Fulton Financial Corporation (the Corporation)"Corporation") was incorporated under the laws of Pennsylvania on February 8, 1982 and became a bank holding company through the acquisition of all of the outstanding stock of Fulton Bank N.A. ("Fulton Bank") on June 30, 1982. In 2000, the Corporation became a financial holding company as defined in the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act (GLB Act)("GLB Act"), which gave the Corporation the ability to expand its financial services activities under its holding company structure (See "Competition" and "Supervision and Regulation" below). The Corporation directly owns 100% of the common stock of six community banks and eight non-bank entities. As of December 31, 2015,2016, the Corporation had approximately 3,4603,500 full-time equivalent employees.

The Corporation’s six subsidiary banks are located primarily in suburban or semi-rural geographicalgeographic markets throughout a five-state region (Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, New Jersey and Virginia). Each of these banking subsidiaries delivers financial services in a highly personalized, community-oriented style that emphasizes relationship banking. Where appropriate, operations are centralized through common platforms and back-office functions. The Corporation has announced that it is developing plans to seek regulatory approval to begin the process of consolidating its six subsidiary banks in connection with a transition to a business model that will be less oriented on geographic boundaries and will instead focus more on alignment with the customer segments the Corporation serves. The Corporation also believes that consolidationconsolidating its subsidiary banks will enhance its ability to manage risk more efficiently and effectively through a centralized risk management and compliance function. This multi-year process is expected to eventually result in the Corporation conducting its core banking business through a single subsidiary bank. Consolidation of the bank subsidiaries will result in a single subsidiary bank with greater than $10 billion ofin assets, subjecting it to more stringent regulation applicable to institutions that exceed that threshold. See Item 1A. Risk"Risk Factors - "Additional growth, particularly at theLegal, Compliance and Reputational Risks - The Corporation’s largest subsidiary, Fulton Bank, N.A., wouldis expected to have had total assets of $10 billion or more for four consecutive quarters as of March 31, 2017, which will subject it to additional regulation and increased supervision" under "Legal, Compliance and Reputational Risks.supervision." The timing of the commencement of this process will depend significantly on the Corporation and its banking subsidiaries making necessary progress in enhancing a largely centralized compliance program designed to comply with the requirements of the Bank Secrecy Act, the USA Patriot Act of 2001 and related anti-money laundering regulations, and establishing, to the satisfaction of the Corporation’s banking regulatory agencies, that those enhancements are sustainable to achieve compliance with the regulatory enforcement orders issued to the Corporation and its subsidiary banks by their respective banking regulatory agencies relating to identified deficiencies in that compliance program. See Item 1A. Risk"Risk Factors - "TheLegal, Compliance and Reputational Risks - The Corporation and its bank subsidiaries are subject to regulatory enforcement orders requiring improvement in compliance functions and remedial actions" under "Legal, Compliance and Reputational Risks.actions."

The Corporation’s subsidiary banks are located in areas that are home to a wide range of manufacturing, distribution, health care and other service companies. The Corporation and its banks are not dependent upon one or a few customers or any one industry, and the loss of any single customer or a few customers would not have a material adverse impact on any of the subsidiary banks. However, a large portion of the Corporation’s loan portfolio is comprised of commercial loans, commercial mortgage loans and construction loans. See Item 1A. Risk"Risk Factors - "EconomicEconomic and Credit Risks - Economic downturns and the composition of the Corporation’s loan portfolio subject the Corporation to credit risk" under "Economic and Credit Risks.risk."

Each of the subsidiary banks offers a full range of consumer and commercial banking products and services in its local market area. Personal banking services include various checking account and savings deposit products, certificates of deposit and individual retirement accounts. The subsidiary banks offer a variety of consumer lending products to creditworthy customers in their market areas. Secured consumer loan products include home equity loans and lines of credit, which are underwritten based on loan-to-value limits specified in the Corporation's lending policy. SubsidiaryThe subsidiary banks also offer a variety of fixed, variable and variable-rateadjustable rate products, including construction loans and jumbo loans. Residential mortgages are offered through Fulton Mortgage Company,

which operates as a division of each subsidiary bank. Consumer loan products also include automobile loans, automobile and equipment leases, personal lines of credit and checking account overdraft protection.

