implemented substantially identical risk-based rules for assessing bank and bank holding company capital adequacy. These regulations establish minimum capital standards in relation to assets and off-balance sheet exposures as adjusted for credit risk. “Total capital” is composed of Tier 1 capital and Tier 2 capital. “Tier 1 capital” includes common equity, retained earnings, qualifying non-cumulative perpetual preferred stock, a limited amount of qualifying cumulative perpetual stock at the holding company level, minority interests in equity accounts of consolidated subsidiaries, less goodwill, most intangible assets and certain other assets. “Tier 2 capital” includes, among other things, perpetual preferred stock and related surplus not meeting the Tier 1 capital definition, qualifying mandatorily convertible debt securities, qualifying subordinated debt and allowances for possible loan and lease losses, subject to limitations. 

The Federal Reserve and the FDIC use the leverage ratio in tandem with the risk-based ratio to assess the capital adequacy of banks and bank holding companies. The Federal Reserve will require a bank holding company to maintain a leverage ratio well above minimum levels if it is experiencing or anticipating significant growth or is operating with less than well-diversified risks in the opinion of the Federal Reserve. The FDIC, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (the “OCC”) and the Federal Reserve will also require banks to maintain capital well above minimum levels.

In July 2013, the Federal Reserve published the Basel III Capital Rules establishing a new comprehensive capital framework applicable to all depository institutions, bank holding companies with total consolidated assets aboveof a certain threshold, and all savings and loan holding companies except for those that are substantially engaged in insurance underwriting or commercial activities (collectively, “banking organizations”). The rules implement the December 2010 framework proposed by the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (the “Basel Committee”), known as “Basel III”, for strengthening international capital standards as well as certain provisions of the Dodd-Frank Act.

The Basel III Capital Rules substantially revised the risk-based capital requirements applicable to bank holding companies and depository institutions compared to the prior U.S. risk-based capital rules. The Basel III Capital Rules:

The Basel III Capital Rules became effective for the Bank on January 1, 2015, subject to a phase-in period ending January 1, 2019, but are not applicable to bank holding companies, like the Corporation, with less than $1 billion in total consolidated assets that meet certain criteria.

The Basel III Capital Rules require the Bank to maintain;

In addition, Section 38 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act implemented the prompt corrective action provisions that Congress enacted as a part of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation Improvement Act of 1991 (the “1991 Act”). The prompt corrective action provisions set forth five regulatory zones in which all banks are placed largely based on their capital positions. Regulators are permitted to take increasingly harsh action as a bank’s financial condition declines. The FDIC is required to resolve a bank when its ratio of tangible equity to total assets reaches 2%. Better capitalized institutions are generally subject to less onerous regulation and supervision than banks with lesser amounts of capital.

The FDIC has adopted regulations implementing the prompt corrective action provisions of the 1991 Act, as revised by the Basel III Capital Rules effective January 1, 2015, which place financial institutions in the following five categories based upon capitalization ratios: (1) a “well-capitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 10%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of at least 8%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of 6.5% and a leverage ratio of at least 5%; (2) an “adequately capitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of at least 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of at least 6%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of 4.5% and a leverage ratio of at least 4%; (3) an “undercapitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of under 8%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of under 6%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of under 4.5% or a leverage ratio of under 4%; (4) a “significantly undercapitalized” institution has a Total risk-based capital ratio of under 6%, a Tier 1 risk-based ratio of under 4%, a CET1 risk-based ratio of under 3% or a leverage ratio of under 3%; and (5) a “critically undercapitalized” institution has a ratio of tangible equity to total assets of 2% or less. Institutions in any of the three undercapitalized categories would be prohibited from declaring dividends or making capital distributions. The FDIC regulations also allow it to “downgrade” an institution to a lower capital category based on supervisory factors other than capital.

As of December 31, 2017, the most recent notifications from the FDIC categorized2018, the Bank aswas “well-capitalized” under current regulations.

The Basel III Capital Rules provide for a number of deductions from and adjustments to CET1. These include, for example, the requirement that mortgage servicing rights, deferred tax assets arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks and significant investments in non-consolidated financial entities be deducted from CET1 to the extent that any one such category exceeds 10% of CET1 or all such categories in the aggregate exceed 15% of CET1. Under prior capital standards, the effects of certain accumulated other comprehensive income items included in capital were excluded for the purposes of determining regulatory capital ratios. Under the Basel III Capital Rules, the effects of certain accumulated other comprehensive items are not excluded; however, certain banking organizations, including the Bank, may make a one-time permanent election to continue to exclude these items. The Bank made this election in the first quarter of 2015 in order to avoid significant variations in the level of capital depending upon the impact of interest rate fluctuations on the fair value of the Bank’s available-for-sale securities portfolio.