Commercial banking services are provided to small and medium sized businesses (generally with sales of less than $150 million) in the subsidiary banks’ market areas. The Corporation's policies limit the maximum total lending commitment to a single borrower

Investment management, trust, brokerage, insurance and investment advisory services are offered to consumer and commercial banking customers in the market areas serviced by the Corporation's subsidiary banks by Fulton Financial Advisors a(a division of the Corporation's subsidiary, Fulton Bank, N.A. subsidiary bank.Bank).

The Corporation’s subsidiary banks deliver their products and services through traditional branch banking, with a network of full service branch offices. Electronic delivery channels include a network of automated teller machines, telephone banking, mobile banking and online banking. The variety of available delivery channels allows customers to access their account information and perform certain transactions, such as depositing checks, transferring funds and paying bills, at virtually any time of the day.

The following table provides certain information for the Corporation’s banking subsidiaries as of December 31, 2015:2016:

The Corporation owns 100% of the common stock of five non-bank subsidiaries, which are consolidated for financial reporting purposes: (i) Fulton Financial Realty Company, which holds title to or leases certain properties upon whichwhere Corporation branch offices and other facilities are located; (ii) Central Pennsylvania Financial Corp., which owns limited partnership interests in partnerships invested primarily in lowlow- and moderate incomemoderate-income housing projects; (iii) FFC Management, Inc., which owns certain investment securities and other passive investments; (iv) FFC Penn Square, Inc., which owns trust preferred securities (TruPS)("TruPS") issued by a subsidiary of Fulton Bank, N.A;Bank; and (v) Fulton Insurance Services Group, Inc., which engages in the sale of various life insurance products.

The Corporation also owns 100% of the common stock of three non-bank subsidiaries which are not consolidated for financial reporting purposes. The following table provides information for these non-bank subsidiaries, whose sole assets consist of junior subordinated deferrable interest debentures issued by the Corporation, as of December 31, 2015:2016:

The banking and financial services industries are highly competitive. Within its geographic region, the Corporation’s subsidiaries face direct competition from other commercial banks, varying in size from local community banks to larger regional and national

banks, credit unions and non-bank entities. As a result of the wide availability of electronic delivery channels, the subsidiary banks also face competition from financial institutions that do not have a physical presence in the Corporation’s geographic markets.

The industry is also highly competitive due, in part, to the GLB Act. As a result of the GLB Act, there is a great deal of competition from manyvarious types of entities aggressively compete for customers that were traditionally served only by the banking industry. Under the GLB Act, banks, insurance companies and securities firms may affiliate under a financial holding company structure, allowing their expansion into non-banking financial services activities that werehad previously been restricted. These activities include a full range of banking, securities and insurance activities, including securities and insurance underwriting, issuing and selling annuities and merchant banking activities. While the Corporation does not currently engage in many of these activities, the ability to do sofurther entry into these businesses may enhance the ability of the Corporation to compete in the future.

The Corporation operatesand its subsidiaries operate in an industry that is subject to laws and regulations that are enforced by a number of federal and state agencies. Changes in these laws and regulations, including interpretation and enforcement activities, could impact the cost of operating in the financial services industry, limit or expand permissible activities or affect competition among banks and other financial institutions.

The Corporation is a registered financial holding company under the Bank Holding Company Act ("BHCA") and itsis regulated, supervised and examined by the Federal Reserve Bank. The Corporation's subsidiary banks are depository institutions whose deposits are insured by the FDIC. The Corporation and its subsidiaries are subject to regulation and examination by regulatory authorities. The following table summarizes the charter types and primary regulators for each of the Corporation’s subsidiary banks:

Federal statutes that apply to the Corporation and its subsidiaries include the GLB Act, the BHCA, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (Dodd-Frank Act), the Bank Holding Company Act (BHCA)("Dodd-Frank Act"), the Federal Reserve Act, the National Bank Act and the Federal Deposit Insurance Act, among others. In general, these statutes, regulations promulgated thereunder, and related interpretations establish the eligible business activities of the Corporation, certain acquisition and merger restrictions, limitations on intercompany transactions, such as loans and dividends, and capital adequacy requirements, among other things.

to issue cease and desist orders and other enforcement actions against bank holding companies (and their non-banking affiliates) to correct or curtail unsafe or unsound banking practices. In addition, the Federal Reserve must approve certain proposed changes in organizational structure or other business activities before they occur. The BHCA imposes certain restrictions