The “capital conservation buffer” is designed to absorb losses during periods of economic stress. Banking organizations with a ratio of CET1 to risk-weighted assets above the minimum but below the conservation buffer (or below the combined capital conservation buffer and countercyclical capital buffer, when the latter is applied) will face constraints on dividends, equity repurchases and compensation based on the amount of the shortfall.

Implementation of the deductions and other adjustments to CET1 began on January 1, 2015, and will be phased-in over a four-year period (beginning at 4.5% on January 1, 2015, and an additional 0.625% per year thereafter). The implementation of the capital conservation buffer began on January 1, 2016, at the 0.625% level and will be phased in over a four-year period (increasing by that amount on each subsequent January 1, until it reaches 2.5% on January 1, 2019).

The Basel III Capital Rules prescribe a standardized approach for risk weightings that expand the risk-weighting categories from the current four Basel I-derived categories (0%, 20%, 50% and 100%) to a much larger and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the assets, generally ranging from 0% for U.S. government agency securities, to 600% for certain equity exposures, and resulting in higher risk weights for a variety of asset categories. Consistent with the Dodd-Frank Act, the Basel III Capital Rules replace the ratings-based approach to securitization exposures, which is based on external credit ratings, with the simplified supervisory formula approach in order to determine the appropriate risk weights for these exposures. Alternatively, banking organizations may use the existing gross-up approach to assign securitization exposures to a risk weight category or choose to assign such exposures a 1,250% risk weight. In addition, the Basel III Capital Rules provide more advantageous risk weights for derivatives and repurchase-style transactions cleared through a qualifying central counterparty and increase the scope of eligible guarantors and eligible collateral for purposes of credit risk mitigation.

As of December 31, 2017,2018, the Bank met all capital adequacy requirements under the Basel III Capital Rules on a fully phased-in basis as if such requirements were currently in effect.basis.

In November 2017, the federal banking agencies adopted a final rule to extend the regulatory capital treatment applicable during 2017 under the capital rules for certain items, including regulatory capital deductions, risk weights, and certain minority interest limitations. The relief provided under the final rule applies to banking organizations that are not subject to the capital rules’ advanced approaches, such as the Corporation. Specifically, the final rule extends the current regulatory capital treatment of mortgage servicing assets, deferred tax assets arising from temporary differences that could not be realized through net operating loss carrybacks, significant investments in the capital of unconsolidated financial institutions in the form of common stock, and common equity tier 1 minority interest, tier 1 minority interest, and total capital minority interest exceeding the capital rules’ minority interest limitations.

In December 2017, the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision published the last version of the Basel III accord, generally referred to as “Basel IV.” The Basel Committee stated that a key objective of the revisions incorporated into the framework is to reduce excessive variability of risk-weighted assets (“RWA”), which will be accomplished by enhancing the robustness and risk sensitivity of the standardized approaches for credit risk and operational risk, which will facilitate the comparability of banks’ capital ratios; constraining the use of internally modeled approaches; and complementing the risk-weighted capital ratio with a finalized leverage ratio and a revised and robust capital floor. Leadership of the federal banking agencies who are tasked with implementing Basel IV supported the revisions. Although it is uncertain at this time, we anticipate some, if not all, of the Basel IV accord may be incorporated into the capital requirements framework applicable to the Corporation.

The Economic Growth Act mandated the federal banking regulators, through notice and comment rulemaking, to develop an “off-ramp” exempting certain banking organizations with less than $10.0 billion in consolidated assets and a low-risk profile from generally applicable leverage capital and risk-based capital requirements if such banking organization maintained a leverage ratio to be set by the federal banking regulators (the “Community Bank Leverage Ratio”). The Economic Growth Act requires the federal banking regulators to set the Community Bank Leverage Ratio between 8% and 10%. On November 21, 2018, the federal banking regulators proposed a rule to implement Section 201 of the Economic Growth Act. The proposed rule would set the Community Bank Leverage Ratio at 9%. To date, the proposed rule implementing Section 201 of the Economic Growth Act has not been finalized.

Consumer Protection Laws. The Dodd-Frank Act centralized responsibility for consumer financial protection by creating a new agency, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (“CFPB”), and giving it the power to promulgate and enforce federal consumer protection laws. Depository institutions are subject to the CFPB’s rule writing authority, and existing federal bank regulatory agencies retain examination and enforcement authority for such institutions. The CFPB and the Corporation’s existing federal regulator, the FDIC, are focused on the following:

The CFPB experienced a leadership changeand FDIC have authority to prevent unfair, deceptive or abusive practices in late 2017, which is subjectconnection with offering consumer financial products. The Dodd-Frank Act permits states to ongoing litigationadopt consumer protection laws and may impactstandards that are more stringent than those adopted at the CFPB’s policiesfederal level and, supervisionin certain circumstances, permits states’ attorneys general to enforce compliance with both state and enforcement efforts.federal laws and regulations.

Volcker Rule. The Dodd-Frank Act amended the Federal ReserveBHC Act to require the federal bank regulatory agencies to adopt rules that prohibit banks and their affiliates from engaging in proprietary trading and investing in and sponsoring certain unregistered investment companies (defined as hedge funds and private equity funds). The statutory provision is commonly called the “Volcker Rule”. The Federal Reserve adopted final rules implementing the Volcker Rule on December 10, 2013. The Volcker Rule and the final rules adopted by the Federal Reserve thereunder, do not have a material effect on the Corporation and the Bank, as we do not engage in businesses prohibited by the Volcker Rule. In the future, the Corporation may incur costs to adopt additional policies and systems to ensure compliance with the Volcker Rule.

Commercial Real Estate. The federal bank regulatory agencies, including the FDIC, restrict concentrations in commercial real estate lending and have noted that recent increases in banks’ commercial real estate concentrations have created safety and soundness concerns in the event of a significant economic downturn. The regulatory guidance mandates certain minimal risk management practices and categorizes banks with defined levels of such concentrations as banks requiring elevated examiner scrutiny. Although management believes that the Corporation’s credit processes and procedures meet the risk management standards dictated by this guidance, regulatory outcomes could effectively limit increases in the real estate concentrations in the Bank’s loan portfolio and require additional credit administration and management costs associated with those portfolios.

Source of Strength Doctrine. Federal Reserve regulations and policy requires bank holding companies to act as a source of financial and managerial strength to their subsidiary banks. Under this policy, the Corporation is expected to commit resources to support the Bank.

Loans. Inter-agency guidelines adopted by federal bank regulatory agencies mandate that financial institutions establish real estate lending policies with maximum allowable real estate loan-to-value limits, subject to an allowable amount of non-conforming loans as a percentage of capital.

Transactions with Affiliates. Under federal law, all transactions between and among a state nonmember bank and its affiliates, which include holding companies, are subject to Sections 23A and 23B of the Federal Reserve Act and Regulation W promulgated thereunder. Generally, these requirements limit these transactions to a percentage of the bank’s capital and require all of them to be on terms at least as favorable to the bank as transactions with non-affiliates. In addition, a bank may not lend to any affiliate engaged in non-banking activities not permissible for a bank holding company or acquire shares of any affiliate that is not a subsidiary. The FDIC is authorized to impose additional restrictions on transactions with affiliates if necessary to protect the safety and soundness of a bank. The regulations also set forth various reporting requirements relating to transactions with affiliates.

Financial Privacy. In accordance with the GLB Act, federal banking regulatory agencies adopted rules that limit the ability of banks and other financial institutions to disclose non-public information about consumers to non-affiliated third parties. These limitations require disclosure of privacy policies to consumers and, in some circumstances, allow consumers to prevent disclosure of certain personal information to a nonaffiliated third party. The privacy provisions of the GLB Act affect how consumer information is transmitted through diversified financial companies and conveyed to outside vendors.

Anti-Money Laundering Initiatives and the USA Patriot Act. A major focus of governmental policy on financial institutions in recent years has been aimed at combating terrorist financing. This has generally been accomplished by amending existing anti-money laundering laws and regulations. The United States Department of the Treasury has issued a number of implementing regulations which apply various requirements of the USA Patriot Act of 2001 to the Bank. These regulations impose obligations on financial institutions to maintain appropriate policies, procedures and controls to detect, prevent and report money laundering and terrorist financing and to verify the identity of their customers. Failure of a financial institution to maintain and implement adequate programs to combat terrorist financing, or to comply with all of the relevant laws or regulations, could have serious legal and reputational consequences for the institution.