Under similar rules adopted by the OCC, the primary regulator of Fulton Bank, national banks with total consolidated assets of more than $10 billion are also required to conduct annual stress tests. AlthoughA national bank becomes subject to the annual stress testing requirement when the institution's total consolidates assets, calculated as the average of the institution's total consolidated assets, as reported on the institution's quarterly Call Reports, for the most recent four consecutive quarters exceeds $10 billion. As of June 30, 2016, Fulton Bank crossed the $10 billion in assets threshold and has maintained that level of assets through the quarter ended December 31, 2016. Provided that Fulton Bank reports total consolidated assets of Fulton Bank, N.A.,$8.3 billion or more on its Call Report for the Corporation's largest subsidiary bank, are less than $10 billion, if Fulton Bank, N.A.’s assets exceed $10 billion in the future,quarter ending March 31, 2017, it will become subjectbe required to conduct annual stress tests in accordance with the OCC rules and as a result, to submit its first stress test report to the OCC’s stress test rules.OCC on or before July 31, 2018.

in the Corporation and its bank subsidiaries becoming subject to formal or informal enforcement actions, the imposition of civil money penalties and consumer litigation.

Based on the Corporation's evaluation of its investments, none fallfell within the definition of a "covered fund" and would neednone needed to be disposed of during 2016 or by July 21, 2016 or any further extension of the conformance date that maybe granted by the FRB. Therefore, it31, 2017. The Corporation does not currently expect that the Final Rules will have a material effect on its business, financial condition or results of operations.

The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (Basel)("Basel") is a committee of central banks and bank regulators from major industrialized countries that develops broad policy guidelines for use by each country’s regulators with the purpose of ensuring that financial institutions have adequate capital given the risk levels of assets and off-balance sheet financial instruments. In December 2010, Basel released frameworks for strengthening international capital and liquidity regulations, referred to as Basel III.

In July 2013, the FRB approved final rules (the U.S."U.S. Basel III Capital Rules)Rules") establishing a new comprehensive capital framework for U.S. banking organizations and implementing the BASEL'sBasel's December 2010 framework for strengthening international capital standards. The U.S. Basel III Capital Rules substantially revise the risk-based capital requirements applicable to bank holding companies and depository institutions.

The new minimum regulatory capital requirements established by the U.S. Basel III Capital Rules became effective for the Corporation on January 1, 2015, and will be fully phased in on January 1, 2019.

The U.S. Basel III Capital Rules require the Corporation and its bank subsidiaries to:

The U.S. Basel III Capital Rules use a standardized approach for risk weightings that expand the risk-weightings for assets and off balance sheet exposures from the previous 0%, 20%, 50% and 100% categories to a much larger and more risk-sensitive number of categories, depending on the nature of the assets and off-balance sheet exposures and resulting in higher risk weights for a variety of asset categories.

When fully phased in on January 1, 2019, the Corporation and its bank subsidiaries will also be required to maintain a "capital conservation buffer" of 2.50% above the minimum risk-based capital requirements. The required minimum capital conservation buffer began to be phased in incrementally, starting at 0.625%, on January 1, 2016, and will increaseincreasing to 1.25% on January 1, 2017, and will continue to increase, to 1.875% on January 1, 2018 and 2.50% on January 1, 2019. The rules provide that the failure to maintain the "capital conservation buffer" will result in restrictions on capital distributions and discretionary cash bonus payments to executive officers. As a result, under the U.S. Basel III Capital Rules, if any of the Corporation's bank subsidiaries fails to maintain the required minimum capital conservation buffer, the Corporation will be subject to limits, and possibly prohibitions, on its ability to obtain capital distributions from such subsidiaries. If the Corporation does not receive sufficient cash dividends from its bank subsidiaries, it may not have sufficient funds to pay dividends on its capital stock, service its debt obligations or repurchase its common stock. In addition, the restrictions on payments of discretionary cash bonuses to executive officers may make it more difficult for the Corporation to retain key personnel.

As of December 31, 2015,2016, the Corporation met the fully-phased in minimum capital requirements, including the new capital conservation buffer, as prescribed in the U.S. Basel III Capital Rules.

The Basel III liquidity framework also includes new liquidity requirements that require financial institutions to maintain increased levels of liquid assets or alter their strategies for liquidity management. The Basel III liquidity framework requires banks and bank holding companies to measure their liquidity against specific ratios.