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

The Federal Reserve will review, as part of the regular, risk-focused examination process, the incentive compensation arrangements of financial institutions like the Corporation that are not “large, complex banking organizations.” These reviews will be tailored to each financial institution based on the scope and complexity of the institution’s activities and the prevalence of incentive compensation arrangements. The findings of the supervisory initiatives will be included in reports of examination. Deficiencies will be incorporated into the financial institution’s supervisory ratings, which can affect the institution’s ability to make acquisitions and take other actions. Enforcement actions may be taken against a financial institution if its incentive compensation arrangements, or related risk-management control or governance processes, pose a risk to the institution’s safety and soundness and the institution is not taking prompt and effective measures to correct the deficiencies.

The scope and content of banking regulators’ policies on executive compensation are continuing to develop and are likely to continue evolving in the near future. It cannot be determined at this time whether compliance with such policies will adversely affect our ability to hire, retain and motivate our key employees.

Cybersecurity.Recent cyber-attacks against banks and other financial institutions that resulted in unauthorized access to confidential customer information have prompted the federal bank regulatory agencies to issue extensive guidance on cybersecurity. These agencies are likely to devote more resources to this part of their safety and soundness examination than they may have in the past.

Fair Value.The Corporation’s impaired loans and foreclosed assets may be measured and carried at “fair value”, the determination of which requires management to make assumptions, estimates and judgments.  When a loan is considered impaired, a specific valuation allowance is allocated or a partial charge-off is taken, if necessary, so that the loan is reported net, at the present value of estimated future cash flows using the loan’s existing rate or at the fair value of collateral if repayment is expected solely from the collateral.  In addition, foreclosed assets are carried at the lower of cost or “fair value”, less cost to sell, following foreclosure.  “Fair value” is defined by U.S. generally accepted accounting principles (“GAAP”) “as the price that would be received to sell an asset in an orderly transaction between market participants at the measurement date.”  GAAP further defines an “orderly transaction” as “a transaction that assumes exposure to the market for a period prior to the measurement date to allow for marketing activities that are usual and customary for transactions involving such assets; it is not a forced transaction (for example, a forced liquidation or distress sale).”  Recently in the Bank’s markets, there have been very few transactions in the type of assets which represent the vast majority of the Bank’s impaired loans and foreclosed properties which reflect “orderly transactions” as so defined.  Instead, most transactions in comparable assets have been distressed sales not indicative of “fair value.”  Accordingly, the determination of fair value in the current environment is difficult and more subjective than it would be in a stable real estate environment.  Although management believes its processes for determining the value of these assets use appropriate factors and allow the Corporation to arrive at a fair value, the processes require management judgment and assumptions and the value of such assets at the time they are revalued or divested may be significantly different from management’s determination of fair value.  Because of this increased subjectivity in fair value determinations, there is greater than usual grounds for differences in opinions, which may result in increased disagreements between management and the Bank’s regulators, disagreements which could impair the relationship between the Bank and its regulators.

Future Legislation.Various legislation affecting financial institutions and the financial industry is, from time to time, introduced in Congress. Such legislation may change banking statutes and the operating environment of the Corporation and its subsidiaries in substantial and unpredictable ways, and could increase or decrease the cost of doing business, limit or expand permissible activities or affect the competitive balance depending upon whether any of this potential legislation will be enacted, and, if enacted, the effect that it or any implementing regulations would have on the financial condition or results of operations of the Corporation or any of its subsidiaries. With the current economic environment, the nature and extent of future legislative and regulatory changes affecting financial institutions is not known at this time.

The Tax Act.On December 22, 2017, the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 and related regulations (the “Tax Act”) was signed into law. The Tax Act includes a number of provisions that affect the Corporation, including the following:

The foregoing description of the impact of the Tax Act on us should be read in conjunction with Note 10 to the Corporation’s consolidated financial statements. 

Available Information

The Corporation’s website where you can find more information is located at www.sgb.bank. We make available free of charge, through our website, our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, proxy statements and other reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”). These reports are available as soon as reasonably practicable after those materials are electronically filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “SEC”).

Our SEC filings are publicly available at the SEC’s website located at www.sec.gov. You may also read and copy any document we file with the SEC at its Public Reference Facilities at 100 F Street, N.E., Room 1580, Washington, D.C. 20549. You may obtain information about the Public Reference Room operations by calling the SEC at 1-800-SEC-0330.

Information provided on our website is not part of this report, and is not incorporated herein by reference unless otherwise specifically referenced as such in this report.