In September 2014, the FRB approved final rules (the U.S."U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule)Rule") implementing portions of the Basel III liquidity framework for large, internationally active banking organizations, generally those having $250 billion or more in total assets, and similar, but less stringent rules, applicable to bank holding companies with consolidated assets of $50 billion or more. The U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule requires banking organizations to maintain a Liquidity Coverage Ratio or LCR,("LCR") that is designed to ensure that sufficient high quality liquid resources are available for a one month period in case of a stress scenario. Impacted financial institutions are required to behave been compliant with the U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule by January 1, 2017. Because theThe Corporation’s total assets and the scope of its operations do not currently meet the thresholds set forth in the U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule, as a result of which the Corporation is not currently required to maintain a minimum LCR.

The Basel III liquidity framework also introduced a second ratio, referred to as the Net Stable Funding Ratio (NSFR)("NSFR"), which is designed to promote funding resiliency over longer-term time horizons by creating additional incentives for banks to fund their activities with more stable sources of funding on an ongoing structural basis. This new liquidity standard is subject to further rulemaking. To date, U.S. banking regulators have not proposed any additional liquidity rules. Because of the Corporation's size, neither the U.S. Liquidity Coverage Ratio Rule nor any additional proposed rules under the Basel III liquidity framework are applicable to it.

For safety and soundness reasons, banking regulations also limit the amount of cash that can be transferred from subsidiary banks to the Parent Companyparent company in the form of dividends. Dividend limitations vary, depending on the subsidiary bank’s charter and whether or not it is a member of the Federal Reserve System. Generally, subsidiaries are prohibited from paying dividends when doing so would cause them to fall below the regulatory minimum capital levels. Additionally, limits may exist on paying dividends in excess of net income for specified periods. See "Note 11 - Regulatory Matters," in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. Financial"Financial Statements and Supplementary DataData" for additional information regarding regulatory capital and dividend and loan limitations.

The subsidiary banks pay deposit insurance premiums based on assessment rates established by the FDIC. The FDIC has established a risk-based assessment system under which institutions are classified and pay premiums according to their perceived risk to the DIF. An institution’s base assessment rate is generally subject to following adjustments: (1) a decrease for the institution’s long-term unsecured debt, including most senior and subordinated debt, (2) an increase for brokered deposits above a threshold amount and (3) an increase for unsecured debt held that is issued by another insured depository institution.

On April 1, 2011, as required by the Dodd-Frank Act, the deposit insurance assessment base changed from total domestic deposits to average total assets, minus average tangible equity. In addition, the FDIC also created a two scorecard system, one for large depository institutions that have $10 billion or more in assets and another for highly complex institutions that have $50 billion or more in assets. As of December 31, 2015, none of2016, the Corporation’s individuallargest subsidiary banksbank, Fulton Bank, had assets of $10.7 billion and had assets of $10 billion or more as of the end of each of the previous two quarters. If Fulton Bank has assets of $10 billion or more as of March 31, 2017, it will become subject to a modified methodology for calculating FDIC insurance assessments and therefore, did not meetpotentially higher assessment rates as a result of institutions with $10 billion or more in assets being required to bear the classificationcost of large depository institutions.raising the FDIC reserve ratio to 1.35% as required by the Dodd-Frank Act.

The FDIC annually establishes for the DIF a designated reserve ratio, or DRR, of estimated insured deposits. The FDIC has announced that the DRR for 20162017 will remain at 2.00%, which is the same ratio that has been in effect since January 1, 2011. The FDIC is authorized to change deposit insurance assessment rates as necessary to maintain the DRR, without further notice-and-comment rulemaking, provided that: (1) no such adjustment can be greater than three basis points from one quarter to the next, (2) adjustments cannot result in rates more than three basis points above or below the base rates and (3) rates cannot be negative.

The Dodd-Frank Act increased the minimum DIF reserve ratio to 1.35% of insured deposits, which must be reached by September 30, 2020, and provides that, in setting the assessment rates necessary to meet the new requirement, the FDIC shall offset the effect of this provision on insured depository institutions with total consolidated assets of less than $10 billion, so that more of the cost of raising the reserve ratio will be borne by the institutions with more than $10 billion in assets. In October 2010, the FDIC adopted a restoration plan to ensure that the DIF reserve ratio reaches 1.35% by September 30, 2020.

On October 22, 2015, the FDIC issued a proposal to increase the reserve ratio for the DIF to the minimum level of 1.35% as required by the Reform Act. The proposedFDIC adopted the final rule would imposeon March 15, 2016, which imposes on insured depository institutions with $10 billion or more in total consolidated assets (such as Fulton Bank) a quarterly surcharge equal to an annual rate of 4.5 basis points applied to the deposit insurance assessment base, after making certain adjustments. IfThe rule became effective on July 1, 2016.

Pursuant to the rule is adopted as proposed,Dodd-Frank Act, the FDIC expects that these surcharges would commence in 2016 and continue for approximately eight quarters; however,has backup enforcement authority over a depository institution holding company, such as the Corporation, if the reserve ratio forconduct or threatened conduct of such holding company poses a risk to the DIF, although such authority may not be used if the holding company is generally in sound condition and does not reachpose a foreseeable and material risk to the required level by December 31, 2018, the FDIC would impose a shortfall assessment on March 31, 2019, which would be collected on June 30, 2019. To the extent that any of the Corporation’s subsidiary banks’ assets exceeds $10 billion in the future, such rulemaking could result in an increase in the deposit insurance assessments for such banks.DIF.

Among other requirements, the Patriot Act and the related regulations impose the following requirements with respect to financial institutions:

Failure to comply with the Patriot Act’s requirements could have serious legal, financial, regulatory and reputational consequences. In addition, bank regulators will consider a holding company’s effectiveness in combating money laundering when ruling on BHCA and Bank Merger Act applications. In May 2016, the regulations implementing the BSA were amended to explicitly include risk-based procedures for conducting ongoing customer due diligence, to include understanding the nature and purpose of customer relationships for the purpose of developing a customer risk profile. In addition, banks must identify and verify the identity of the beneficial owners of all legal entity customers (other than those that are excluded) at the time a new account is opened (other than accounts that are exempted). The Corporation and its banking subsidiaries must comply with these amendments and new requirements by May 11, 2018. The Corporation has adopted policies, procedures and controls to address compliance with the

Patriot Act and will continue to revise and update its policies, procedures and controls to reflect required changes. changes (including the May 2016 amendments).

The Corporation and its banking subsidiaries are currently subject to regulatory enforcement orders (the Consent Orders)"Consent Orders") issued by bank regulatory agencies relating to identified deficiencies in a largely centralized compliance program (the BSA/"BSA/AML Compliance Program)Program") designed to comply with the Bank Secrecy Act,BSA, the Patriot Act and related anti-money laundering regulations (the BSA/"BSA/AML Requirements)Requirements"). The Consent Orders require, among other things, that the Corporation and its banking subsidiaries review, assess and take actions to strengthen and enhance the BSA/AML Compliance Program, and, in some cases, conduct retrospective reviews of past account activity and transactions, as well as certain reports filed in accordance with the BSA/AML Requirements, to determine whether suspicious activity and certain transactions in currency were properly identified and reported in accordance with the BSA/AML Requirements. See Item 1A. Risk Factors - "The"Risk Factors-Legal, Compliance and Reputational Risks-The Corporation and its bank subsidiaries are subject to regulatory enforcement orders requiring improvement in compliance functions and remedial actions" under "Legal, Complianceactions;" "Note-17 Commitments and Reputational Risks;" Item 3.Contingencies - Legal Proceedings; "Regulatory Enforcement Orders," under "Overview and Outlook" in Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations; and "Note 11 - Regulatory Matters,Proceedings," in the Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements in Item 8. Financial"Financial Statements and Supplementary Data."

The Corporation’s bank subsidiaries are subject to regulatory guidelines establishing standards for safeguarding customer information. These regulations implement certain provisions of the GLB Act. The guidelines describe the federal bank regulatory agencies’ expectations for the creation, implementation and maintenance of an information security program, which would include administrative, technical and physical safeguards appropriate to the size and complexity of the institution and the nature and scope of its activities. The standards set forth in the guidelines are intended to ensure the security and confidentiality of customer records and information, protect against any anticipated threats or hazards to the security or integrity of such records and protect against unauthorized access to or use of such records or information that could result in substantial harm or inconvenience to any customer. These guidelines, along with related regulatory materials, increasingly focus on risk management and processes related to information technology and the use of third parties in the provision of financial services. In October 2016, the federal banking agencies issued an advance notice of proposed rulemaking on enhanced cybersecurity risk-management and resilience standards that would apply to large and interconnected banking organizations and to services provided by third parties to these firms. These enhanced standards would apply only to depository institutions and depository institution holding companies with total consolidated assets of $50 billion or more.