Executive Officers of the Corporation and the Bank

Executive officers are elected by the Board of Directors annually in May and hold office until the following May at the pleasure of the Board of Directors. The principal executive officers of the Corporation and the Bank and their ages, positions, and terms of office as of March 30, 2018,29, 2019, are as follows:

None of the above officers are related and there are no arrangements or understandings between them and any other person pursuant to which any of them was elected as an officer, other than arrangements or understandings with directors or officers of the Corporation or Bank acting solely in their capacities as such.

The following is a brief description of the business experience of the principal executive officers of the Corporation and the Bank. Except as otherwise indicated, each principal executive officer has been engaged in their present or last employment, in the same or similar position, for more than five years.

Mr. Drew is a director of the Corporation and the Bank and was named President and Chief Executive Officer in May 2002. Previously, he served as President and Chief Operating Officer beginning in 2001 and Executive Vice President in 1999 of the Corporation and the Bank.

Mr. Cole is a director of the CorporationMs. Lott became Chief Administrative Officer in 2018 and the Bank and became Executive Vice President and Chief Operating Officer of the Corporation and the Bank in 2011. He has been Executive and Senior Vice President of the Corporation and the Bank since 1992 and hasin 2017. She is also Cashier of the Bank. Previously, she served in various other positions withas Senior Vice President of the Bank since 19762014. Prior to that, she served as Vice President of the Bank since 2008 and Assistant Vice President of the CorporationBank since 1981.2007.

Mr. Hanson became Executive Vice President of the Corporation in 2012 and Executive Vice President and Chief Banking Officer of the Bank in 2011. Previously, he was employed by Park Avenue Bank in Valdosta, Georgia, as Valdosta Market President and various other positions since 1994.

Mr. Singley became Executive Vice President and Chief Credit Officer of the Bank in 2014. Previously, he was appointed President Moultrie Region and Senior Vice President of the Bank in 2011 and served as Senior Vice President of the Bank since 2008. Prior to that, he had been Vice President of the Bank since 2002.

Ms. Lott became Executive Vice President of the Corporation and the Bank in 2017. She is also Cashier of the Bank. Previously, she served as Senior Vice President of the Bank since 2014. Prior to that, she served as Vice President of the Bank since 2008 and Assistant Vice President of the Bank since 2007.

Ms. Boyd became Senior Vice President and Treasurer of the Corporation in 2017. She is also Senior Vice President and Controller of the Bank since 2014. Previously, she served as Vice President of the Bank since 2010 and, prior to that, Assistant Vice President of the Bank since 2007.

Mr. Moritz became Executive Vice President of the Bank in 2018. Previously, he was appointed as Senior Vice President of the Bank and Valdosta Region President in 2011. Previously,Prior to that, he was employed by Park Avenue Bank in Valdosta, Georgia, for five years and Regions Bank for five years.

Mr. Dekle became Executive Vice President of the Bank in 2018. Previously, he was appointed Senior Vice President of the Bank and Moultrie Region President in 2014. Previously,Prior to that, he served as Vice President of the Bank since 2011 and, prior to that, Assistant Vice President of the Bank since 2007.

Mr. Costin became Senior Vice President of the Bank in 2015. Previously, he served as Vice President of the Bank since 2012 and, prior to that, Assistant Vice President of the Bank since 2011.

Ms. Yeager became Senior Vice President of the Bank in 2015. Previously, she was employed for 11 years with Commercial Banking Company in Valdosta, Georgia. Prior to that, she was employed for 18 years with First State Bank and Trust in Valdosta, Georgia.

Mr. Carpenter became Senior Vice President of the Bank and Tifton Region President in 2015. Previously, he was employed by BB&T Bank in Tifton, Georgia, for 15 years where he most recently held the position of Area President for the communities of Tifton, Valdosta and Douglas.

Ms. Green became Senior Vice President of the Bank in 2018. Previously, she served as Vice President of the Bank since 2017. Prior to that, she was employed for 4 years with Thomas County Federal Savings and Loan in Thomasville, Georgia. 

Table 1 - Distribution of Assets, Liabilities, and Shareholders’ Equity; Interest Rates and Interest Differentials

The following tables set forth, for the fiscal years ended December 31, 2018, 2017, 2016, and 2015,2016, the daily average balances outstanding for the major categories of earning assets and interest-bearing liabilities and the average interest rate earned or paid thereon. Except for percentages, all data is in thousands of dollars.