Required reserves must be maintained in the form of either vault cash, an account at a Federal Reserve Bank or a pass-through account as defined by the FRB. Pursuant to the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008, the Federal Reserve Banks pay interest on depository institutions’ required and excess reserve balances. The interest rate paid on required reserve balances is currently the average target federal funds rate over the reserve maintenance period. The rate on excess balances will be set equal to the lowest target federal funds rate in effect during the reserve maintenance period.

The Corporation's results of operations and financial condition are affected by conditions in the capital markets and the economy generally. The Corporation's financial performance is highly dependent upon the business environment in the markets where the Corporation operates and in the U.S. as a whole. Unfavorable or uncertain economic and market conditions can be caused by declines in economic growth, business activity or investor or business confidence, limitations on the availability, or increases in the cost, of credit and capital, changes in the rate of inflation, changes in interest rates, high unemployment, natural disasters, acts of war or terrorism, global economic conditions and geopolitical factors, or a combination of these or other factors.

Specifically, the business environment impacts the ability of borrowers to pay interest on, and repay principal of, outstanding loans and the value of collateral securing those loans, as well as demand for loans and other products and services the Corporation offers. If the quality of the Corporation’s loan portfolio declines, the Corporation may have to increase its provision for credit losses, which would negatively impact its results of operations, and could result in charge-offs of a higher percentage of its loans. Unlike large, national institutions, the Corporation is not able to spread the risks of unfavorable local economic conditions across a large number of diversified economies and geographic locations. If the communities in which the Corporation operates do not grow, or if prevailing economic conditions locally or nationally are unfavorable, its business could be adversely affected. In addition, increased market competition in a lower demand environment could adversely affect the profit potential of the Corporation.

The allowance for credit losses consists of the allowance for loan losses and the reserve for unfunded lending commitments. While the Corporation believes that its allowance for credit losses as of December 31, 20152016 is sufficient to cover incurred losses in the loan portfolio on that date, the Corporation may need to increase its provision for credit losses due to changes in the risk characteristics of the loan portfolio, thereby negatively impacting its results of operations.

The allowance for loan losses represents management’s estimate of losses inherent in the loan portfolio as of the balance sheet date and is recorded as a reduction to loans. Management’s estimate of losses inherent in the loan portfolio is dependent on the proper application of its methodology for determining its allowance needs. The most critical judgments underpinning that methodology include: the ability to identify potential problem loans in a timely manner; proper collateral valuation of impaired loans evaluated for impairment; proper measurement of allowance needs for pools of loans measured for impairment; and an overall assessment of the risk profile of the loan portfolio.

The Corporation determines the appropriate level of the allowance for credit losses based on many quantitative and qualitative factors, including, but not limited to: the size and composition of the loan portfolio; changes in risk ratings; changes in collateral values; delinquency levels; historical losses; and economic conditions. In addition, as the Corporation’s loan portfolio grows, it will generally be necessary to increase the allowance for credit losses through additional provisions, which will impact the Corporation’s operating results.

If the Corporation’s assumptions and judgments regarding such matters prove to be inaccurate, its allowance for credit losses might not be sufficient, and additional provisions for credit losses might need to be made. Depending on the amount of such provisions for credit losses, the adverse impact on the Corporation’s earnings could be material.

Furthermore, banking regulators may require the Corporation to make additional provisions for credit losses or otherwise recognize further loan charge-offs or impairments following their periodic reviews of the Corporation’s loan portfolio, underwriting procedures and allowance for credit losses. Any increase in the Corporation’s allowance for credit losses or loan charge-offs as required by such regulatory authoritiesagencies could have a material adverse effect on the Corporation’s financial condition and results of operations. See "Provision and Allowance for Credit Losses," under "Financial Condition" in Item 7. Management’s"Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.Operations-Financial Condition-Provision and Allowance for Credit Losses."